Self-styled property guru Samuel Leeds is once again on our radar after restarting his campaign against Property Tribes community manager, Vanessa Warwick.

Leeds published a video on his YouTube channel on Friday seeking to discredit her and accusing her of “fraud” and “spreading hate”.

As many landlords will be aware, Vanessa and Property Tribes have been targeted by Leeds and his supporters in the past, largely because many of its forums include less than flattering but substantiated commentary about his courses and sales techniques.

This came to a head in May last year when Property Tribes co-founder Vanessa Warwick was the victim of an on-line malicious communications and harassment campaign using fake profiles, which resulted in a seven-month investigation by Surrey Police.

- Advertisement -

This activity, which included the placement of an advert for Vanessa as a sex worker on Gumtree with her name and phone number, went on for two months along with emails of a threatening nature sent to her husband, Nick, demanding that threads must be deleted.

Vanessa tells LandlordZONE that, when he refused to delete the threads, the activity ramped up.

This ran for two months and included the creation of four websites against Vanessa which were taken down one by one with the assistance of the police.  

Police investigation

After an exhaustive police investigation into the malicious activity, including use of the police cybercrime lab to trace the digital footprints, it was found that all roads led to Samuel Leeds’ home address.  

Leeds was interviewed under caution at Guildford police station in January this year. 

Despite this, Leeds has not been put off. His new video accuses her of hiding several aspects of her career and business dealings and of setting out to put people off investing in property in the style promoted by his academy – i.e. with little experience or money.

These have all been strongly rebutted by Warwick, including that she is a jealous of Samuel’s success, that she has hidden her ‘back story”, that she doesn’t own any investment property, and that threads critical of Leeds are deliberately started by her on Property Tribes.

Warwick says she has now reported Leeds to the police for the second time for harassment and recording telephone calls the two had without telling her.

“The first phone call published was an excerpt of the conversation when Nick and I rang Samuel Leeds in May 2019 to let him know about the campaign and to ask for his assistance to shut it down, as we did not believe he would want his brand associated with such malicious activity.  

“If Leeds had played the entire phone call, you would have heard how he said: “I’m actually quite happy with what’s being said about you so you should just delete the threads if you want it to stop.”

Out of the blue

The second phone call published was from July 2020, over a year later, when Samuel called her out of the blue.  

“Naturally, I hung up on him. I have no desire to speak to someone who harassed me for two months, put an advert for me as a sex worker on Gumtree, and also created a TrustPilot site in my name to post fake reviews for me as a sex worker,” she says.

“Samuel has used this to spin the narrative that I used the police to bully him at the start of the campaign but, in reality, I reported the malicious activity to the police, not Samuel Leeds, and there was a seven month police investigation before he was identified as the perpetrator and interviewed under caution.

“Samuel used my refusal to speak to him on the July phone call as an act of cowardice when in fact I am the victim of a serious crime and naturally have no wish to speak to the perpetrator.

“That he would think I would ever wish to speak to him after what he has done and continues to do is quite beyond me”.

Call recorded

Recording and publishing private phone calls can be a criminal offence and may form part of the new investigation by Surrey Police.  It also has serious GDPR implications.

“Anyone who wants to cut to the chase and get to the heart of this matter only needs to understand that Leeds wants the threads about him deleted off Property Tribes as they rank very high on Google organic search results.  

“As they are all substantiated, he cannot use legal means, and therefore he resorted to alternative methods which failed the first time around.”

Read Vanessa’s rebuttal of Leeds’ video on Property Tribes where she has provided screen-shotted evidence of the entire campaign.

Read her rebuttal of Leeds’ video on PropertyTribes.

Samuel Leeds has been contacted by LandlordZONE via his Property Investment academy for comment.


  1. Mark Jones = Scamuel Leeds account (one of many).

    Scamuel, or someone else from HIS HOUSE, advertised Vanessa as a sex worker on websites (as traced by the Police). Why on earth would she want to go anywhere near him???! He uses smoke, mirrors and lies in my opinion and doesn’t deserve a platform.

    Leeds has a major flaw with his latest attack on Vanessa. The threads on Property Tribes about Scamuel aren’t started by Vanessa. They tend to be started by former associates and customers of Scamuel who have issues with him. He then blocks them from his groups (to control the narrative) so they post elsewhere. These posts are very informative and have no doubt helped those evaluating Scamuel. In targeting Vanessa, he brushes over all of those on the Property Tribes (and other) forums who have issues with him and again paints himself as the victim when he is clearly the bully.

    Scamuel is a despicable human being in my honest opinion. All the info is out there. Exposed on national TV (twice) and in the national press (twice) and also exposed by well regarded Youtubers and business people (Lord Sugar, Shaf Rasul). He’s been interviewed under police caution. He contradicts himself in his videos. He sold his few properties at auction recently at a loss and is left with Rubblesford House (not a castle). He often doesn’t practice what he preaches.

    He uses relatives and business associates for testimonials without revealing it . He uses hypnosis, NLP and cult like behaviours to sell at seminars. His “no money down” mantra targets those with no money and charges them up to £12000 and for what? Forums, review sites and a Class Action lawsuit reveal a trail of unsatisfied customers.

    Sites like Property Tribes and The Truth About Samuel Leeds Facebook group provide an invaluable service by providing a platform to those whose voices have been banned and silenced from Scamuel’s groups. These voices often provide a valuable and valid perspective to others – a perspective that is missing from Scamuel’s marketing materials and deleted from his groups and YouTube videos. And long may they continue to do so. Despite his BS, harrassing behaviour (in my opinion) and legal threats he won’t prevent the truth from being told. There are too many strong people standing up to him. Long may they continue to do so.

  2. I am not Samuel Leeds. I have never had anything to do with him or any other “gurus”. I don’t need some 20 year old giving me business advice.
    I’m glad Property Tribes (and other sites) are able to give honest opinions on him. I believe in Caveat Emptor and Due Diligence, precisely because that’s how sensible people stay clear of wasting money on poor value “education seminars”.

    However, I don’t agree with the argument that because Samuel Leeds is such a bad person, that someone like Vanessa (or any others who have disputes with him) should shy away from arguing their points face to face.

    These arguments have obviously degenerated into petty pranks (such as the fake advert mentioned). In my opinion, all those involved should grow up and face each other face to face. Getting solicitors and police involved is just petty and all too common these days.

    • Mark Jones – you say “getting solicitors and the police involved is just petty”.

      I’d like to ask you what planet you are on. If fake sex worker ads were taken out in your wife/partners name with her phone number on, on multiple websites, do you honestly think that your wife would want to meet or have discussions with the low life who placed the ads?

      Again if you aren’t Samuel I’m betting you’re one of his associates looking to throw a spanner in the works. Your lack of empathy regarding what Vanessa has been through tells the story.

    • Not everyone is as smart as you Mark and can see through the BS of 13 hour cult-like seminars, which use NLP, fake testimonials, sleep deprivation and hypnosis in order to sell a dream and a course that doesn’t actually deliver the content and service that was sold. Vulnerable people with existing debt only get into more debt because they buy based on lies. They need to be protected from the lies and from falling further into debt and becoming trapped.

      • My concern is that such “protections” for customers may inhibit the right to contract.
        Debt is really an issue between the creditor and the debtor.
        If someone borrows to purchase a seminar, is that any different than borrowing to purchase a holiday?

  3. I don’t know who placed those ads.
    The story on this website seems to imply that the IP address was traced to Samuel Leeds home ISP. I have no idea if that was the case, as I have no involvement in the matter.
    But anyone who wanted to play such pranks could easily use a coffee shop WiFi, if they wanted to.

    My personal reaction to anything like this would just be to ask for the ads to be removed and leave it at that. I wouldn’t involve the police, because it wouldn’t really bother me that much. I’ve always found that the more attention you give to such pranksters, the more it encourages them. The best option is to ignore it.

    I’ve reported much more serious incidents (repeated criminal damage, doors kicked in, etc) to the police in the past and nothing was done. So I wouldn’t bother with them most of the time (unless I needed to for an insurance claim, which I also don’t usually bother with anymore).

    The main issue here is whether or not Samuel Leeds courses are good value for money or not. The rest just seems to be petty pranks and name calling.

  4. @Mark Joes You DO know who placed those ads. The police identified Samuel Leeds as the perpetrator which is the reason he was interviewed under caution. He admitted that he was interviewed under police caution. How can it not be clearer?

    Samuel favours the use of fake profiles and the same rhetoric as yourself. Interesting that he described the gumtree advert as a “prank” in May 2019 and also said “grow up” in the latest video, which I am pleased to report has been taken down by youtube.

    The police decide whether they will assign an officer to investigate an incident. Not me. They thought it serious enough to do so. They don’t investigate every incident reported to them, so the fact they assigned an investigating officer means they took the harassment and malicious communications campaign against me very seriously.

    I don’t think you can call what Samuel did a “petty prank” and Samuel’s character and behaviour are an important part of his brand when people are deciding whether to undertake training with him or not.

    Finally, you keep insisting on an interview, just like Samuel, just like the blackmailer. A year later, still insisting on an interview. The answer is NO. No, I will not sit in the same room as that perpetrator of a criminal activity against me and nor should I be expected to.

    I’ve never started any threads on Samuel Leeds, I’ve never defamed him, I’ve never used personal insults or “name calling” and I’ve never made videos about him. All I have done is fact check some of his rhetoric, and there is nothing wrong in that.

    What would there be to talk about? Samuel is not even in the same industry as me. I have no need to have anything to do with him and you are very misguided to think I should.

    • I do not know all the details of this incident. I’m only commenting on the few social media videos I have seen. That’s why I am choosing my words carefully. I personally do not know who placed the fake adverts mentioned. I have only read comments, such as yours, online. Being interviewed by the police is not the same as being convicted in a criminal court or found liable in a civil court. So for that reason I can only truthfully state that I do not know who placed the fake adverts mentioned.

      If you do not wish to have a face to face discussion with Samuel Leeds, that is obviously your choice. It was my opinion that it may help to resolve some of the disputed claims and may be of interest to social media viewers. I did not intend to imply that it would establish any facts or proof.

      I have no connection to Samuel Leeds. I think that Property Tribes provides an excellent resource for advising on due diligence (for any individual or company). I personally would not attend any of Samuel’s courses, because I have no interest in his business models or methods.

      However, I do believe in the principles of willing buyer and willing seller, caveat emptor and the right to contract. So I am against any kind of additional regulations in that respect. But that is my personal opinion.

      I believe many online “educators” use their free YouTube videos as “loss leaders”, to funnel in potential customers towards paid services. I don’t bother with the paid services, but I do find some of the free content interesting. If the potential to funnel paying customers is reduced (through regulations), then the “educators” may lose the motivation to provide their free content.

      • “I have no connection to Samuel Leeds” – yet you spend hours defending him, ignoring evidence against him, like you either are him or are a very close relative. Hello Tim.

  5. Mark jones is such obviously an associate of (or is actually) Samuel.
    Happy to dismiss everything done by samuel but trying to accuse everything else reported officially as “petty”.

    That is a classic example of trolling.

    If Mark Jones is not an associate of SL, them mark will gladly and clearly state that fake adds are petty, childish and whoever has done them should be prosecuted.

    Bet mark doesn’t agree to that.

    • Of course the fake adverts were petty and childish. I thought I’d already made that clear.
      As to prosecution, if a criminal offence has been committed and the evidence is available, then yes, of course the person responsible should be prosecuted. Otherwise, what would be the point of having a law against such activities?
      I don’t actually know which law, if any, such a fake advert would have broken. But the politicians are constantly changing the laws, so maybe there is a law that has been broken.
      I would imagine a civil case would be more realistic, with a lower burden of proof.

      However, my experience is that even when an obvious crime has been committed, the chances of the police actually doing anything effective are slim. I have suffered numerous episodes of criminal damage, with witnesses to the offenders. Bricks being thrown and all sorts of abuse. Nothing is ever done about it. I gave up bothering with the police years ago, so I don’t know what interests them these days. I’d imagine tracing an online post is pretty easy for them to do.

      • I have already told you the basis of the investigation – malicious communications and harassment. Those were the two criminal activities the police said had been undertaken. Look them up on google.

        The adverts were not “fake and petty”. Stop trying to diminish the intention and malice behind them.

        I was on the receiving end of them, and I can tell you they caused me severe distress. Or are you also going to be the arbiter of how victims of a crime should feel?

        It’s clear you have no understanding of the seriousness of what has been described here – just like Samuel Leeds himself.

    • So has anyone been convicted, cautioned or found liable in a civil court, for the incident you describe?

      Because my understanding is that an interview under caution, in no way implies any finding of guilt or civil liability. This is different to someone accepting a police caution.

      Unless I was personally sure that a case had been proven, I would not imply any individual was involved. Just because someone has written something on a website, doesn’t make it true.

      • Hello Mark Jones aka Samuel:

        Your defence of Samuel knows no bounds in view of al the evidence that’s out there (two national TV exposures, two national newspaper exposures and much more). If you aren’t Samuel I’m betting you’re his brother or his dad. Let me ask you, “Mark,” why are you facilitating his dreadful behaviour? You should encourage hime to do the right thing – not suck.up to him unconditionally – that is part of what has caused the behaviour in the first place. Or would that hurt your pocket too much?? Perhaps you are Russell Leeds after all.

        Why does Samuel only engage using fake accounts on forums? Because he can’t defend his behaviour and he got caught out every time when he posted as himself.

        With the video request he’s looking for content for his channel – which he would edit and manipulate – as he did with the people he recorded on the phone without telling them. So its not surprising that most right-thinking people won’t go anywhere near his toxic personality and brand. For you to continue to request it tells me that you are either him or someone very, very close.

  6. Just to confirm everybody. ‘Mark Jones’ is Samuel Leeds fake account. Sam makes these kind of accounts all the time. They always say the same kind of thing ‘interview samuel face to face!’. Mark Jones (aka samuel leeds simply wants to use vanessas interview to boost his own crappy ratings) sam will then cut / crop and edit the interview to make appear the good guy as he always does. Luckily it seems vanessa can see though this.

    Mark Jones comments make me laugh ‘I dont like samuel but i think we should all drop the police charges against him as it was only a prank’.

    Pathetic. It so obvious its scammy sammy sat in his bedroom typing that.

    No sorry sam, your getting sued mate. Nothing will stop it

    Press on vanessa

  7. Yep – Mark Jones is a Scamuel Leeds fake account. With all that’s gone on, only Scamuel would be ignorant enough to keep suggesting an interview – which he has been doing for some time.

    Instead of creating multiple fake accounts, Scamuel could post as himself and reason with people that way. The reason he doesn’t do it is because his behaviour is inexcusable and he has no defence for the appalling way he has treated many customers as well as his critics and those who provide a platform for others.

    He is heading towards insolvency and possibly jail in my honest opinion.

    • I watched the video where Samuel Leeds claimed he was willing to participate in an interview. I was not sure whether his proposal had genuinely been rejected or not.

      I would personally like to watch an interview where all the criticisms were put to him in person.

      After reading these posts I agree that Vanessa may not be the best person to put these claims to Samuel. (She is only the Property Tribes platform owner, not someone with first hand experience of Samuel Leeds services). Maybe someone else who has criticisms to put would be better?

      • Wrong again. I am neither a Director, Shareholder, or employee of Property Tribes.

        We never refused to interview Samuel in the first place. If you read the original thread, I said “I would interview him when it was appropriate”. There is no chance of Samuel Leeds ever being interviewed by Property Tribes now for obvious reasons.

        For someone who claims to be a random outsider, you sure do sing from the same hymn sheet as Samuel and care greatly about this whole issue and invest a lot of time in it.

      • Hello Mark Jones aka Samuel:

        Your defence of Samuel knows no bounds in view of al the evidence that’s out there (two national TV exposures, two national newspaper exposures and much more). If you aren’t Samuel I’m betting you’re his brother or his dad. Let me ask you, “Mark,” why are you facilitating his dreadful behaviour? You should encourage hime to do the right thing – not suck.up to him unconditionally – that is part of what has caused the behaviour in the first place. Or would that hurt your pocket too much?? Perhaps you are Russell Leeds after all.

        Why does Samuel only engage using fake accounts on forums? Because he can’t defend his behaviour and he got caught out every time when he posted as himself.

        With the video request he’s looking for content for his channel – which he would edit and manipulate – as he did with the people he recorded on the phone without telling them. So its not surprising that most right-thinking people won’t go anywhere near his toxic personality and brand. For you to continue to request it tells me that you are either him or someone very, very close.

  8. Yes, keep going Vanessa. Those in the industry are shocked at Samuel Leeds’ behaviour and are looking forward to seeing justice done.

    Samuel is known for fake accounts – unfortunately he isn’t smart enough to hold multiple identities and goes back into Samuel Leeds mode and has been caught out multiple times…

    Hello Samuel…

    aka Mark Jones
    aka Donald Dappleforth
    aka Ronald Simms
    aka Mark Truth and Light
    aka many others….

  9. The evidence against Scamuel is overwhelming.

    So many former associates and customers have spoken out against him I am very surprised that he is still going.

    Remember also the people who facilitate Scamuel: Russell Leeds, Anna Leeds, Amelia Sutcliffe (aka Amelia Asante).

    I’ll give it 6 months max.

  10. There’s a lot of individuals riding on Samuel’s band-wagon of ill-gotten gains and they don’t want to see it fail for obvious reasons.

    The one that most concerns me is his legal advisor, Sam Hawking, who was used in the video against me to try and refute my valid concerns about residential lease options.

    Samuel’s brand is certainly highly toxic yet Mr. Hawking continues to provide testimony & support for it. It could have something to do with that he’s loaned Samuel money, and he’s worried he’s going to lose it?

    And what about the two “investors” who foolishly bought two apartments off-plan in Ribbesford House for £200K each? I doubt they will ever see a return of their capital, let alone a finished apartment.

    There will be many other Samuel enablers, suppliers, and contractors in a similar bind with Samuel. They will want to keep the sinking ship afloat until they get what is owed to them.

    These are the kind of agendas at play as the Samuel Leeds gravy train dries up, the “castle” is moth-balled, and the marketing funnel continues to shrivel up due to increasing awareness of his nefarious practices.

  11. So how did the police allegedly trace the internet advert posting to Samuel Leeds home?
    Presumably, they obtained the IP address and then approached the ISP for the identity of the corresponding customer account?

    I was under the impression that ISPs would only release customers details following a court order?

  12. They obtained digital data from gumtree and the ISP provided the residential address associated with it.

    Your attempts to muddy the water are feeble and just show you are working on behalf of your master to try and undermine this article, which is his favoured tactic to try and control the narrative.

  13. Hi Nigel Lewis editor here. If you are going to post comments on this thread about this article and/or the wider debate on property gurus like Mr Leeds, then please keep it respectful and factual – tweets that are rude and bullying will be deleted by the moderator regardless of which side of the debate you are on!

  14. Well done to Vanessa for standing up to this sort of behaviour! Anyone saying that Vanessa should have a face to face debate with someone she is accusing of this and currently taking police action against needs to have a more careful thought. Vanessa want’s the Law thrown at Samuel not You Tube support so any ‘Debate’ to satisfy some people looking for public displays of drama would be counterproductive to the desired legal process and justice.

  15. Traits of a real bully:

    1. Uses fake profiles to amplify their message and defend their position.

    2. Makes wild and unsubstantiated allegations. Never provides one shred of evidence.

    3. Uses personal insults and “ad hominen” commentary.

    4. Uses emotional rhetoric like “She’s a fraud and a failure if I’m wrong and if all of these facts and this hard evidence is not true, then I invite her to talk to me and tell me but the truth is that i know she won’t because what she does is plays the victim pretending to be bullied or harassed.”. See point 2.

    If you’d like to see what a real bullying thread looks like, then look no further than this page:

    Notice at the bottom Samuel is still demanding an interview with me. I think I should add coercion to the list of bullying, harassment, and stalking.


    Number of threads, posts and videos made by me about Samuel Leeds: 0

    Number of threads, posts, and videos made by Samuel Leeds about me: I’ve lost count.

    • Yes, you’ve got it. Looking at how he unconditionally defends Scamuel, despite national TV and press exposures + a ton of evidence against him, and is pushing for a YouTube video with Vanessa, “Mark” must be a close relative or close associate on the Scamuwell bandwagon.

  16. Interesting that Mark Jones subscribes to the same ‘willing buyer, willing seller’ phrase that Samuel Leeds also used to repeatedly defend himself in the interview with Poku Banks. It is a term used to define Fair Market Value where neither party is under any compulsion to buy or to sell and both having reasonable knowledge of relevant facts; Not, the pressurised sale of training courses to people who ill afford them.

    • The UK education system should prepare people to deal with such situations. It needs to be about critical thinking, because the scenarios will evolve with time.

  17. Agreed Mark. Samuel is on facebook and twitter calling me a “coward” for not interviewing him or engaging with him, yet he’s clearly been on this thread trying to diminish his campaign against me by calling it a “petty prank”.

    So, he’s continuing to lie and hope that I won’t ever take up his offer of an interview, so he can continue to play the “coward card” without his followers understanding the true reason why I justifiably won’t have anything to do with him.

    I also commented on his youtube video about me, but, rather than engaging, he blocked me and deleted my comment. He has no genuine desire to engage with me at all. It just suits his narrative to brand me as a “coward”. More evidence of his bullying and harassing behaviour.

    Samuel only comments where he can control the narrative. The Poku Banks interview was a set up from the start. Samuel used and manipulated Poku. It’s ironic, because one of the things Samuel accused me of is raining on the parade of newbies. He stamped 20 year old Poku into the ground, ridiculed him, and is now inciting all his followers against the poor guy.

    Samuel, with all his claimed wealth, could have been magnanimous and professional, but he’s so desperate he went for the jugular with an interview designed to crush Poku. Like all his nefarious activities, it will back fire in the end.

    • I haven’t seen the Poku Banks and Samuel Leeds discussion.
      Will watch it.
      Poku may be younger than Samuel, but I presume that Poku had just as much opportunity to prepare his case.

      • Started to watch the Poku Banks and Samuel Leeds video, but it’s hard going. Very unstructured, with lots of waffle, at least at the start.

        Not a normal type of interview.

        • Watched a bit more of it.
          They both seem quite unprofessional and disorganised, in the way they ask and answer questions.
          I wouldn’t waste time watching any more of it.
          I don’t think Poku was “set up”. I think he’s just not very good at interviewing people.

  18. I see that Andrew Burgess of Property Education Truth Seekers (PETS), has challenged Samuel Leeds to a face to face debate.
    Samuel Leeds should agree.
    Would be interesting to watch.

  19. I hope Samuel Leeds is brave enough to face Andrew Burgess, in a civilized debate.
    I saw the mainstream media program where some guy went undercover to one of Samuel Leeds’ events. I can’t remember the name of the TV celebrity / presenter, but I was disappointed with the way the MSM performed. I found their manner odd.
    Hopefully Andrew Burgess will do a much better job of getting down to the important points and not just creating a strange performance, like the MSM did.

  20. Samuel Leeds continues with his campaign against me. The video has been reposted, with the private phone calls cut out.

    A new post on youtube comments asks his followers to contact me to demand answers and force a live debate. He says he will buy anyone who does that dinner.

    He won’t have to worry too much about the cost as only one person has contacted me so far.

    It seems that even Samuel’s own fans don’t have an “appetite” for his particular menu of bullying.

  21. I find the internet “wealth gurus” quite interesting.
    (I often get their video adds interrupting my YouTube viewing.)

    Whether it’s online selling, “copy trading”, property investment, whatever, they all seem to follow a similar format:
    The person talks a lot and uses a lot of phrases, such as “positive cash flow”, “passive income”, etc. But the actual basics of the proposed activity remains unclear (to me, anyway).

    I would ask the gurus this question:
    If I agree that the phrases you use, are indeed important aspects of “passive income” (and therefore, worth me paying for), then why should I not simply invest in something like Fundsmith?


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here