Couple ran Bristol airport car parking business out of landlord’s house without permission racking up over £10K in unpaid rent

Operators of an unauthorised Bristol Airport car parking service have been causing a ‘nightmare’ for the owner of the property they’ve been working out of, who claims they have refused to stop their business while racking up more than £10,000 in unpaid rent.

Bristol Valet Parking SW Limited—an airport car parking business which is unauthorised as it is operating without planning permission—has been based out of a home in the tiny village of Redhill for nearly two years.

The enterprise has allegedly also been run from the property without the permission of the house’s owner, who discovered what was happening a few weeks after his tenants moved in back in September 2024.

Landlord Jim, who asked for his real name not to be used, also claims he was met with a ‘torrent of abuse’ when he confronted the occupants of his mother’s former home.

“I rented the property out when my mother had to be moved into a nursing home,” he said.

“We had a tenant there for a year and they were fine. They left after a year and the letting agency we were with very quickly said they’d got somebody (else).

“Driving by the property a few weeks later, there’s cars parked outside on the high street, on the lawn, in front of the property and everything and I thought, ‘what the hell’s happened here?’ So I went and knocked on the door and said, ‘Excuse me, you can’t park vehicles like this on our property.’

“I was met with verbal abuse by the lady there. She met me with a torrent of verbal abuse saying if you don’t get off the f***ing property I’ll call the f***ing police and immediately started really trying to get in my face outside the house.”

The sole listed director of Bristol Valet Parking SW Limited, Dean Mockridge, and his wife Natasha, said they were “winding down” the business when they were contacted by Bristol Live. Mr Mockridge said the tenancy had been agreed as a business, while his wife claimed the landlord had been harassing them.

A spokesperson for the letting agency managing the tenancy, R&G Property Group UK Ltd, said the rental agreement prohibited any commercial use of the property, or for a business to be registered at the address. According to Companies House, Bristol Valet Parking SW Limited was incorporated in October 2024, with Jim’s property given as the registered office address and Mr Mockridge listed as the director of the business.

According to the landlord, he had only attended the property twice since September 2024. The first visit was when he confronted the couple over the business they were running without his permission and the second, in January this year, was over the unpaid rent. He alleged he had been abused and threatened on both occasions.

Mr Mockridge told Bristol Live he was planning to repay the unpaid rent if he could ‘get some money’. He claimed the arrears had accumulated because him and his wife had been sick.

Mr Mockridge’s phone number is also linked to another car parking business, ‘Central Airport Parking Meet and Greet Bristol’, which has attracted several negative reviews on its Facebook page from customers alleging they suffered financial losses in their dealings with the company – including uncompensated damage to their vehicles and paying money without receiving a service in return.

The landlord said he tried to take advantage of a break clause in the tenants’ rental contract, but they refused to leave and have piled up in excess of £10,000 in unpaid rent. One Redhill local, who didn’t want to give her name, claimed the cars presented a safety risk as they were often left parked on double yellow lines near the busy junction with the A38.

“People often come off the A38 at speed, and they could easily crash into a car that’s been left parked on the side of the road,” she said. The resident confirmed that the operators of the parking business appeared to have been gradually winding down their activities in recent months.

When Bristol Live visited the property in late April there were only a few cars, including a high-end Maserati, parked in the driveway.

The number of vehicles parked at ‘unauthorised’ locations—either through businesses operating without planning permission or simply left on the side of the road—near to Bristol Airport has roughly doubled over the past ten years, according to North Somerset Council enforcement officers. In the past decade, the cost of official parking at the airport has also skyrocketed to become one of the most expensive in the country, and Bristol Airport’s single biggest source of income.

Redhill and other small villages near the airport often bear the brunt of the consequences, along with drivers whose cars are often damaged when left with unauthorised businesses. The council has been cracking down on rogue parking operators recently, aided by a full time employee paid for by the airport–which helps alleviate the problem of unauthorised car parks and drives even more revenue to the airport itself.

“We know that parking with off-site operators can be tempting for travellers, but their services & practices vary widely in quality,” Councillor Annemieke Waite, cabinet member for planning and environment, said following a recent crack down. “While there are reputable offsite operators, it is important to remember that none have ever been granted planning permission. Unethical operators cause misery for local neighbourhoods and in some cases support wider criminal activity.”

A spokesperson for NSC said the people running Bristol Valet Parking SW Ltd from the landlord’s Redhill home were frequent flyers when it came to operating such unauthorised parking businesses.

“North Somerset Council is aware of the enterprise in question, and an enforcement notice has been served at this site,” the spokesperson said. “We have also worked with Avon and Somerset Police and our Parking Services team regarding vehicles associated with the site.

“While these were not assessed as dangerous, they were considered a nuisance. The operators are known to our teams and have previously operated across a number of sites.

“However, as investigations and enforcement proceedings are currently underway, we are unable to comment further at this stage. We will continue to monitor and respond with enforcement action as appropriate, though the mobility of operators can present ongoing challenges for enforcement teams.”

The landlord has also raised grievances with the agency he hired to manage the tenancy.

He claimed R&G Property Group UK Ltd had not given him enough references and had ‘taken the side’ of the tenants after they complained about his first unannounced visit to the property, which he said he didn’t know was prohibited under the Landlord and Tenant Act. A spokesperson for R&G Property Group UK Ltd confirmed the contract prohibited the tenants running a business from the property, but said normal referencing processes were carried out.

“Standard referencing was carried out, and the tenancy proceeded only after the landlord confirmed his approval of the proposed tenant,” the spokesperson said.

“The tenancy agreement drafted on the landlord’s behalf contains express prohibitions against any commercial use of the property, against receiving paying guests, and against registering a business at the address. These are standard protective clauses that give a landlord clear legal grounds to act in the event of misuse of a residential property.”

“The tenancy ran without issue for a considerable period. The tenant subsequently informed us, in writing and on multiple occasions, that the landlord had attended the property without providing the 24 hours’ written notice required under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. Rent arrears arose during the same period.”

“When the arrears began, R&G Property Group UK Ltd acted promptly. Formal warning notices were issued to the tenant, and we identified activation of the break clause within the tenancy agreement as the fastest and most cost-effective route to recover possession for the landlord. That process was underway on the landlord’s behalf.”

The R&G spokesperson went on to say the matter was now in the hands of the solicitor the landlord had instructed when he became unsatisfied with the agency’s handling of the situation.

“The solicitor served a further notice which superseded the one we had already issued, and which had the unintended effect of cutting across the break clause strategy already in motion,” they said.

“As a legal representative was then acting directly for the landlord, our role in the possession process concluded at that point, and our management of the tenancy ceased.”

Jim, who is waiting on further enforcement action to take place, just wants to put the ordeal behind him having buried his mother at the start of April.

“We had mum’s funeral a few weeks ago, now all we want to do is settle her estate, sell up and move on,” he said.

“This has been an absolute nightmare.”