A MUM whose partner pestered her and trashed her car when she dumped him has had the restraining order against him lifted.

Billy Watts had already breached the order put in place to protect Mary-Anne Poyner. She applied to have the three year order lifted at Worcester Crown Court on Friday.

We reported last month how Watts, 23, of Cleeve Drive, Worcester breached the restraining order three times in August, the same month it was made. It was imposed on August 1. One breach involved Watts ringing Miss Poyner in front of the custody sergeant at Worcester Police Station, claiming he was ringing his aunt.

While Watts was in prison Miss Poyner sent emails saying 'miss you', 'no regrets' and 'you're my babe, my world'. These were read out by Watts's solicitor Jason Patel at the city's magistrates court last month.

The order was imposed for criminal damage and harassment after Watts used a rake to smash the windows of her Vauxhall Corsa and harassed her with phone calls, at one point hiding behind a hedge and jumping out to confront her outside a Worcester school, angry she had dumped him.

This was in itself a breach of a suspended sentence order (six months suspended for two years) for battery and possession of an offensive weapon, a sentence not activated at the crown court. The couple had been in an 18 month relationship and have a young daughter but broke up in May this year although they now wish to resume their relationship. Miss Poyner told police: “He’s constantly contacting me, telling me how much he loves me and needs me in his life."

Watts, who has been recalled to prison, was brought up from the cells to hear the application by his partner who took the oath and came to the witness box to ask that the order be lifted.

Judge Nicolas Cartwright asked Miss Poyner if Watts had paid her the £300 compensation he owed her. Miss Poyner faltered for a while before answering ‘most of it’, telling the judge: “It’s coming off benefits.”

She said she believed he had paid ‘£290 or something’.

“You want the restraining order lifted completely?” asked Judge Cartwright. “Completely, yes” replied Miss Poyner.

“You understand the implications of that?” said the judge to which she answered ‘yes’.

“You would be without the protection the restraining order gives you” the judge told her and again she replied ‘yes’.

Dean Easthope, prosecuting, asked Miss Poyner if any pressure had been put upon her by the defendant to lift the restraining order and she said it had not.

“I just want everything to work out again” said Miss Poyner who has a daughter with the defendant.

The judge revoked the restraining order and was thanked by Miss Poyner. The judge said it was important that she was at the court 'in person' to make the application.