A SECURITY boss firm brought in tens of thousands of pounds despite him being barred from working in the industry, a court heard.

James Barnett was a director of Goldshield Security, a Swindon-based firm providing business and home security services.

But the 40-year-old was banned from holding a Security Industry Authority licence after he was convicted in 2017 of an assault.

Under the regulations that meant he was automatically barred from acting as a director of a security firm.

Appearing before Swindon Magistrates’ Court, Mr Barnett, of Sharp Close, Shaw, admitted failing to comply with an instruction under the Security Industries Act to provide documentation and engaging in conduct not licensed by the act. A charge that he acted as an unlicensed security guard at the Oasis leisure centre was dismissed.

Peter Rollins, counsel for the SIA, said the regulator had been tipped off about Mr Barnett’s companies providing security guards – despite the director’s licence ban.

That ban is understood to have followed a conviction for an assault outside the King’s Arms, Wood Street, in 2016.

“The SIA was informed of Mr Barnett’s companies undertaking private security and an investigation was started following Mr Barnett losing his licence which was revoked as a result of what we call a relevant offence.

Mr Rollins said: “The SIA was aware and received information that even though Mr Barnett’s licence was revoked he still held the position of director.

“He was given two warnings in response of him still being a director whilst he didn’t have a licence.

“As a result of ongoing concerns Mr Barnett was invited to an interview on June 15, 2018. At that interview Mr Barnett was served with a notice requiring information. Mr Barnett was required by that notice to provide documents and information about the business of his companies.”

Mr Barnett was said to be the director of a number of companies bearing the Goldshield name.

The Section 19 notice required him to send the SIA detail of Goldshield’s contracts and staff working at the first.

Asked to hand over the relevant information within a fortnight. But the documents were not provided.

Independently, SIA investigators found Goldshield had been working a Bristol security contract for Compass Group, a facilities management firm.

That continued for six months after he was interviewed by the watchdog, bringing in around £80,000.

“In effect, at the time Mr Barnett was being interviewed by the SIA he was at the same time providing services to the Compass Group,” Mr Rollins said.

“There has been no information provided in respect of those contracts. The Compass Group has provided a full, documented history of their contract.

“They show Mr Barnett is the main person who has been arranging the provision of security services.

“In effect, he’s the controlling mind, the director of the company.”

The barrister said the fact Mr Barnett knew he was under investigation by the SIA while his company was also working a security contract for Compass was an aggravating feature in the case.

“At the same time of Mr Barnett’s interview he was aware he was under investigation. Yet he was providing services which he knew to be contrary to the legislation,” Mr Rollins said.

Magistrates committed the case to Swindon Crown Court for sentence on November 15. Mr Barnett was not given the opportunity to make representations in his defence.