KB-2021-000741 - [2025] EWHC 2096 (KB)

Wendy Smith is an office manager who has worked with Mr Benson and JBL for over 30 years. She was for a period of time of more than 10 years a personal partner of Mr Benson. She did not mention that in her witness statement. Albeit that this point was bound to emerge, the statement would have had greater balance if it had been mentioned in her witness statement. It emerged in evidence that Mr Benson is according to her the stepfather to her two children and that her children are Mr Benson's next of kin.

Instead, the statement contains many remarks about Mr Benson and JBL praising him as “very fair” and “more than fair”. She sought to justify practices of JBL. For example, she thought that it was good not to have a personal number of a franchisee because head office always answers calls professionally.

Wendy Smith came over as a cautious witness and one affected by loyalty to JBL and affection for Mr Benson. She described the workplace as being one of harmony even when confronted with behaviour that Mr Benson had previously admitted when he told Ciera Rogers and her to “f*** off”. I was unimpressed by her evidence that people were happy to enter into long-term agreements. At one point she said that Mr Benson was passionate about the business and would do anything for the franchisees to do well. He knew the tricks of the trade and if the franchisees listened to him they would be successful. That seemed to me in the context of the evidence as a whole to be viewing the business and Mr Benson and its practices through rose tinted spectacles.

Wendy Smith said that she thought that Mr Benson was sympathetic to everyone. It was then put to her that Mr Benson said of a franchisee that he was a pussy when he reported that he was not fit enough to work, and she responded that this was not said directly to the franchisee. In respect of the Chinese franchisee of whom Mr Benson used an offensive epithet, she said that Mr Benson did not mean this in a racist way. In respect of a recording of a conversation with Ciera’s father whom he called a “retard”, she said that he must have been provoked. In respect of the postings about ruining people’s lives, she said he does not ruin people’s lives. That conversation was in 2023 and is therefore of limited relevance to these proceedings, but it contains pages of vile and aggressive abuse from Mr Benson to Ciera’s father, Simon, which is evidence of the personality of Mr Benson.

There were put to her extracts from a taped conversation between Susanna Summers and Linda Sharpe (who worked at the office). Ms Sharpe said “… if people pissed him off we were told to not book any pupils with them. That was in response to Ms Summers saying, “I was under the impression if you was in his bad books your diary went to the back of the pile and stayed and only got bookings if there was no one else to take it”. Later in the conversation, Ms Sharpe said “he has big problem with mental health. He told [a named employee] if he knew at the interview that she had mental health issues he wouldn't have employed her.” Whilst none of this affected the view of Wendy Smith of Mr Benson, cumulatively it undermined her glowing views about him and did not stand scrutiny in view of the oral and documentary evidence in the case as a whole.

The evidence of Lisa Charalambous and Roderick Stubbs were of limited assistance because they did not become trainees/franchisees until almost years after the termination of the Claimants’ agreements. They said that they kept matters to themselves. As present franchisees, they both had reasons not to give evidence to the detriment of JBL and Mr Benson, which does not mean that they were intending to mislead. Mr Stubbs had no coherent explanation why he had signed a number of agreements with longer periods. One agreement was “in settlement of a dispute” which he said was not exactly a dispute. Likewise, Mr Kevin Carroll’s evidence was of little value to the issues in the case. He is now retired. His statement did not disclose that he had been on a 0 fees agreement since 2012. He confirmed that he had little interaction with his fellow instructors and he just kept his head down to do his job.

Two witnesses recruited in 2017 were Grant Bywaters and Robert Garrard. Mr Bywaters had little interaction with the Claimants and who paid little attention to the Just Benson Facebook group. Mr Garrard’s guarantor was his mother. He said that the life of a driving instructor was quite an isolated one and he knew very little of the experiences of his colleagues. He said that he paid no attention to the reputation of Mr Benson. This was confirmed by the fact that it appeared that he learned for the first time at trial that Mr Benson had been convicted of a firearms offence. Their evidence too was of very limited assistance.

There were two further witnesses who had signed ten-year agreements namely Sajjad Hussain and Jonathan Challis. Mr Hussain was in poor health with progressively worsening symptoms and had signed a 10year agreement at the start of COVID and a further agreement in May 2022. Mr Challis had signed various agreements until he reached a 10year commitment. His agreement was guaranteed by his mother. He says that he was not aware of various racist aggressive or intimidating conduct by Mr Benson. I do not find that these witnesses in any way cause me to doubt the validity of the evidence of the Claimant’s witnesses. The probability is that they have been anxious not to say anything which would upset thei position with Mr Benson and to protect themselves, and in the case of Mr Challis, his mother. That is not to say that their evidence was dishonest, but it explains why it is that they and indeed other witnesses on behalf of JBL have been supportive and/or uncritical of JBL. I have referred to the evidence of Mr Court elsewhere in the context of the evidence of Mr Dean.