Karl Francis, 59, of Prestbury Green, Shrewsbury, pleaded guilty to six charges of falsely charging VAT, while running KSS Security. The offences took place between May 2011 and October 2014. In total Shrewsbury Crown Court was told that Francis had charged Shropshire Council, Shrewsbury School and The Forestry Commission around 59,700 of VAT, which was not paid to HM Revenue and Customs.
Francis company provided security staff who were responsible for locking up buildings and patrolling. Philip Beardwell, prosecuting, said the matters had come to light after one of Francis employees was found to be working without the right authority. He said: When working at Shrewsbury school the man was approached and they found he was not authorised to have the appropriate licence to be working on site that day and he received a formal police caution for that,
Francis company was responsible for a number of sites including Raven Meadows Car Park, Shrewsbury s park & ride facilities, Shrewsbury Bus Station, and event and evening security at Shrewsbury School.
The court heard that he had been registered for VAT but had de-registered in April 2011. Mr Beardwell said that Francis had continued to invoice the organisations for work, including VAT, but had not paid the appropriate amount to HM Revenue and Customs. The court was told that in a police interview Francis had said that another man had been responsible for the accounts.
However, Mr Beardwell said: Attempts were made to trace him but he was never found. Anthony Scott, mitigating, told Judge Peter Barrie that Francis suffers from respiratory problems and mental health issues. Sentencing Judge Barrie said: I have to deal with you for six counts in relation to three clients from whom your business quite deliberately charged VAT when the business was not registered for VAT so the money collected, which should have been seen as tax, was not accounted for by the revenue and was kept by your business.
Having previously been registered for VAT you must obviously have understood how wrong it was to conduct the business in this way.
The total amount is not far short of 60,000 which is a significant loss to the revenue, accrued over a significant period of time.
However, Judge Barrie said that despite the seriousness of the crime he was not going to send Francis to jail because of his health. He said: Because of ill health it would be disproportionate to impose a sentence of immediate custody. Francis was sentenced to 21 months in prison, suspended for two years.
Police 2arrested the woman on suspicion of trespassing, and they say the incident is not being treated as terrorism related. Images from the scene appear to show a woman being pulled down from the railings by police, as people capture the incident on their phones. Video footage posted online captures the dramatic moment cops bring her back down, put her arms behind her back and appear to handcuff her.
Officers caught a woman trying to climb the gates of Buckingham Palace (Image: twitter.com/aidilarazak)
The woman is heard screaming “Queen of the country” as she is led to a police car. A spokesperson for the Metropolitan Police said: “At 17.40hrs on Saturday, 7 October officers in the area of Buckingham Palace observed a woman climbing the front gates of the palace.
“The woman, believed to be in in her 30s was quickly detained by officers before she gained access to the palace grounds.
“She was arrested on suspicion of trespass under Section 128 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005, trespass on a designated site and is currently in custody at a central London police station.
“The incident is not being treated as terrorist-related.”
Buckingham Palace (file photo) (Image: Getty Images)
Follow us on Twitter @DailyMirror – the official Daily Mirror & Mirror Online Twitter account – real news in real time.
We’re also on Facebook/dailymirror – your must-see news, features, videos and pictures throughout the day from the Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror and Mirror Online.
Plans for the fencing at Waymills Industrial Estate in Whitchurch have been given the go-ahead by Shropshire Council. Mr F Worsencroft applied for the fencing because of problems with cars driving around his car park at night. Gary Chesters, writing on behalf of Mr Worsencroft, said: “The reason for the application is to prevent joy riders and trespassers from using the car park in a reckless manner.
“The applicant is having problems with cars driving around his car park at night.
“The applicant has several concerns about this including damage to the car park, liability if anyone gets injured and the time consuming effort it involves for both the landowner and police when damage occurs.
“The applicant’s insurance company also have concerns.
“The applicant owns the adjoining site which does have a security fence and there are no issues .
The new fencing will match the existing fence.”
The security fencing will be put up across the front and a small section at the rear of units 4 and 5.
The front section will be gated and it will be similar to the neighbouring set of units.
Shropshire Council case officer Luke Ashley said: “The proposed scale, design and appearance of the fencing will respect the existing character of the area and will not result in harm in regards to its visual impact or cause any detrimental impact on neighbouring properties.”