Oakham Town Council, Plantscape, Andy Peaple Catering Services and Oakham Town Partnership Account Objections
Email below sent to our Chairman in an attempt to explain my objections.
It would seem my request that the council run correctly is not getting approval from
some members.
Who want to draw a line and just move on, we can draw a line only if we recognise
where we are going wrong and implement change then we can move on.
I am also told the way I am trying to achieve a council that follows the required laws
is bringing it down to a poor level and making it a laughing stock, if that is the case
it is not my fault, if the council was not run incorrectly by a tiny few we would not
be in this mess.
Dear Adam Lowe (Chairman)
Today I obtained copies of invoices and details of two payments made to Plantscape Ltd in 2015.
4/09/2015 Invoice no 10458 £6,9600
The law requires all payments of £5000 and above to be presented to full council, our own financial
regulation 4.1 confirms this.
It appears these regulations were revised in January 2016 although the words are slightly different, the regulations
dated 2014 in place during 2015 clearly states:
This authority is to be determined by:
the Council for all items over £5,000
The Clerk has decided to skip this requirement by using Financial regulations 5.5 (a) which gives delegated
powers to pay if the council was at risk of paying interest or a penalty, for late payment, there was no risk of that.
The regulation also states it can only be used if the payment is not being disputed or any for other reason.
I had disputed the payment and asked the Clerk to bring it to full council for approval.
He refused to bring it to council and the invoice was paid without lawful authority.
Attached to the invoice is a post it note which I have copied it reads:
Need to pay within 30 days
council will not meet for another
5 weeks
F R No 5.5(a)
PAY (in bold and unlined)
I don't know how long the post it had been placed on the invoice I do know when I discussed this
with the clerk there was a meeting set for the next week.
The cheque was signed without the required works order,
Signed by Vince Howard and Paul Mills.
Standing orders say all payments should only be made if all regulations have been followed
This standing order has been ignored.
This also can also be applied to the following Plantscape invoice
In 2012 the council approved a one year trial for Plantscape to provide hanging baskets
The Clerk can not explain how the matter was not brought to full council to tender or
agree a contract for Plantscape after the one year passed. The invoices increased
in value each year???
9th June 2015 Invoice 10304 £8,688.90 This invoice has no work order, no contract or minute
number.
The cheque was signed by Paul Mills and Stan Stubbs.
A simple safe guard recommended by Streets last year that all payments must have an attached works order
appears to be ignored in many cases.
I am told that payments currently being made against old contracts don't have work orders, why? these are
required for an audit trail.
Even though we were all told the conduct of 2014 - 2015 could and not be repeated it has been
repeated during 2015 - 2016
When I spoke with you this afternoon you asked me a question in response to mine and made a statement.
I asked why you were not answering my question:
did you respond to the clerks emails seeking authority to pay the above and did
you tell him to ignore me and my request that he brought these invoices to full council for approval?
you said you did not need to answer the question, why?
You added are you suggesting all those Cllrs who responded to the clerks request and gave him
consent to pay the above should resign?
I responded yes. Because at the one training session we both attended you will
remember we were told it is unlawful to conduct any council business via emails, telephone or outside of council meetings.
That is why I am objecting to the above payments.
I also obtained a copy of Invoice no 850Oakhamtc £1051.60 freedom of entry catering.
The councils financial regulations state any contract agreed that ends up exceeding 5% of the agreed amount should
be returned to council for further approval.
This contract exceeded 5% after the following was added
Equipment Hire = £146.60
Staffing Cost = £120
Extra Juice / coke and glasses = £35
A cheque was signed by you and Stan Stubbs made payable to Mr A peaple.
There is no work order or minute recorded giving approval for this extra costs.
This is why I am disputing this payment.
The next is Invoice No: 00510 £1000 3rd November 2015
There is not work order or minute or any consent for this payment made
and therefore is unlawful.
I am also very concerned that this invoice shows the Town Partnership Ltd is
still using the Council as its address.
the invoice is headed Oakham Town Partnership
c/o Oakham Town Council.
Oakham Town Partnership Ltd is not in anyway associated with the council so
I wonder why they are permitted to use the councils address in this way?
I understand you were concerned about this payment, although I
sensed your concern is that the money to fund this invoice came out of a
budget which you have some control of. So I find it odd that you signed
the Cheque knowing this had not been approved by full council and your
concern that it had taken a considerable chunk out of the promotions of
Oakham budget. The other signature on the cheque is Stan Stubbs.
To Conclude, before the Clerk went away on sick, I aksed for confirmation
that members who were signing cheques were being provided with invoices
with attached works orders and minute number giving approval for the
expenditure. He confirmed this was now happening, although I find this is not
happening in all cases. Can I ask all those who sign cheques or authorise
electronic payments don't sign if the invoices don't have the required
work orders or the minute attached. Then perhaps we can move forward
without further issues like this.
Regards from
Martin
Email below sent to our Chairman in an attempt to explain my objections.
It would seem my request that the council run correctly is not getting approval from
some members.
Who want to draw a line and just move on, we can draw a line only if we recognise
where we are going wrong and implement change then we can move on.
I am also told the way I am trying to achieve a council that follows the required laws
is bringing it down to a poor level and making it a laughing stock, if that is the case
it is not my fault, if the council was not run incorrectly by a tiny few we would not
be in this mess.
Dear Adam Lowe (Chairman)
Today I obtained copies of invoices and details of two payments made to Plantscape Ltd in 2015.
4/09/2015 Invoice no 10458 £6,9600
The law requires all payments of £5000 and above to be presented to full council, our own financial
regulation 4.1 confirms this.
It appears these regulations were revised in January 2016 although the words are slightly different, the regulations
dated 2014 in place during 2015 clearly states:
This authority is to be determined by:
the Council for all items over £5,000
The Clerk has decided to skip this requirement by using Financial regulations 5.5 (a) which gives delegated
powers to pay if the council was at risk of paying interest or a penalty, for late payment, there was no risk of that.
The regulation also states it can only be used if the payment is not being disputed or any for other reason.
I had disputed the payment and asked the Clerk to bring it to full council for approval.
He refused to bring it to council and the invoice was paid without lawful authority.
Attached to the invoice is a post it note which I have copied it reads:
Need to pay within 30 days
council will not meet for another
5 weeks
F R No 5.5(a)
PAY (in bold and unlined)
I don't know how long the post it had been placed on the invoice I do know when I discussed this
with the clerk there was a meeting set for the next week.
The cheque was signed without the required works order,
Signed by Vince Howard and Paul Mills.
Standing orders say all payments should only be made if all regulations have been followed
This standing order has been ignored.
This also can also be applied to the following Plantscape invoice
In 2012 the council approved a one year trial for Plantscape to provide hanging baskets
The Clerk can not explain how the matter was not brought to full council to tender or
agree a contract for Plantscape after the one year passed. The invoices increased
in value each year???
9th June 2015 Invoice 10304 £8,688.90 This invoice has no work order, no contract or minute
number.
The cheque was signed by Paul Mills and Stan Stubbs.
A simple safe guard recommended by Streets last year that all payments must have an attached works order
appears to be ignored in many cases.
I am told that payments currently being made against old contracts don't have work orders, why? these are
required for an audit trail.
Even though we were all told the conduct of 2014 - 2015 could and not be repeated it has been
repeated during 2015 - 2016
When I spoke with you this afternoon you asked me a question in response to mine and made a statement.
I asked why you were not answering my question:
did you respond to the clerks emails seeking authority to pay the above and did
you tell him to ignore me and my request that he brought these invoices to full council for approval?
you said you did not need to answer the question, why?
You added are you suggesting all those Cllrs who responded to the clerks request and gave him
consent to pay the above should resign?
I responded yes. Because at the one training session we both attended you will
remember we were told it is unlawful to conduct any council business via emails, telephone or outside of council meetings.
That is why I am objecting to the above payments.
I also obtained a copy of Invoice no 850Oakhamtc £1051.60 freedom of entry catering.
The councils financial regulations state any contract agreed that ends up exceeding 5% of the agreed amount should
be returned to council for further approval.
This contract exceeded 5% after the following was added
Equipment Hire = £146.60
Staffing Cost = £120
Extra Juice / coke and glasses = £35
A cheque was signed by you and Stan Stubbs made payable to Mr A peaple.
There is no work order or minute recorded giving approval for this extra costs.
This is why I am disputing this payment.
The next is Invoice No: 00510 £1000 3rd November 2015
There is not work order or minute or any consent for this payment made
and therefore is unlawful.
I am also very concerned that this invoice shows the Town Partnership Ltd is
still using the Council as its address.
the invoice is headed Oakham Town Partnership
c/o Oakham Town Council.
Oakham Town Partnership Ltd is not in anyway associated with the council so
I wonder why they are permitted to use the councils address in this way?
I understand you were concerned about this payment, although I
sensed your concern is that the money to fund this invoice came out of a
budget which you have some control of. So I find it odd that you signed
the Cheque knowing this had not been approved by full council and your
concern that it had taken a considerable chunk out of the promotions of
Oakham budget. The other signature on the cheque is Stan Stubbs.
To Conclude, before the Clerk went away on sick, I aksed for confirmation
that members who were signing cheques were being provided with invoices
with attached works orders and minute number giving approval for the
expenditure. He confirmed this was now happening, although I find this is not
happening in all cases. Can I ask all those who sign cheques or authorise
electronic payments don't sign if the invoices don't have the required
work orders or the minute attached. Then perhaps we can move forward
without further issues like this.
Regards from
Martin
