Property tycoon threatened to send his 'friends from Manchester' to 'thrash' award-winning landscape gardener in front of his 'fragrant wife' in furious row over bill for work on his £8.5m mansion, court hears

• e-mail

A multi-millionaire property tycoon has been accused of threatening to have an award-winning landscape gardener 'thrashed' in front of his 'fragrant wife'.

Mark Harrison, chief executive of £1.2million property management firm Praxis, is said to have made 'serious threats, including of physical violence' against Devon-based garden guru Alasdair Cameron.

The pair fell out over a £650,000 bill for landscaping works at Mr Harrison's 10-bedroom, £8.5million mansion in Surrey and are now pitted against each other at London's High Court.

Mr Cameron is said to have taped phone conversations in which his client made the threats - and Mr Harrison is now urging judges to make him reveal who the recordings have been shared with.

The businessman says he has missed out on a major deal due to the exchanges being shared within the property industry, court documents reveal.

Property tycoon Mark Harrison hired Alasdair Cameron to carry out landscaping works at his £8.5million, ten-bedroom mansion The Gate House in Kingston-upon-Thames, Surrey

Award-winning landscape gardener Alasdair Cameron says he was threatened by Mark Harrison in a phone call he recorded, London's High Court has been told

Mr Harrison is said to have told Mr Cameron he would send 'two of my friends from Manchester' to 'administer an education' and 'thrash it out' - adding: 'Thrash being the operative word.'

The businessman had hired the gardening expert's firm Alasdair Cameron Landscaping (ACL) to design and carry out works at his home set on three acres of gardens and woodland in Kingston-upon-Thames, Surrey. 

The early 20th-century mansion, bought by Mr Harrison for £8.5million in 2020, has a swimming pool and separate staff quarters.

On the Praxis Group website Mr Harrison's company is described as 'one of the UK's leading real estate investors' with £1.2billion-worth of assets under management.

Mr Cameron's business website describes his company, which he founded in 1992, as an 'award-winning landscape gardeners'.

Lawyers for Mr Cameron have told the High Court that Mr Harrison made the threats when challenged over an alleged shortfall in payments for work carried out in 2021 and 2022. 

The costs were initially put at £560,000 plus VAT before rising to a final bill of £650,000 plus VAT when extra work was needed, Mr Cameron's barrister Kate Wilson says in documents put before the High Court.

She told of works being almost complete in May 2022 and £250,000 of the bill unpaid when Mr Harrison 'terminated the agreement' and asked Mr Cameron's workers to leave his property. 

She said: 'In the course of the exchanges between Mr Harrison and Mr Cameron, Mr Cameron stated, as was the case, that Mr Harrison had failed to pay ACL's invoices.'

Mr Cameron also said the businessman 'owed ACL money and had not paid for plants and materials which were at his property and which he was asserting ACL must not remove, despite him not having paid for them', she added.

Mr Cameron recorded the calls and Mr Harrison claims his firm has since suffered and missed out on a major deal due to Mr Cameron having 'shared the recordings and/or the transcripts with one or more third parties with direct or indirect connections to the property investment industry'.

The property boss is now suing under data protection legislation, bidding to force the gardener to reveal who he has shared the recordings with.

Mr Harrison has admitted he 'allowed his anger to get the better of him and made a number of ill-judged comments' to the gardener but denies 'that any such comments amounted to a serious threat', his lawyers said.

The phone conversations took place on May 7, 2022, with Mr Cameron's lawyer insisting he 'did not raise his voice or behave unreasonably'.

Ms Wilson said: 'In stark contrast Mr Harrison was aggressive and made serious threats, including of physical violence, to Mr Cameron and his family.

'The final occasion on which Mr Cameron called Mr Harrison was triggered by Mr Harrison having ended the previous call by hanging up, after threatening to drive to Mr Cameron's home.

'Mr Cameron called back to make it clear to Mr Harrison that he did not want him to come to his home and there was no reason for him to do so.'

She says Mr Harrison responded to being told the gardener needed time to remove stone which had not been paid for, by saying: 'You try and take anything off site, and you will have a visit from two of my friends from Manchester.

Mr Cameron's business website describes his company, which he founded in 1992, as an 'award-winning landscape gardeners' 

Lawyers for Alasdair Cameron (pictured) say the phone conversations with Mark Harrison left him fearing for the safety of himself and his family

'You try and take any materials off this site and I will send some people to pay you a visit you will never forget, you and your family will never forget.'

He then hung up before Mr Cameron called back and 'made clear that he did not want him coming to his home', Ms Wilson added.

She said of Mr Harrison: 'He responded to that request and a question as to the purpose of him coming to Mr Cameron's home by saying, amongst other things, "I'm going to administer an education, that's what I'm going to do".

'Mr Harrison ended the call with the words, "Now listen, go away, I will see you in a couple of hours and then we will thrash it out, thrash being the operative word, in a couple hours, bye bye", and then hung up.'

Mr Harrison's barrister Nikolaus Grubeck said the case had gone to court because the contents of their calls were subsequently communicated to others within the property investment industry.

The tycoon has made a subject access request under the Data Protection Act to force Mr Cameron to reveal who the information was shared with.

Mr Grubeck said: 'On or around the fourth or fifth telephone call from Mr Cameron, Mr Harrison allowed his anger to get the better of him and made a number of ill-judged comments.

'It is denied, insofar as alleged, that any such comments amounted to a serious threat to Mr Cameron or that they could properly have been taken as such in all the circumstances.

'Without Mr Harrison's knowledge, Mr Cameron used a second mobile telephone to record two of the 7 May calls.

'Mr Cameron subsequently, on a date unknown to Mr Harrison, prepared transcripts of the recordings using electronic word processing equipment.

'Several of Mr Harrison's professional colleagues and competitors in the property investment industry have seen or heard the recordings or transcripts.'

Mr Harrison believes the recordings are to blame for his property investment firm losing out on a deal to acquire a retail shopping centre in Chester, he added.

Mr Grubeck told the court: 'Despite Praxis being the highest bidder, it was informed by the seller's agent that a sale to Praxis would create an unacceptable reputational risk to the sellers due to the recordings.

'Upon making further inquiries, Mr Harrison discovered that the recordings/transcripts had also been made available to other professional contacts of Mr Harrison in the property investment industry.'

He said Mr Cameron had 'unlawfully refused' to comply with a data subject access request and Mr Harrison now wanted 'a comprehensive list' of those the transcripts or recordings were shared with.

Robin Hopkins, representing Mr Cameron at a pre-trial hearing before Mrs Justice Tipples, told her he denies sharing the material from the phone calls other than lawfully with friends and family because he feared for his safety.

Mr Hopkins said: 'Mr Harrison said inter alia he and "two of my friends from Manchester" would come to Mr Cameron's family home in Devon immediately and, contrary to Mr Cameron's repeated requests that he desist from doing so, to "administer an education" and "thrash it out - thrash being the operative word" in front of Mr Cameron's "fragrant wife".

'Mr Cameron's case is that he was concerned for his safety and that of his family. He shared the recordings and/or transcripts of those two short calls with, in his personal capacity a small number of friends and family members, and in his work capacity a small number of ACL employees.

'It is denied that Mr Cameron provided the recordings or the transcripts to any person working for the companies listed or otherwise shared them with such persons.

'Mr Harrison is a businessman who had resorted to making threats of personal violence when terminating a contract with substantial sums owing to the other party and in response to that other party's complaints about unpaid invoices and requests for time to remove materials for which he has not paid.

'The use of the recordings/transcripts was lawful and fair.'

The case is set to return for a full trial at a later date.