Cheshire East Council claims Tyson Fury and two of his brothers owe an £82,000 council tax billCredit: AP

The trio allegedly owe the sum for property adjoining their £1million mansion in Styal

Tyson Fury (L) and his brother Shane Fury walk after Tyson Fury’s WBC heavyweight title fight against Deontay Wilder in 2021Credit: Getty

Claiming he’d signed the lease agreement, John Snr, 59, said: “I didn’t even have to be here but I’ve come here today to tell you the boys have nothing to do with anything of it, especially Tyson.

“It’s ridiculous when you’re paying millions of pounds in taxes. He hasn’t lived at that address for 18 years.

“All I’ve done is rent a piece of land out. I have no understanding of any kind of business or what they do. It was just an empty yard, that’s all I’ve ever done.”

John Snr, who lives at the £1million property in Styal, Cheshire, revealed he’d handed over ownership of the property to his sons – who are worth over £134million – following a “fight with the wife 20 years ago”.

He admitted signing a lease agreement in April 2021 to allow a valet company, Manchester Holiday Car Parks Ltd, to use the site – just a stone’s throw from the airport – despite not being able to read or write.

Giving evidence at Chester magistrates court, John Snr, who was jailed for 11 years in 2011 for gouging a man’s eyes out, said: “I’m an old fashioned man, I’m semi-illiterate, that’s just how it is.

“I’m busy doing other things. I’m a boxing coach and a boxing trainer.

“I have no knowledge of any of this – this technical stuff is not my field.

“The only trouble I’ve ever been in is criminal, not this technical stuff.

“I can’t read and write.”

He went on: “We are a different culture to society. I am the man.

“My sons have nothing to do with it.

“I have done nothing wrong.

“I wasn’t aware I was breaking any law.

“I’m not trying to be awkward.”

But District Judge Mr John McGarva ordered Tyson and his two brothers to pay the business rates bill of £82,166.85 they owed to Cheshire Council East, as well as court costs of £17,206.

He said: “With respect to John Snr, he did not know what was going on.”

If they fail to pay up, a bailiff could have the unenviable task of reclaiming assets from the boxing family.

The brothers did not attend yesterday’s hearing and John Snr left the court before the ruling was handed down.

Tyson, the 6ft 9 Gypsy King, is currently holidaying with his family on a private yacht around Saudi Arabia.

He missed yesterday’s hearing and instead spent the day parasailing.

The director of Manchester Holiday Parks, Mr Babikir Elmosbah, gave evidence to say he was leasing the land from the Furys but was described as a “wholly unreliable witness” by the judge.

Judge McGarva said he had been “floundering” in the box.

John Snr said he has no dealings with Mr Elmosbah and used a third party, Mr Collin, for all his business arrangements.

Mr Elmosbah said he pays £600-a-month to the Furys for use of the car park.

Martin Budworth, defending, said: “The local authority accepts that the company exists.

“But the suggestion that the company operation can be disregarded as a sham is quite a bold proposition.

“Holiday Car Parks Ltd on the balance of probability is the tenant.

“Unfortunately there is a history of failed tenants, meaning the authority has struggled to collect tax.”

Referring to the Furys, he added: “To some extent there’s been a common denominator.”

But the council is also arguing that when tenancy on the land started, Holiday Car Parks Ltd did not exist.

It emerged yesterday afternoon at court that John Snr was not one of the respondents in the case.

John Snr said: “All I have done is rent a piece of land out to Mr Elmosbah. I don’t have any understanding of what business they do.”

Judge McGarva said the local authority did not dispute that Holiday Car Parks Manchester Ltd existed.

But it noted Mr Elmosbah could not explain why in its accounts for the year ending August 2022 it was listed as dormant and had no employees in that period.

He was satisfied the company did exist but the evidence about it was “wholly conflicting”.

The judge said that Mr Elmosbah was “far from an impressive witness”, while he said it was “wholly unsatisfactory” he had not heard from any of the three respondents in person or from Mr Fury Snr’s advisor.

He added the lease agreement “left more questions than answers” including why Mr Fury Snr had agreed to lease a property he had “already disposed of”.

Martin Budworth, representing the respondents, argued the council had no positive case against his clients other than their names were recorded on the Land Register.