Home   Spalding   News   Article

Subscribe Now

Angry Spalding trader vows to fight ‘mafia-esque’ levy for town’s Business Improvement District




An angry trader says he will be going to court to fight against a ‘mafia-esque’ levy for a new business group.

Nicholas Thompson, of the Art of Ink, is one of a number of town centre traders who are refusing to pay the Spalding Business Improvement District (BID) levy and have now received letters threatening court action unless they cough up.

Anger has been sparked among businesses in the town since the first levy bills were rolled out in March. These bills had been backdated since September - despite only backoffice work being conducted - and this has prompted some to question the validity of last summer’s ballot.

Trader Nicholas Thompson, of the Art of Ink, is going to court to fight the Spalding Business Improvement District levy
Trader Nicholas Thompson, of the Art of Ink, is going to court to fight the Spalding Business Improvement District levy

The BID — which organisers promised could raise £1million over five years to help boost the fortunes of the town — was brought in as a result of a very narrow ballot last summer, with just one vote tipping the balance.

Mr Thompson has been summoned to appear at Boston Magistrates Court on Monday, June 30, as he has not paid the levy of £77.57 which has gone up to £156 plus court costs.

He said: “I have refused to pay it - there is no benefit to me paying it whatsoever. I find it really bad that they are demanding money through menances.

Trader Nicholas Thompson, of the Art of Ink, is going to court to fight the Spalding Business Improvement District levy
Trader Nicholas Thompson, of the Art of Ink, is going to court to fight the Spalding Business Improvement District levy

“They are very mafia-esque - a bigger group of people than me is demanding money for something we shouldn’t have to pay for as it is nothing to do with me. They are threatening me with court.”

Mr Thompson has been running The Art of Ink, which is Bond Street Court, off Station Street, for 14 years and does not feel that the BID will benefit his business.

People behind the BID have have promised it can bring in extra investment and revitalise Spalding by bringing more footfall into the town.

Mr Thompson said he voted against the proposal during last July’s ballot and described information about the proposals as ‘vague.

A total of 115 votes were cast from a business community of more than 400 during the ballot, with 58 in favour. South Holland District Council had 18 votes due to the number of properties it owns in the town centre and cast them in support of the BID.

Since the bills were issued in March, Mr Thompson has contacted the BID to ask if he would have a say on how the levy is spend.

He said: “I asked if I will see any benefit in my business and was told no so I have questioned why am I paying for it?

“Why should I be threatened to pay money so people can make someone else’s life better with my money?”

Mr Thompson said he felt intimidated by the threat of court but has vowed to argue his case to ensure his voice is heard.

He said: “It is frightening to be to taken to court if I refuse to bow to demands of whoever the BID levy people are.

“I am going to argue my case against it. There was not enough consultation and most businesses are against it. I don’t expect to win but I expect to have my say.

“Can it ever put someone on side to be take to court for something that you didn’t ask for?”

South Holland District Council is responsible for collecting the BID levy for the board.

The authority says it has collected £71,795.62 until June 16 with 375 accounts paid in full.

A spokesman said: “South Holland District Council’s role is to collect the levy on behalf of the Business Improvement District, and to then pass the funds over to them.

“As it would with council tax and all other council managed collection processes, since the levy notices were issued due time has been given and follow-ups have been undertaken to those with outstanding payments.

“The majority of payments have now been received and, in line with the relevant national regulations, further recovery action is now required to ensure the receipt of any remaining funds.”



This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies - Learn More