A Kent businessman has been ordered to stump up £15,000 for withholding information in a pensions probe.
Lee Bartholomew, from Tonbridge, the former director of 1066 Target Sports, appeared at Lewes Crown Court on Friday 31 May 2024, in a prosecution brought by the pensions regulator.
He was fined £7,500 and ordered to pay costs of £7,500.
At a previous hearing in April, Bartholomew pleaded guilty to intentionally and without reasonable excuse suppressing documents he was required to produce under the Pensions Act 2004.
In his ruling, His Honour Judge Mooney told Bartholomew: “You took the decision to suppress, i.e. deliberately not provide, documentation you should have done because you knew to do so would alert the Regulator that you weren’t paying money where you should have done.”
The judge added that as this hadn’t been done, he could not know where the money went at that time.
He continued: “This caused a degree of distress to the people affected, as the money they thought was going into their pensions didn’t. It caused them real concern.”
The pensions regulator formally requested the information in June 2020 as part of investigations into allegations of fraudulent evasion of employee pension contributions.
The court heard that the 45-year-old businessman intentionally failed to provide the information required by the deadline, suppressing the material sought without reasonable excuse.
Judge Mooney said Bartholomew's decision not to provide the information required a sentence that serves as a punishment and also as a deterrent to others from doing the same thing.
1066 Target Sports, which is in Hastings, East Sussex, once billed itself as the UK's largest indoor family-friendly target sports venue. The site is now permanently closed.
Joe Turner, head of enforcement at the pensions regulator, said: “This case sends a clear warning that we do not hesitate to prosecute companies or individuals if they refuse to give us the right information when requested and/or try to frustrate our aim to protect pension savers.
“We attempted to use our civil powers to put things right in this case, but this was ignored. Anyone refusing to comply with our requests for information without good reason should take note that they could find themselves in court and with a criminal conviction.”
