A driving school boss who subjected his instructors to racist, sexist and homophobic abuse has spectacularly lost a £2 million court battle against 20 former franchisees who walked away from their contracts.
John Benson, 64, founder of Benson School of Motoring in Braintree, Essex, was ruled by the High Court to have created an “abusive and intimidating” work environment through years of bullying behaviour that included calling a female instructor a “wrinkled old bag” and referring to a Chinese instructor as “p**sy chow mein”.
The landmark ruling by Mr Justice Freedman on 6 August represents a crushing defeat for Benson, who had counter-sued the instructors for damages approaching £2 million after they terminated their franchise agreements in late 2020. Instead, the judge dismissed all of Benson’s counterclaims and released the instructors from their contracts without any liability.
‘His Way or the Highway’
During the five-week trial at the High Court in London, the court heard damning evidence of Benson’s “dominant and domineering nature” that left many vulnerable instructors trapped in what the judge described as “overbearing” contractual arrangements.
It was John’s way or the highway,” former instructor Janine Rusted, 57, of Great Chesterford, Essex, told The Sun after the judgment.
The court found that Benson regularly made threatening comments to instructors, boasting about suing former franchisees and seizing guarantors’ homes. In one particularly alarming incident, he reportedly dismissed a female instructor’s fears that he would “go after her with a gun” as “the most cynical and nonsensical thing that I have ever heard” – despite having a prior conviction for a firearms offence.
Racist Slurs and Discriminatory Language
Evidence presented to the court revealed a pattern of discriminatory behaviour through Benson’s use of the company’s internal Facebook group, ‘Just Benson’. The judge found that Benson had posted derogatory remarks about female instructors and published racist slurs targeting the traveller community and Chinese instructors.
Mr Justice Freedman noted that this discriminatory language “further supported the claimants’ description of a hostile working environment” and formed “part of the intimidatory atmosphere and bullying conduct of Mr Benson”.
The judge observed Benson’s behaviour first-hand during the trial, describing him as “frequently aggressive and sarcastic” in the witness box. “I found Mr Benson a person used to getting his own way,” Mr Justice Freedman stated. “He did treat himself as if he had control over the franchisees. He was unsympathetic to those whose interests were different from his own.”
Trapped in ‘Desperate’ Contracts
The court heard how Benson School of Motoring, established in 2004, had grown to operate more than 100 franchisees across Essex, Suffolk and Norfolk by 2020. Most were new instructors with little business experience who found themselves locked into increasingly onerous contracts.
Instructors paid fixed weekly fees regardless of their earnings, with contracts routinely lasting well over three years. Some desperate instructors agreed to extensions of up to 132 months – over 11 years – after falling into arrears, fearing immediate termination and unaffordable litigation.
The franchise agreements imposed wide-ranging restrictions on instructors, who were barred from publicising their own phone numbers or setting their own prices. Despite being styled as independent businesses, they were required to act in John Benson Limited’s (JBL) best interests and follow strict teaching guidelines.
Individual counterclaims by JBL against some instructors exceeded £100,000, with one approaching £300,000. The court found that 70 instructors had previously either ended up in court, bought themselves out of their contracts, or managed to give notice of termination at the right time.
Landmark Victory for Franchisees
The High Court’s 509-paragraph judgment held that the franchise contracts contained implied terms of good faith – and that JBL could not conduct itself in a manner which would be regarded as commercially unacceptable by reasonable and honest people.
Mr Justice Freedman found that the company had breached these implied terms through Benson’s conduct, thereby repudiating the contracts and entitling the instructors to leave the network without any liability.
Jonathan Hodge, consultant solicitor at Aquabridge Law which represented 17 of the claimants, commended the instructors for their “bravery” in taking on Benson. My clients spent five years litigating against the Benson School of Motoring in the High Court, and sought no compensation,” he told The Sun.
All they wanted was to be released from an environment in which John Benson controlled them through fear and intimidation. When presented with their claims, Mr Benson engaged a large team of lawyers who brought counterclaims against my clients for millions of pounds – all of which were dismissed.”
Hodge emphasised that his clients “could only sustain this hard-fought case by sticking together”, adding: “The judgment identifies their bravery in standing up to Mr Benson, confirming their fears were well placed.”
Legal Implications for Franchise Industry
The case, formally known as Ellis & Ors v John Benson Ltd, builds upon developing law concerning duties of good faith in commercial contracts and carries significant implications for the franchise industry.
Mark Stephens of Gatehouse Chambers, who represented the claimants alongside Hodge, noted that the decision “confirms that, where there is an imbalance of power and the franchise relationship is similar to an employment relationship, there are limits to how a franchisor can treat its franchisees.”
The judgment drew upon precedents including Bates v Post Office, expanding protections for franchisees in relationships characterised by significant power imbalances.
Benson was represented by Andrew Butler KC and Annie Higgo of Tanfield Chambers, instructed by Holmes & Hills. A hearing to determine costs will take place at a later date, with the instructors also able to pursue any damages claims in the next phase of proceedings.
The ruling serves as a stark warning to franchisors across Britain that bullying, discriminatory behaviour and abuse of power will not be tolerated by the courts, even in commercial relationships. For the 20 brave instructors who stood up to their former boss, it represents vindication after years of intimidation and a chance to finally move forward with their careers free from fear.
Follow for more updates on Britannia Daily
