Monday 20 April 2015

Incompetent Labour Sandwell!

The general reader may not wish to plough through the 2013 internal audit report linked to this blog but I will try and give you a short summary. The report is a couple of years old and no doubt the cunning comrades will try and claim they are putting things right. But just look at what your pitiful Labour Council have done here and despair.....

The report deals with commercial properties leased by the Labour Council following their OWN ADMISSION that, under the Labour dictatorship in Sandwell, the leases referred to in the report had "proved to be poor value for money".

The report makes grim reading and does NOT deal with the biggest f*ck-up of all - the disastrous BT deal which has saddled the taxpayer with this £20m+ white elephant at 1 Providence Place, West Bromwich (which the sleazy "socialists" are refusing to tell us about):

A laughable Labour deal but no joke for the taxpayer!
Please bear in mind that commercial property leases are generally long-term - in at least one disastrous case here, 30 years. Usually there are "break clauses" which allow the tenant - in this case, your crappy Labour Council - to exit the lease - subject to conditions - after say, every 10 years. But whether the Council leaves early or at the end of the lease they are liable for "dilapidations" which basically means that they have to meet the costs of making sure the buildings are handed back to the Landlords in good repair.

I promise you you will not believe this next bit but it is all there in the report. With long term contracts such as long leases it is obviously vital that both parties have watertight agreements and that they can be referred to if a dispute arises. According to the Law Society website there are no less than 27 solicitors in highly-paid Neeraj Sharma's legal department (there used to be more) PLUS they have been farming out a lot of their dirty work (eg the bent Public deal) to a "local" firm of Solicitors in, er, EXETER (!) but the report found that despite this, insufficient information had been retained when the leases were approved. There was also a "lack of clarity" on the conditions and covenants relating to the all-important break clauses and dilapidations and no-one had bothered to monitor the position during the periods of the respective leases. Inevitably,this led to "extra costs" when the Council tried to get out of the leases.

Incredibly, the bullshitting comrades, in their empire building madness, were taking out 10 to 25 year leases on buildings built in the 1960's which were already in a poor state of repair and were even failing to do a survey report when entering the lease. People from several different departments were involved so that the left hand did not know what the right was doing!

Please - I am NOT joking about the next bit. Much of the "key information" was seemingly kept in people's heads or otherwise lost. This pathetic situation was exacerbated by the "socialist" Council itself sacking so many of the staff who negotiated the leases! Although the leases themselves were kept in a strongroom "documents such as key lease clauses and detailed costings" have been lost!

And the "best" of all. These wankers had put some of these "key documents" on a computer system which automatically wiped everything over seven years old! It is NOT 1st April. You really are reading the truth.

As above, no surveys were done when moving in so that Landlords had these morons over a barrel when forcing them to pay for repairs and it is not now possible even to estimate "ongoing liabilities" on some of the leases ie they can't even guess at future costs the taxpayer is going to have to fork out!

Because the Council have to make sure the buildings are in good repair when the leases end it is vital that the buildings are kept in good repair but the sleazy socialists have been skimping on the work to fund their collective obsession with building fancy new sports centres and the like. The result, of course, is that the taxpayer just gets an even bigger bill at the end of the lease. You have been conned, Sandwell - yet again.

Of course, your cuddly leftie leaders have got into bed with with the likes of capitalists Barclays Bank and construction vultures like Interserve in PFI and other highly-expensive Wonga-style "deals" and in the case of this report the lease of the "Sandwell Homes" site at Roway Lane merits special mention. It will be interesting to know what the role of newly-promoted "Assistant Chief Executive", Melanie Dudley, was in this debacle as it was rushed through to coincide with the total f*ck-up that was the hopeless BT "Transform Sandwell" deal. She was certainly involved in that fiasco and that "brilliant" deal has fallen through spectacularly with disastrous consequences (see also 1 Providence Place above).

Both deals were viewed as "high profile" vanity projects by the posturing prats Sandwell have elected and it is noteworthy that these were SPECIFICALLY cabinet decisions. The ludicrous "leadership" can't pass the buck here! Just as with the likes of the bent Public deal, the cabinet approved the deal for Roway Lane in March 2007 BEFORE full information on costs was available. How good is that?

These useless arseholes had the building specially built in 2008 and then leased it but, as at 2013, still hadn't got round to sorting defects with the Landlord. Don't worry, it gets worse.....It is admitted in the report that the political leadership rushed the job to get 1 Providence Place built as a vanity project (sorry "regeneration opportunity") and they approved the project without even knowing the most important thing in a lease of all - the rent! Eventually, they agreed to pay A MINIMUM of £18 MILLION over 30 years with no transfer of the building to Sandwell at that date. There are NO break clauses!!!!

And what was the upshot? The report tells us that you, dear residents and taxpayers, acquired "a purpose-built site which did not meet all of Sandwell Homes requirements RESULTING IN ADDITIONAL REFURBISHMENT COSTS AT OTHER LOCATIONS (eg Dartmouth House)". The brand new bloody building was not even fit for purpose and they still had to pay extra rent elsewhere!

If you now have the sensation that you want to punch someone very hard in the face (metaphorically natch), some of the Council staff and ex-staff I have talked to about this say the situation is actually far worse and that the report is actually a "whitewash"!!! Some have suggested that the situation is so disastrous that it may not be merely total incompetence at play in some of the transactions but something far more sinister. (Just to make it plain here I am specifically not making any allegation of fraud against any specific person - either officer or councillor in this post and no such inference should be drawn from it). But maybe this is something the ongoing police enquiry can have a look at? I also wonder what the auditors, KPMG, have to say about it all?

I am told that the termination of the leases for Shaftesbury House, Development House and Environment House have all involved colossal sums of money.

Now don't forget to vote Labour y'all!

Here is the report:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4nnHU5t5piVaVRCVWZTR0Ffam52bG9hbHlvYW5URmZnNENN/view

Speak to the police Regional Fraud Team if you have information about possible fraud at Sandwell Council - DS Wayne Haynes & Team - 0121 251 2175

THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - A COMMUNITY BLOG - READ THE SKIDDER, KIDDER!

E-mail:   thesandwellskidder@gmail.com                  Twitter:  @bcrover (Vernon Grant)

Confidential phone number:  07599 983737

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.