Mdemorandum submitted by Geoffrey Banks
1. I have been a bookmaker all my working
life. I am now aged 42 and live in Berkshire.
2. My late father, John Banks, was a successful
bookmaker and a former Chairman of the Rails Bookmakers Association.
He had numerous pitches and prior to his death in December 2002,
he made a gift of those pitches to me. The Inland Revenue wrote
to the solicitors acting on behalf of the executors of my late
father's estate on 9 November 2005 confirming the pitches I had
received were deemed to be a gift.
3. In light of that gift my father made
no other provision for me in his Will. He was a man of considerable
wealth. Accordingly, his estate vested solely in my sisters and
my step mother. At no time was it ever considered that the tenure
of the pitches was going to be the subject of challenge. Indeed,
the terms of the Sparrow Report and the subsequent conduct of
the sale of pitches through the NJPC made it clear that the pitches
were assets to be bought and sold freely on the open market.
4. In the early part of 2007 my pitches
were valued by the NJPC at £270,000. That was the figure
taken in account as my major asset base when my solicitors entered
into discussions for financial settlement with my former wife's
representatives. Taking into account the value of those pitches
(which included inherited pitches) I agreed to accept a capital
sum of only £50,000 on the sale of the former matrimonial
home. My former wife receiving £320,000 and a generous maintenance
payment. I entered into the Consent Order believing, as did all
other bookmakers, that their pitches were secure and valuable
assets. If I had any reason to believe to the contrary I would
have negotiated a far different settlement. At annexe 1 of this
submission are the letter from the Inland Revenue, a list of my
pitches and the Consent Order. My understanding of the tax treatment
of pitches is confirmed by the report of Grant Thornton obtained
by the Federation of Racecourse Bookmakers and is produced at
annexe 2 of this submission.[2]
5. The financial settlement was agreed before
the RCA announcement in March 2007. Since 1998 pitches could be
freely bought and sold and I constantly invested in pitches upgrading
my position on a series of racecourses. I would not have done
so had there been any suggestion that the tenure would be challenged.
Until this matter is clarified in accordance with everyone's understanding
that the tenures are secure, I fear not only for my business but
for my ability to make the maintenance payments to my wife and
children. I know that other bookmakers are in similar positions
and have been depressed by the threat to their livelihood and
the profession in which we have spent our entire working lives.
6. The RCA's position is in my view untenable.
They took part, as I well know from my father, in discussions
regarding tenure and agreed the new system that was introduced.
They benefited from pitch sales. They have only queried the matter
now.
7. If given the opportunity, I would like
to give evidence before the Select Committee.
October 2007
2 Not printed. Back
| 
