Ben Houchen linked to VAT Fraud & PD Ports issues

Port issues are behind a Torygraph paywall;

Teesport claims mayor is ‘holding it to ransom’ in hope of sinking sale price​

Tees Valley mayor Ben Houchen has been accused of driving down the value of Teesside’s biggest port as he looks to purchase the site

By Russell Lynch, Economics Editor 29 May 2021 • 7:00pm
The Tees Valley mayor Ben Houchen has been accused of “holding to ransom” the owner of Teesside’s biggest port to drive down the value of the business and then buy it cheaply, court papers show.

A legal battle between Mr Houchen’s South Tees Development Corporation and PD Ports, owned by Canadian fund giant Brookfield, erupted earlier this year over access rights to the Teesport site, which employs 700 people.

The corporation has embarked on one of the biggest brownfield regeneration projects in Europe, redeveloping 4,500 acres of land including the former SSI steelworks. But its land surrounds the Teesport site and it has gone to court to seek a declaration that PD Ports – which has been put up for sale by Brookfield – only has one legal access route.

The ports company claims in its defence document that its “true motive is … to seek to hold the defendant to ransom over its rights of access”.

“Further the defendant avers that this claim has been brought by the claimants to extract a ransom discount for the purchase of the defendant’s business,” the court papers said.


PD Ports claims it has other access rights to its site, but if the High Court rules in favour of STDC it is likely to severely damage the valuation of the company, which was put up for sale last year through investment bank RBC with a rumoured £1.2bn price tag.
The document adds that the “claimant (via Mr Houchen)” contacted Brookfield in September last year to “propose a joint venture in respect of the port, or the acquisition by the first claimant of the defendant (or its business)”.

Mr Houchen told The Sunday Telegraph that he “asked to talk to them about buying it, which I never heard back about other than to say they weren’t interested in a joint venture”.

But he confirmed his ambitions to absorb PD Ports’ Teesport container gateway into the region’s new freeport zone, after The Telegraph revealed discussions over a potential £1bn plus investment from Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund Mubadala last month to create one of the UK’s most advanced ports.

Mr Houchen – a key ally of Boris Johnson in the so-called “blue wall” that helped deliver his general election victory – said: “We are speaking to lots of funders and investors of which Mubadala is one.”

But he said PD Ports’ claim the STDC was holding the business to ransom “doesn’t make any sense”, adding: “Their defence says they have a second access anyway. So if they do, what’s the issue?”

He added: “We would like them to come to the table to resolve it but unfortunately it seems they haven’t.”
If realised, Mr Houchen’s ambitions would dwarf his previous £40m deal to take the region’s airport into public ownership – a key pledge when he was first elected in 2017 – after it was threatened with closure.

PD Ports declined to comment on the legal action but said it was “committed to collaborating with all stakeholders”.
 
So he's trying to devalue PD Ports to enable a purchase of Teesport? What about Hartlepool Dock, PD Logistics and the other sites around the country?
 
Joy_Division_Oven_Gloves said:
VAT story behind a pay wall - is there much more detail?
Click to expand...

Formatting is a bit off but kept messing up the quote so will leave it as it is.

VAT story behind a pay wall - is there much more detail?
A Conservative mayor was an adviser to a company that was implicated in a large-scale VAT fraud and later accepted a £15,000 donation from the business.

Ben Houchen, who increased his majority in the Tees Valley, faces questions over his involvement with Askaris International Technology.

In 2013 the company tried to claim VAT refunds totalling nearly £810,000 but was blocked by HM Revenue & Customs because the transactions were part of a chain identified as “missing trader” fraud. Last year a judge rejected an appeal and said that “Askaris both knew and should have known that its transactions were connected with the fraudulent evasion of VAT”.

The company began trading mobile airtime minutes in the summer of 2013 and recorded a turnover of more than £4 million within six months. It had one supplier and one customer, and a tax tribunal criticised a “startling” lack of written evidence, ruling that it appeared to pay little attention to negotiating prices and maximising profits from the trades.

Houchen is named in last year’s legal judgment as having “been the adviser to Askaris prior to . . . being elected Tees Valley mayor” and was the director of a legal consultancy criticised by HMRC for allegedly trying to run up costs.

Missing trader intra-community (MTIC) fraud takes advantage of EU rules which allow trading between member countries to be VAT-free. Fraudsters use a chain of companies to make transactions, with one company charging VAT to a customer which a later entity seeks to reclaim from HMRC. It is known as missing trader fraud because when HMRC seeks the VAT from the seller, the trader has disappeared.
Houchen, 34, a solicitor, began working as a consultant to Askaris and other businesses owned by the same Dubai-based businessman in early 2015, after the disputed transactions had taken place but before HMRC had made its decision to not pay the claimed tax.

He was involved with the company, and key figures in it, as the case progressed, raising questions about his business associations and judgment in the years immediately before his election as the first mayor of Tees Valley.
Houchen worked on the legal case via a non-regulated law firm called RU Licit which was set up by Askaris’s owner. It was an arrangement a lawyer for HMRC described as a “breathtakingly brazen” attempt to run up costs which it apparently hoped to claim back from taxpayers.

​



In 2016 he went into business with a key figure in the disputed transactions. Benham Azadi had arranged the sale of airtime and a tribunal judge later ruled that he had deliberately sought to hide Askaris’s activities from HMRC.
Houchen solicited a £15,000 donation from Askaris in 2019, a few months before the company’s unsuccessful appeal against the withheld tax.


Houchen, who has been described as an ally of Boris Johnson, first entered politics as a councillor in Yarm in North Yorkshire in 2011 and met Richard Upshall while working as a solicitor at a firm in the northeast of England.
Upshall is a Tory supporting entrepreneur who has met Boris Johnson and who shares photographs of private jets, luxury watches and fast cars on social media. Houchen worked on Upshall’s acquisition of several Pizza Hut franchises and in early 2015 left private practice to work for him as a consultant providing advice on several of the entrepreneur’s businesses.
Upshall said that Houchen had been “consulting across my various businesses from a legal point of view and some strategy type work” including on Askaris. Houchen was subsequently involved in Askaris’s attempt to contest HMRC’s decision to withhold more than £800,000 in VAT refunds, with RU Licit, of which he was a director of, racking up more than £100,000 in costs.


The Tory mayor said he had no involvement in compiling a costs submission for RU Licit and said his “only involvement with Askaris is that I worked for RU Licit as an employee and my work extended only to helping Askaris access legal advice from a leading UK specialist tax barrister about the claim they were bringing against HMRC”.
Houchen subsequently went into business with the man who had arranged Askaris’s mobile airtime transactions, Benham Azari, and accepted a donation from the company in 2019. Houchen said he would “probably not” take another donation from Askaris, adding: “I get donations from elsewhere so it’s not something, I’m not desperate, I don’t need to.”
He said Upshall was a “decent person and he runs a lot of successful businesses”.
Upshall insisted that Askaris had been the “unfortunate party that was caught up in the chain” and said the lack of a criminal prosecution showed he had not known the transactions were linked to VAT fraud. The tax tribunal ruled that he should have been aware of the issues around the airtime transactions but “there is no evidence he had any familiarity with these transactions or the circumstances surrounding them”.
Azadi did not respond to a request for comment.
Click to expand...
 
Isn't Benham Azadi the guy who's daughter died a few years back? or a coincidence with the name? He was then involved in that crap nightclub in Stockton and currently involved in the Village Bar and Grill takeaway. He blocked me on Facebook for pointing out that his advert for barmaids was illegal due to gender discrimination laws, if memory serves it was heavily slanted towards suggesting they also be "fit".

Edit - just looked up that Askari's Information Technology and the same guy wrote their page a positive review so seems like the same bloke.
 
Given the Tory ideology its inevitable that corruption follows, it will never change.

Capalism isn't the issue, but putting profit before people is.
 
Ex Footy Legs said:
Yes, it will be a big % wedge of cash off a Saudi businessman for setting up a deal that is now being scuppered by a stubborn port company
Click to expand...
More likely an Emirati if Mubadala is involved. This makes me sad that the only investment is from crappy regimes with poor governments and human rights records.
 
I'm sure all the tory boys on here will forgive him. Makes him more human. No doubt he will be on social media telling everyone how brilliant he is stood in front of teesside Airport.... And remember Diane abbot had a mojito on a train and miliband dropped a bacon sandwich.... But corbyn etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc
 
zorro_mfc said:
If you are referring to the MALL it was voted night club of the year more than once. So hardly crap mate.

Why do some people in Teesside need to run the place down.
Click to expand...
No, i’m referring to the place on prince regent street that had the N-trance set you free video filmed on location, however that was about 25 years ago and this was about 3 years ago where it was a dead end club that rapidly closed for being terrible, and, you know, creating sexist ads for barmaids as I already said, so yeah, that crappy nightclub in Stockton

Egg on your face son. Suppose you could always care less though 🦄

www.gazettelive.co.uk

Stockton nightclub due to reopen under new management within weeks

The Prince Regent Street venue has had various guises over the years
www.gazettelive.co.uk www.gazettelive.co.uk
 
ThatFragranceGuy said:
No, i’m referring to the place on prince regent street that had the N-trance set you free video filmed on location, however that was about 25 years ago and this was about 3 years ago where it was a dead end club that rapidly closed for being terrible, and, you know, creating sexist ads for barmaids as I already said, so yeah, that crappy nightclub in Stockton

Egg on your face son. Suppose you could always care less though 🦄

www.gazettelive.co.uk

Stockton nightclub due to reopen under new management within weeks

The Prince Regent Street venue has had various guises over the years
www.gazettelive.co.uk www.gazettelive.co.uk
Click to expand...
Fair enough then cinzano biancos ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top