Window Cleaning Wars - Second & Final Round

York crown court.

Window cleaning boss is sentenced: A window cleaning boss has been cleared of three charges arising out of a dispute with a former employee. A jury at York Crown Court yesterday found Philip Jones, 44, not guilty on the direction of the judge of charges of burglary, intimidation and criminal damage. The verdict came at the end of the prosecution case which alleged Jones had entered the home of John Massheder and his partner as a burglar, and removed window cleaning equipment. It was also alleged that on another occasion he had intimidated Mr Massheder by stating that he ought to be careful up his ladder in case some one knocked him off it. The third allegation was that he kicked and dented Mr Massheder’s vehicle in the street. 

Judge Colin Burn told the jury the evidence had not come up to scratch and in those circumstances the Crown were offering no further evidence and he would direct them to return not guilty verdicts. However, father-of-four Jones, of Kirkdale, Kirkbymoorside, was then sentenced on two previously admitted charges of sending an offensive or menacing text message to Mr Massheder on September 6 2010, and misuse of a computer. Jones admitted sending a text stating Mr Massheder was “a dead man”. He also admitted that after entering Mr Massheder’s home by a first floor window by use of a ladder on September 4 2010, he had wiped a programme off the couple’s computer.

The court heard that Jones had been after equipment he believed was his and had decided once in the house to wipe the business programme, which he had originally installed himself, off the computer. The jury had been told the two former friends had fallen out after Mr Massheder decided to start up on his own, allegedly taking with him some of Jones’ customers and business. Mitigating, David Dixon said his client was a hard-working man who in 17 years had built up a window cleaning business covering much of Scarborough, Malton and Pickering areas.

Passing sentence, the judge said the fact Jones had entered someone else’s home in order to get at the computer was an aggravating feature. For the text message offence Jones was fined £485 and ordered to pay a £15 victim surcharge. The computer offence led to Jones being ordered to complete 100 hours of unpaid work. The judge also imposed a five-year restraining order preventing Jones contacting Mr Massheder and his partner.

Window Cleaning Wars - Round 1

Window Cleaner, Maple Drive, Scarbororough.

Window cleaners’ row ends in court: A row between two Scarborough window cleaners which started when one of the men tried to start his own business ended up in court yesterday. Philip Jones, 44, is accused of entering the home of John Massheder, in Maple Drive, through a bathroom window and stealing window cleaning equipment which he claimed belonged to him. Jones is also charged with later intimidating Mr Massheder by implying he would knock him off his window cleaning ladder and saying he would “pound” him, as well as kicking and damaging the van which he used for his business.

Jones, of Kirkdale, Kirkbymoorside, denies charges of burglary, witness intimidation and criminal damage. Mr Massheder also alleged that Jones had punched him in the face and told him he had paid for someone to break his legs as the feud escalated. Robert Galley, prosecuting on the first day of the trial at York Crown Court, said: “This can be summed up in a few simple words – it’s a conflict between two window cleaners and their ability to do their rounds.” The jury were told that Mr Massheder had worked for Jones as a franchisee of his Scarborough window cleaning business for around 18 months before he had decided to set up on his own after a disagreement.

Mr Galley added: “Mr Massheder went to a scooter rally in Wakefield. That day he received a text saying ‘your conservatory door was wide open so I got the stuff back’ from Mr Jones. “When he returned home the conservatory was insecure and all of his window cleaning equipment had been removed.” The court heard that information on Mr Massheder’s computer, giving details of his customers, had also been deleted by Jones.

Mr Galley said that although he had initially denied entering Mr Massheder’s home, Jones later accepted he had done so when a footprint was found but maintained he had the right to do so because he said the items belonged to him. Mr Massheder, who says his home was locked at the time of the alleged burglary, claims he had purchased the allegedly stolen items - a box, a belt, a ‘bucket on a belt’ and window cleaning rubbers and pouches - from Jones or obtained them independently.

Giving evidence, Mr Massheder said that Jones had been unhappy when he told him he planned on starting a rival business and that he gradually became more abusive after a series of rows. “He said ‘you watch nobody knocks you off them ladders’. I thought ‘I can’t be doing with this all the time’. I felt under threat.” He said that Jones had bought some equipment for him, because he could get a better price, but that he always reimbursed him in full. The trial continues.