Vaughan tells court he didn’t oust Waddell for CEO role because he could have ‘got any job I wanted’

The CEO of Big Motoring World has insisted he did not oust company founder Peter Waddell for his six figure salary because he could have ‘got any job I wanted’.

Waddell is claiming unfair dismissal, harassment and disability discrimination by Bluebell Cars – the holding company of Big Motoring World.

Laurence Vaughan took over from Peter Waddell on a £600,000 salary but he told the High Court he was frequently offered other executive and non-executive roles.

His statements of earnings from 2023 and 2024 were shown in court, and Alan Gourgey, KC, representing Waddell, suggested to him that he needed the money from the CEO role as he did not have future sources of income.

Vaughan said: ‘There was always quite a lot of churn because of the kind of business I was doing.

‘If I’d wanted more income I could have found more roles. I am approached very regularly for roles.’

Gourgey went on to suggest the CEO salary represented a ‘substantial increase on what you would have been earning in 2024’.

Vaughan replied: ‘Not at all. If I’d wanted to earn more money I could have.

‘Every job I’ve applied for in the last 30 years I’ve got.’

Waddell was suspended from his position as CEO of the used car supermarket group on March 7, 2024 – the same day he appeared on stage at that year’s Car Dealer Live event.

The decision came after a series of misconduct allegations were made against him.

Gourgey suggested that money and the ‘prestige’ of the CEO role was what motivated Mr Vaughan to send an email to investors in November 2023, suggesting Waddell should be removed as CEO.

Vaughan said: ‘I wanted it because it was the right thing for the company.’

He was questioned about a £145,000 payment made to him from Freshstream through the Laurence Vaughan Consultancy on December 18, 2023.

Freshstream are the investment company Waddell sold out to but he now claims the company and their holding company, Bluebell Cars plotted to get ride of him.

Gourgey said: ‘You knew full well you had not provided consultancy services to the investor.’

Vaughan said: ‘I’d been perfectly happy to be paid by the company, but Freshstream agreed there was no way Pete was going to let that happen, he was putting pressure on me, this is the way they decided to handle it so I let them handle it.’

Gourgey said: ‘You know that all of the services you provided, you had provided to BIG as its chair.’

He added: ‘You deliberately concealed this payment from Mr Waddell didn’t you?’

Vaughan said: ‘In effect yes.’

Gourgey said: ‘You deliberately refrained from telling Mr Waddell that you had entered this agreement and received payment.’

Vaughan said: ‘It wasn’t an oversight, but it was not relevant in my view.’

Gourgey said:’It wasn’t relevant that as chairman of Big you were receiving a concealed, secret payment from the minority investor in Big?’

The boss replied: ‘It was clear to me and to Freshstream that that wasn’t going to happen.’

When asked if Vaughan thought this was ‘holding yourself to a high ethical standard’ he said ‘perfectly, yes’.

Gourgey suggested that Vaughan was involved in a plan with Freshstream to oust Waddell from his position as CEO, regardless of the results of disciplinary proceedings against him.

A string of misconduct allegations had been made against Waddell, who was also subject to an official complaint by a female staff member at Car Dealer Live.

Gourgey suggested that by this time Vaughan had personal motivation to want Waddell out of the company.

He said: ‘Waddell was trying to marginalise your role in the business wasn’t he?’

Vaughan replied: ‘He was.’

He showed the court emails from December 2023 which gave different possible futures for Big Motoring World – all of which involved Mr Waddell stepping down as CEO.

Gourgey said: ‘By this time you were not looking at the possibility of a deal with Mr Waddell?’

Vaughan said: ‘I was absolutely arranging for a deal to be done.’

He said his understanding at the time that Freshstream did not want Waddell to stay on, but that he thought discussions were going on to try and find a compromise between December and March.

Gourgey showed notes from Freshstream from a December 2023 meeting which suggested Vaughan would be responsible for managing Waddell’s transition from CEO to a non-executive chairman position, which was one of the options they were considering.

The Judge asked Vaughan what would have happened had he refused this role of overseeing the change at the company.

Vaughan replied: ‘I thought it would be incredibly difficult but it doesn’t mean I wouldn’t do it.’

Gourgey showed the court planning documents from Freshstream which showed they were considering starting MDE or ‘bad actor’ disciplinary proceedings against Waddell.

Vaughan said: ‘I can’t even tell you what a bad actor clause is. It’s not something I focussed on’

Gourgey said: ‘You were totally acting with Freshstream against Mr Waddell.’

Vaughan said: ‘Absolutely not.’

‘You were having all these discussions with Freshstream and Mr Waddell had no idea.’

Gourgey also suggested that Vaughan had pre-empted Waddell’s suspension, by speaking to HR director Andy Holness who had recently left the company about returning before Waddell had been suspended.

He showed the court a text message from director Tom Clarke, suggesting Vaughan confirmed Holness would rejoin the company on March 11, a few weeks after Waddell would have been suspended.

Vaughan said: ‘I’ve absolutely no idea where they got that from.’

He said it was important for them to be able to plan ahead because of the level of staff turnover at the time.

‘We were having to recruit just to stand still more than a hundred people every month,’ he said.

He says he did not confirm Holness’s return until after meeting him for dinner in April.

Gourgey showed the court a plan for Big Motoring World produced by Freshstream dated March 2023, which showed Vaughan in the position of CEO.

Gourgey said: ‘I suggest to you that you knew full well that the plan involved Waddell either by consent or by force after action from his CEO role either on day one or soon after.’

Vaughan said: ‘I think I assumed that yes.’

Gourgey said: ‘You prejudged the outcome of the disciplinary process didn’t you?’

Vaughan said: ‘Absolutely not’.

He suggested that Vaughan’s ‘motivation’ in the plan was to ‘get Mr Waddell’s job with the professional kudos and financial rewards’ that he had already been offered by Freshstream.

Vaughan denied this.

Gourgey showed the court a list of allegations against Waddell compiled by Vaughan and Clarke, who is due to give evidence next week.

This list of allegations was then used to initiate misconduct proceedings against Waddell.

He suggested Vaughan and Clarke were charged by Freshstream with finding evidence of Waddell’s bad behaviour so that they could bring disciplinary action against Waddell and get rid of him as CEO.

Vaughan said: ‘There was no such tasking from anybody. However, we were receiving complaints at an ever increasing rate.’

Gourgey suggested: ‘You made it [clear] that you would be interested in hearing what they had to say.’

Vaughan said: ‘As soon as he was suspended people felt able to come forward.’

Gourgey pointed out this list included one allegation of racist conduct and one of sexism, though Vaughan’s witness statement includes numerous allegations.

Examples in Vaughan’s statement but not in the list of allegations included Waddell saying there are ‘too many Muslims’ and that he had encouraged middle management to party and to hire prostitutes.

Gourgey suggested these examples were not included because Vaughan did not think they were serious at the time, treating them in a ‘jokey’ way.

Vaughan said it was a ‘mistake’ that these examples had been omitted.

In relation to Vaughan’s appointment on the investigation committee which dealt with Mr Waddell,  Gourgey said: ‘You chaired the investigation committee even though you were the one that had originated and made some of the allegations that formed part of Mr Waddell’s terms of reference?’

Vaughan said: ‘It is and I think it’s inevitable that in a company stuff like that happens yes.’

Gourgey said: ‘You accept that you were plainly not a neutral or unbiased party in respect of this investigation.’

Vaughan said: ‘I did my very best but that’s why we had an independent investigator.’

Gourgey further suggested: ‘What you wanted to happen out of this investigation process was finds of MDE against Mr Waddell didn’t you.’

Vaughan said: ‘No I wanted there to be a comprehensive investigation.’

The hearing continues.

The trial so far…