Revision guides millionaire endures poison-pen campaign from neighbours

A millionaire author who made his fortune writing GCSE revision guides was subjected to a “poison pen” campaign by his disgruntled neighbours, a court heard.

Former maths teacher Richard Alan Parsons endured repeated harassment at his rural home in Cumbria, including being sent an anonymous letter reading: “Once upon a time there was a T---. It was you. The end.”

Mr Parsons, 56, has an estimated £115 million fortune and was dubbed “Mr Revision” after he published a series of best-selling GCSE study guides.

He suspected the Garnetts, a local family who ran a farm on his land, were behind the campaign and so sued Elizabeth, 53, and Allan Garnett, 56, and their daughter Katie Armistead in the High Court over the harassment.

The family now face a court bill of over £100,000 after being ordered to pay damages for harassment and libel, plus legal costs.

Making the order, Mrs Justice Collins Rice said it was accepted that all allegations against Mr Parsons were “false and defamatory”.

Mr Parsons was brought up in Cumbria and, after studying physics at Oxford University, returned there to work as a teacher.

He made his fortune after deciding that the GCSE revision guides available at the time were not good enough and that he could do better.

Mr Parsons quit teaching in 1995 and began writing his first manuscript, which was later published through his own company, Coordination Group Publications.

Mr Parson’s revision guides were notable for their light-hearted tone and questionable jokes at the bottom of pages.

He owns a petrol station and leisure centre in Broughton-in-Furness, Cumbria, where he lives with his wife and two children, plus land, including that farmed by the Garnetts.

The court heard the campaign against the author began in August 2018 when he received a letter with a photograph of a notice board bearing the message: “Once upon a time there was a T---. It was you. The end.”

It was accompanied by the words: “Thanks for ruining our holidays with all your noise. We hope you realise just how much people dislike you and how unpopular you are.”

Then, in May 2019, a letter was posted to Mr Parson’s publishing company, accusing Mr Parsons of sexually exploiting a vulnerable woman in town and comparing him to Hollywood sex predator Harvey Weinstein.

‘Salacious and tendentious content’

The letter had further “salacious and tendentious content”, said Mrs Justice Collins Rice, and went on to compare Mr Parsons to Prince Andrew, which she described as “a reference to a well-known public figure to whom rumours of links to a convicted child-abuser have persistently attached”.

As preparations were made for trial, the Garnetts’ solicitors informed the court that they would not be defending the claim against them, but simply “wished the proceedings ‘brought to an end’”.

Mrs Justice Collins Rice entered a default judgment in Mr Parson’s favour against all three defendants for libel and Mr and Mrs Garnett only for harassment.

Although the judgment does not amount to a finding that they did what was alleged, the judge went on to order Mr and Mrs Garnett to pay £8,000 damages jointly for libel, plus £12,000 for harassment, and Mrs Armistead to pay £2,000 in libel damages.

She also ordered the defendants to pay £45,000 on account of Mr Parsons’ legal costs, which are expected to run to more than £100,000 once fully assessed.

The full costs bill and how it will be apportioned between the Garnett family has yet to be worked out.