Leicestershire Police Cllr Michael Haley Richard White Oakham Town Council FOI
Dear Michael
My freedom of information request arrived this morning.
I trust the council will also be publishing the response on our website
as required by the FOI act.
The Town Council also provides a FOI form which contains an inccorect and unlawful statement
The council must respond to any such request for information within 20 day and may also
make a charge.
make a charge.
A council can not make a charge for a FOI request.
Reading your letter to the chief constable clearly shows you did not read my email
regarding the subject of the payment to the clerk and how the police assisted me.
All extracts taken from your letter are typed in italics and bold.
You start with
Dear Chief Constable Cole
In a recent e mail sent on the 15th July 2017 to Town Councillors, and the
Rutland County Council (Debbie Mogg) by a town Councillor Martin Brookes,
seriious allegations are made which if true, may effect the proffessional reputation
of the local police. We have a deep respect for the proffessional reputation of the
local police. We have a deep respect for the intergrity of your local officers, and
I find it difficult to accept the truefullness of the allegations.
First you speak on behalf of the council and then yourself no member even the chairman
has the right to speak on behalf of the council without its consent.
You then go on to say:
Cllr Brookes is under the illusion that a payment made to the former Town Clerk
(Richard White) is both unlawful and without the prior approval of the Town Council.
Both Claims are manifestly untrue and can be fully verified. Cllr Brookes cannot accept
this fact and continues to argue, publicly his claim.
Cllr Haley I do not beleive the payments made to Richard White were
unlawful. It is a simple fact the council has not complied with the audit act
and there are no minutes of the council approving the payments of over £5000
each at any meeting, this is what makes the payments unlawful.
The council also failed to comply with its own financial regulations which
clearly state all payments over £5000 must be brought to full council for approval
before the payment is made. Some times we do this and other times we dont
an example of when the process was followed correctly was the payment of
£6,000 given to OTP
There are no minutes stating this sum was agreed, the only minute the council
can provide is authority was given to the Staffing Committe to offer Richard
White a £18,000 settlement .
Documents also show that only one former Cllr Mr Stubbs signed the
clerks authority to make the elctronic payments, when two signatures from
council members are required.
The second part of you letter is the most daft as you claim I give the impression
a police officer has accessed the former Clerk's personal bank account to verify
this payment was made.
You have kindly copied part of my email to the chief constable, to back up your daft claim. When
I refer to Leicestershire Police you have added in brackets (police officers) and (Town) before Clerk
I am not sure why?
If you read my email again, you will clearly find I only say the police examined the
documents Oakham Town Council Provided me. Documents which had the clerks name
redacted. His personal banking details were not redacted from the documents.
You write part of my email:
'Leicestershire Police have been very helpful and from the documents the (Town)
Clerk has provided me with, they (police officers) were able to examine some closely,
and show me that both payments were sent to Richard Whites personal account.
The Police have asked I do not share how.
You then write a very daft paragraph which leads me to this question
how does me stating an officer examining council documents gives a clear impression
that an officer has accessed the former town clerks personal bank account?
I suggest is you were annoyed that when the Clerk wrote to me and said the
name would not be redacted from documents you overuled her decission and were even more annoyed
when I let you know the police officer had shown me how to reveal the redacted name.
This promted you to the write to the chief constable once again demostrating how unfit you are to
be our chairman.
The clear impression is that a police officer has accessed the former Town Clerk's
personal bank account to verify this payment was made. I find it hard to accept
an Officer would do this in this particular kind of situation. However, before considering
what further action the Town Council might consider, I would be grateful if you would
confirm my above presumption. If however the e mail statement is true, you may
feel that further internal action might be appropriate.
I look forward to your (confidential) repsonse
Yours sincerely
Cllr Michael Haley
Town Mayor and Chairman.
Why do you appear to threaten Leicestershire Police with further action from the council?, who
gave you the authority to make such a statement on behalf of the council?
You may be interested to know Leicestershire Police correctly refused to suppply these emails
under FOI, I made the mistake of applying for a FOI when it should have been a data request.
Once again proving an unqualified Clerk and you as chairman who authorised the FOI are unfit
to run this council correctly.
Now You have provided them under FOI they are deemed public documents and I will be publishing
both.
The chief constables reply is somewhat baffling I wonder if he actually wrote it or even
looked at what was being sent out?
I had thought this matter waas closed until I received your e mail this week.
As a result of your e mail I have lodge a formal complaint with Leicestershire Police
against the chief constable for entering into corrspondence with you with out my consent.
He has also provided inacurate information because, I have only contacted Leicestershire Police
about Oakham Town Council once to raise the matter of the redacted name from public documents
I telephoned Leicestershire Police on the 12th July 2017 and was given ref no 345 of ther 12th July 2017
on Saturday 15th July 2017 PC 1831 Long visited my home and departed after he showed me how to reveal
the name redacted on the public documents provided by Oakham Town Council when I made a request to obtain
them as an elector in accordance with the rights of an elector afforded to them by the audit act.
It is now for the exterenal auditor Grant Thorton to report if Oakham Town Council has acted properly when it attempts to
hide from the public who received £18,000 of their money.
From
Martin Brookes
