MBC Legal Fees Contract - J E Baring & Co CA29830

Ed Boyce made this Rhyddid Gwybodaeth request to Maidstone Borough Council

Automatic anti-spam measures are in place for this older request. Please let us know if a further response is expected or if you are having trouble responding.

Mae'r ymateb i'r cais hwn yn hwyr iawn. Yn ôl y gyfraith, ym mhob amgylchiad, dylai Maidstone Borough Council fod wedi ymateb erbyn hyn. (manylion). Gallwch gwyno drwy yn gofyn am adolygiad mewnol.

Dear Maidstone Borough Council,

MBC Legal Fees Contract - J E Baring & Co CA29830

On 14 October 2019 Maidstone Borough Council made the following statement :
Quote: 'J E Baring & Co carry out work in accordance with regulations, not a contract'

1. Please provide the regulations MBC is referring to and in what context if not operating under this contract.

2. State the precise names of company and company numbers and all individuals connected to this contract.

3. List exactly what services MBC has under this contract been paying legal fees for.

4. Provide a copy of this contract for legal services and who signed it.

5. If there are any other contracts made for legal services by any other means for example through a partnership arrangement, also provide a copy of those contracts.

6. Name the department within MBC who obtained this contract or if it is a partnership service provider who has obtained these external legal services for their client MBC, confirm their name. For example: Mid Kent Improvement Services or Mid Kent Legal Services.

7. Supply the position of the person ultimately responsible for procuring this contract of legal services with Mr Allan Hooper and in what capacity they instructed him, for example: as a debt collection agency acting through his company.

6. Provide the date when this contract was put out to tender and the names of the other competitors.

Company name: J E Baring & Co
Contract details: CA29830 Legal Fees
Buyer: Maidstone Borough Council
Start date: 1/12/2016.
Department: Procurement
End Date: 31/03/2022
Review date: 1/01/2022
Estimated total value: £40,000.00
Contacts: Mr Allan Hooper

Yours faithfully,

Ed Boyce

Complaints & FOI (MBC), Maidstone Borough Council

Dear Mr. Boyce

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST

Ref: FOI 3029

Thank you for your request for information. We will endeavour to provide our response within statutory timescales. However, please be aware that the Council is currently facing increased pressures due to COVID-19. The Information Commissioner has released guidance to help us through this difficult time which can be found here. It allows for a more measured approach in handling FOI requests, should it be needed.

After considering your request, we may decide to refuse to supply the information under a number of exemptions that exist in legislation. For details of these exemptions, please visit the Information Commissioner’s website: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/gui...

If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me. Please remember to quote the reference above in any future communications.

Yours sincerely

FOI Team
Policy and Information Team
Maidstone Borough Council, Maidstone House, King Street, Maidstone, Kent
ME15 6JQ
t 01622 602640 w www.maidstone.gov.uk

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Complaints & FOI (MBC), Maidstone Borough Council

Date: 11^th November 2020
Ref: FOI/3029

Dear My Boyce
I am writing in regard to your information request. In order to respond to
your request, we are awaiting further information response from our client
JE Baring & Co, who are advising on the content of the reply.
Unfortunately, this will mean a slight delay and we will not be able to
respond by the deadline we originally advised.

 

Once we’ve received the information we need from them, we will begin
preparing our response to your request. Until then, I have put FOI/3029 on
hold.

Yours sincerely

FOI Team
Policy and Information Team
Maidstone Borough Council, Maidstone House, King Street, Maidstone, Kent
ME15 6JQ
w [1]www.maidstone.gov.uk

 

To access our digital services please visit www.maidstone.gov.uk/service
Sign up to receive your Council Tax bill by email http://www.maidstone.gov.uk/emailbilling

We understand the importance of ensuring that personal data, including sensitive personal data is always treated lawfully and appropriately and that the rights of individuals are upheld.

We are required to collect, use and hold personal data about individuals. Data is required for the purposes of carrying out our statutory obligations, delivering services and meeting the needs of individuals that we deal with. This includes current, past and prospective employees, service users, members of the public, Members of the Council, our business partners and other local authorities or public bodies.

To view our full statement to see how your data will be stored and processed please visit https://maidstone.gov.uk/dataprotection

This email is confidential. If you receive it by mistake, please advise the sender by email immediately.
Any unauthorised use of the message or attachments is prohibited. Unless stated otherwise, any opinions are personal and cannot be attributed to Maidstone Borough Council.
Unless a purchase order is attached this email is not a contract or an order.
It is your responsibility to carry out Virus checks before opening any attachments.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.maidstone.gov.uk/

Dear Complaints & FOI (MBC),

Thank you for MBC reply today stating that you have the right to put this FOIA request (FOI/3029) on hold until you hear back from Your Client?

1. Please confirm where within the FOIA it specifically grants MBC this right ?

2. Please confirm if the ICO has granted MBC the right to delay providing information that it holds relating to your contracts?

2. Please clarify what you mean by 'our Client'

3. When did J E Baring & Co become MBC client?

4. Please clarify if MBC is in fact a client of J E Baring & Co?

If MBC is in fact the Client please ensure you provide all information requested that MBC holds within the statutory time frame.

Yours sincerely,

Ed Boyce

Dear Maidstone Borough Council,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Maidstone Borough Council's handling of my FOI request 'MBC Legal Fees Contract - J E Baring & Co CA29830'.

Maidstone Borough Council have delayed in responding to this FOI request 19.10.2020 that was acknowledged the same day and should have been responded to promptly by 16.11.2020.

On 11.11.2020 MBC said there would be a slight delay (it is now 25.11.2020) a response was sent back to MBC 12.11.2020 seeking clarification regarding their 'Client' JE Baring & Co who was advising them on the content of their reply, with a reminder of the statutory time frame and for MBC to provide all the information they hold.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/m...

Yours faithfully,

Ed Boyce

Complaints & FOI (MBC), Maidstone Borough Council

1 Atodiad

Dear Ed Boyce

 

Unfortunately we sent our response to FOI/3029 to the incorrect email
address on 23 November (see below and attached), I am very sorry about
this.

 

Please note that we made the decision to withhold the information
requested in question 4 under Section 42 of the Freedom of Information
Act.

 

Under Section 42 of the FOI Act, information in respect of which a claim
to legal professional privilege (LLP) could be maintained in legal
proceedings is exempt information. The information requested relates to
correspondence between the Council and its solicitors. The ability to
correspond freely and frankly with a legal adviser in order to obtain
appropriate legal advice is a fundamental requirement of the English legal
system. The concept of LPP protects the confidentiality of communications,
this helps to ensure complete fairness in legal proceedings.

 

In considering the public interest test, we consider that the public
interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in
disclosure. We recognise that there is strong public interest in
safeguarding openness and transparency in all communications. However, we
feel that there is greater interest in maintaining the exemption due to
the importance of ensuring frankness between solicitors and the Council
which goes to serve the wider administration of justice.

 

If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your
request and wish to request a review of our decision, please respond to
this email and I will pass it on to Mid Kent Legal Services to conduct a
review. Please ensure you outline your reasons for requesting a review.

 

If you are not content with the outcome of your complaint, you may apply
directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision.  Generally, the
ICO cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaints
procedure provided by the Council.  The Information Commissioner can be
contacted at: The Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water
Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.

 

Yours Sincerely

 

FOI Team

Policy and Information

Maidstone Borough Council, Maidstone House King Street, Maidstone, Kent

ME15 6JQ

w [1]www.maidstone.gov.uk

 

 

 

 

From: Complaints & FOI (MBC)
Sent: 23 November 2020 13:34
To: '[email address]'
<[2][email address]>
Subject: FOI/3029 response.

 

Date: 23^rd November

Ref: FOI/3029

 

Dear Mr Boyce,

 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST

 

I am writing to confirm that the Council has now completed its search for
the information you requested.

 

A copy of the information is enclosed.

 

If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me.  Please
remember to quote the reference above in any future communications.

 

If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your
request and wish to request a review of our decision, please respond to
this email and I will pass it on to Mid Kent Legal Services to conduct a
review. Please ensure you outline your reasons for requesting a review.

 

If you are not content with the outcome of your complaint, you may apply
directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision.  Generally, the
ICO cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaints
procedure provided by the Council.  The Information Commissioner can be
contacted at: The Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water
Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.

 

Yours Sincerely

 

FOI Team

Policy and Information

Maidstone Borough Council, Maidstone House King Street, Maidstone, Kent

ME15 6JQ

t []01622 602640 w [3]www.maidstone.gov.uk

 

To access our digital services please visit www.maidstone.gov.uk/service
Sign up to receive your Council Tax bill by email http://www.maidstone.gov.uk/emailbilling

We understand the importance of ensuring that personal data, including sensitive personal data is always treated lawfully and appropriately and that the rights of individuals are upheld.

We are required to collect, use and hold personal data about individuals. Data is required for the purposes of carrying out our statutory obligations, delivering services and meeting the needs of individuals that we deal with. This includes current, past and prospective employees, service users, members of the public, Members of the Council, our business partners and other local authorities or public bodies.

To view our full statement to see how your data will be stored and processed please visit https://maidstone.gov.uk/dataprotection

This email is confidential. If you receive it by mistake, please advise the sender by email immediately.
Any unauthorised use of the message or attachments is prohibited. Unless stated otherwise, any opinions are personal and cannot be attributed to Maidstone Borough Council.
Unless a purchase order is attached this email is not a contract or an order.
It is your responsibility to carry out Virus checks before opening any attachments.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.maidstone.gov.uk/
2. mailto:[email address]
3. http://www.maidstone.gov.uk/

Dear Complaints & FOI (MBC),

Why have MBC waited until 4.12.2020 to confirm that you sent a reply to this outstanding FOI request dated 19.10.2020 on 23.11.2020 albeit to a wrong email address, although you have not clarified which email address this was sent to?

As you are aware the internal review was requested on 25.11.2020 (two days after you sent your reply and clarification sought regarding your comments implying J E Baring & Co a solicitors partnership was YOUR CLIENT, unfortunately this has been ignored by MBC.

Not in the public interest to know what an estimated value of £40.000 is being spent on is strongly disputed and it will be for the ICO to decide whether MBC can conceal the information relating to services provided by external solicitors.

MBC appears to be deliberately providing misleading and confusing information and seem evasive in your answers.

1. MBC are implying that they are YOUR CLIENT rather than MBC being the client of J E Baring & Co (Allan Hooper is a partner in this firm of solicitors)
2. That MBC have no contract for Legal Fees but also refer to receiving Debt Recovery Services (not advice) under this contract.
3. MBC has no contract with either J E Baring & Co or Allan Hooper who is a partner in this solicitors firm.
4. Who is providing Debt Recovery Services under this contract or any other arrangement if not the above.
5. Who obtained these Debt Recovery Services on behalf of MBC.
6. Has Mid-Kent Services (MBC service provider) obtained any of these services on behalf of MBC.
7. MBC states 'we are not trading as a company at this time' . Who is "We" and what do you mean 'at this time'?
8. To be helpful. J E Baring & Co did prior to this contract with MBC own a limited company with the same name that was already dissolved 29.3.2016 and have created their recent company J E Baring Ltd 8.8.2019. MBC have not stated which part of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 Chapter 9 - Tendering and Contract Award applies to an exemption to being put out to tender for MBC contract with Mr Allan Hooper.

Yours sincerely,

Ed Boyce

Dear Complaints & FOI (MBC),

MBC stated on 4 December 2020 that they would pass this onto your service provider Mid Kent Legal Services, have they anything to add prior to this FOI request being sent to the ICO for their decision because MBC have ignored the questions put to them on 5 December 2020?

Yours sincerely,

Ed Boyce

Gadawodd Ed Boyce anodiad ()

Maidstone Borough Council 23 November 2020

1. The SRA (Solicitors Regulation Authority) and Law Society Regulations
2. N/A - we are not trading as a limited company at this time
3. Debt Recovery services
4. Any correspondence entered in to with Council's solicitors is covered by legal professional privilege, s.42 FOIA 2000
5. No working Partnership arrangement in place
6. There is no contract
7. There is no contract with Allan Hooper
8. No tender requirement necessary as the contract is below minimum procurement threshold of £160K (European Tender Regulations)

Gadawodd Ed Boyce anodiad ()

Contract: CA29830 Legal Fees

Buyer: Maidstone Borough Council
Department: Procument
Start date: 01/12/2016
End date: 31/03/2022
Title: CA29830 Legal Fees
Awarded date: 01/12/2016
Reference no: DN435768
Estimated total value: £40,000.00
Review date: 01/01/2022
Initial contract period: 63 months
Central purchasing body: Maidstone Borough Council
Process used: RFQ

Primary contact Mr Jeff Robinson 01622 602527

Awarded supplier(s). Company Name J E Baring & Co
Contacts Mr Allan Hooper
Postcode EC1N 8LE

Categories 281200 - General Support
https://procontract.due-north.com/Contra...

Dear Complaints & FOI (MBC),

Why would Maidstone Borough Council want to hide information that is already available in the public domain regarding a contract and why are your answers so evasive?

Contract: CA29830 Legal Fees

Buyer: Maidstone Borough Council
Department: Procument
Start date: 01/12/2016
End date: 31/03/2022
Title: CA29830 Legal Fees
Awarded date: 01/12/2016
Reference no: DN435768
Estimated total value: £40,000.00
Review date: 01/01/2022
Initial contract period: 63 months
Central purchasing body: Maidstone Borough Council
Process used: RFQ

Primary contact Mr Jeff Robinson 01622 602527

Awarded supplier(s). Company Name J E Baring & Co
Contacts Mr Allan Hooper
Postcode EC1N 8LE

Categories 281200 - General Support

https://procontract.due-north.com/Contra...
Yours sincerely,

Ed Boyce

Complaints & FOI (MBC), Maidstone Borough Council

Dear Ed Boyce

If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your request and wish to request a review of our decision, please let me know and I will pass it on to Mid Kent Legal Services to conduct a review. Please ensure you outline your reasons for requesting a review.

Yours sincerely

Complaints & FOI Team
Policy & Information Team
Maidstone Borough Council, King Street, Maidstone, Kent ME15 6JQ
e [email address] w www.maidstone.gov.uk

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Maidstone Borough Council,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Maidstone Borough Council's handling of my FOI request 'MBC Legal Fees Contract - J E Baring & Co CA29830'.

Maidstone Borough Council have already internally reviewed this FOIR 25.11.2020 and chose to conceal this information from the public, which is not providing a transparent service, concerning public funds.

It is crucial that the public know where and what their funds are being used for, especially when you are funding a external London solicitors firm in the region of £40,000 who are obtaining and using personal data transferred to them by Maidstone Borough Council and your partnership service providers Mid Kent Improvement Services renamed Mid Kent Services.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/m...

Yours faithfully,

Ed Boyce

Complaints & FOI (MBC), Maidstone Borough Council

Date: 05/02/21
Ref: FOI/3029
 
Dear Ed Boyce
 
Thank you for your request for an internal review. I have passed this on
to Mid Kent Legal Services to review your request and the response. You
will receive a response within 20 working days.
 
If you are not content with the outcome of your complaint, you may apply
directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision.  Generally, the
ICO cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaints
procedure provided by the Council.  The Information Commissioner can be
contacted at: The Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water
Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF. [1]https://ico.org.uk/
 
Yours sincerely,
 
Complaints & FOI Team
Policy & Information Team
Maidstone Borough Council, King Street, Maidstone, Kent ME15 6JQ
e [2][email address] w [3]www.maidstone.gov.uk
 
 
 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Complaints & FOI (MBC),

Thank for confirming MBC are carrying out a second internal prior to this Foir being forwarded onto the ICO.

MBC will be aware that data accuracy and outsourced activities of debt collection agencies must be reported if any inaccuracies are found by the council and all data breaches reported to the ICO.

Is J E Baring & Co a trading name of J E Baring & Co Ltd 'a debt collection agency' dissolved on 29.3.2016 is this also the trading name of J E Baring Ltd 8.8.2019.

Was there a contract with this prior debt collection agency and prior to 1.12.2016?

Why have MBC not provided a copy of these contracts for Debt Recovery Services and who has signed these contracts.

Were any of these contracts made for MBC through Mid Kent Services and if so what department.

MBC provided information on 4 December 2020 from your debt recovery company who states on 23 November 2020 quote:

' 2. N/A- we are not trading as a limited company at this time'

Yet, Companies House shows J E Baring Ltd their new limited company legal entity has a charge created 23 November 2020 with HSBC UK Bank PLC.

Are MBC 'customers' whose personal details are being transferred to your debt recovery services company /agency made aware of which legal entity MBC has a contract with or is this also kept hidden.

Does your contract contain the address for debt recovery services agency as First Floor 63-64 Hatton Garden, Holburn, London or 1st Floor, note this is spelt differently again and as 1St Floor on the Law Society.

Bradley Bloom and Allan Hooper area's of practice on the Law Society are for Insolvency and restructuring -BUSINESS.

Yours sincerely,

Ed Boyce

Gadawodd Ed Boyce anodiad ()

How many have complained to the FCA or FOS or the department of trading standards or CSA (credit services association) or ICO about 'Debt Recovery Service Agents'?

When Agents are paid by local authorities, both the council and agents must not mis-lead or conceal how and through, which of their legal entities they are acting or being paid or making payments, as there are distinct and separate taxation rules for different legal entities.

Gadawodd Ed Boyce anodiad ()

SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY

J E BARING LTD recognised body since 14/01/2020

J E BARING & CO recognised body since 01/11/2011

Dear Complaints & FOI (MBC),

Can you confirm how and why your London solicitors 'practice' can claim not to have a contract for £40,000 with a local authority when a contract does exist for debt recovery services according the solicitors.

How can they give out false information via their client MBC.

This contract can only have been through their partnership that has the same name they use as a trading name for their company J E Baring Ltd and former company J E Baring & Co Ltd, because the latter was dissolved 29 March 2016 and the current company was not incorporated on Companies House 8 August 2019 and not regulated by SRA until 14 January 2020.

Why are the local authority and these solicitors giving out conflicting and deliberately confusing information to hide which legal entity they are acting through.

How is it possible for this partnership that the council has a contract with for legal services to be signing in a company trading name, letters and court documentation etc when this company was either not in existence or not regulated by SRA on those dates.

Since when have these company director solicitors been authorised to carry out bankruptcy work against individuals and not a company, under their solicitors company?

The Law Society website shows that only Insolvency and restricting - business can be carried out by solicitors Allan Hooper and Bradley Bloom whose registered partnership address is First Floor, 63-66 Hatton Garden,London.(DX151 LONDON)

Their company registered address is 1st Floor, 63-66 Hatton Garden, London, and their email address [email address] for this company appears on their website. (Notice the subtle change in spelling of the first line of their address changed from First Floor to 1st Floor.)

Are the directors allowed to send out documentation on headed paper with J E Baring & Co solicitors with their partnership address 'First Floor' with their company email address and LDE 151 Chancery Lane (not DX151 LONDON) and yet sign as a company trading name 'J E Baring & Co' with their company name 'J E Baring Ltd' trading as J E Baring & Co (Registered in England No. 1214662) Authorised and Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority No. 666652 Registered Office: FIRST FLOOR, (which is their registered partnership address not their registered company address) Directors: A Hooper, B Bloom and J Bending, at the bottom.

Are these solicitors allowed to mix and match their legal entities to conceal who has really been instructed by their client and for what purpose and if they are actually officially authorised in the correct capacity to carry out certain work, such as bankruptcy.

Surely, both solicitors and councils who are accessing and processing personal data of living individuals must be both transparent and accountable and not deceptive in their actions or can they simply swop and change their lawful basis to suit a mutual agenda, and without informing your purported council "customer".

MBC Legal Fees Contract - J E Baring & Co CA29830
www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/mbc_legal...

Yours sincerely,

Ed Boyce

Complaints & FOI (MBC), Maidstone Borough Council

Dear Ed Boyce

The internal review of the Council's response to your FOI request in relation to this subject matter (FOI/3029) is currently being conducted by Mid Kent Legal Services.

On this occasion, the matters raised in your email dated 25 February will be considered as part of the current review. However, any further requests relating to this matter may treated by the Council is as a new FOI request.

Yours sincerely

FOI Team
Policy & Information Team
Maidstone Borough Council, King Street, Maidstone, Kent ME15 6JQ
e [email address] w www.maidstone.gov.uk

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Gina Clarke,

1 Atodiad

Dear Mr Boyce,
Please see attached letter.

Dear Gina Clarke,

Are Maidstone Borough Council as a data controller claiming to be able to conceal what legal entity of your external solicitors you have been paying and for what service?

Please provide clarification and define precisely which legal entity you are referring to where you have stated multiple names attached to your external solicitors listed below or are MBC claiming to also to be able to deliberately cause confusion so as to avoid answering the questions as to whether you have been paying the partnership or their company or both at different times and if so for what services.

1.Barings
2.J E Baring and Co
3.J E Barings
4.J E Baring

Yours sincerely,

Ed Boyce

Gadawodd Ed Boyce anodiad ()

Although listed as a "contract" there is no contract in place and Maidstone Borough Council have failed to define precisely which of their external London solicitor's legal entities they have instructed and through, either the partnership or their company they have been paid.

As a Data Controller with access to personal data shouldn't they be required to be far more transparent, especially when sharing personal data and information with external London solicitors etc and why not use a local legal team?

Dear Gina Clarke,

Please provide answers to the questions sent on 17 March 2021 because MBC have not confirmed which legal entity it has been paying public funds to for debt recovery services, either the partnership or a company and you have used various spellings, which is far from being transparent and may be construed as concealment.

Please also confirm this firm's correct SRA ID number so their can be no doubt as to which external London solicitor's legal entity MBC claim to have instructed and have an arrangement with that you state is not a contract, either the partnership or their company.

As a Data Controller with access to personal data shouldn't MBC be required to be far more transparent, especially when sharing personal data and information with external London solicitors and you should be able to produce all information including your data sharing agreement, which should include exactly which legal entity you have been sharing data with and paying funds to.

Yours sincerely,

Ed Boyce

Gina Clarke,

 

Thank you for  your email, I am not working today and do not have access
to my emails.  If you require an urgent response please contact
[1][email address]

 

Thank you

 

 

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Gadawodd Ed Boyce anodiad ()

Where is the transparency in public office, surely it is not right that councils can simply hide or twist information, for what purpose and for whose benefit that is the question that needs to be asked and not skirted around?

Gina Clarke,

The solicitors are J E Baring & Co.

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Gina Clarke,

A response has been now sent to your email of 17 March by of clarification.
As previously informed in the outcome of review letter, if you are dissatisfied with the outcome of the review, please contact the ICO.
If you require new information which was not part of your original request for information which has been reviewed, then you can check whether the information you require is the public domain. Or you may consider making a new request for information to the Council's FOI Team.

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Gina Clarke,

Why is MAIDSTONEBOROUGH COUNCIL concealing who they have been awarding £40,000.00 to.

You have only stated J E Baring & Co is this the name of a partnership or a company ?

Yours sincerely,

Ed Boyce

Gadawodd Ed Boyce anodiad ()

With the local election on the horizon it is crucial that clear and concise information is provided by the council that must not be allowed to remain hidden.
Maybe potential candidates should be made aware of these issues and the complete lack of transparency so it can be raised regarding the concealment of funds and who is receiving them and in which capacity as a partnership or company or both.

Dear Gina Clarke,

Maidstone Borough Council continues to conceal who you have been awarding £40,000 to, is it the partnership or company that trades as J E Baring & Co that has been awarded these public funds?

Yours sincerely,

Ed Boyce

Gina Clarke,

 

Thank you for  your email, I am not working today and do not have access
to my emails.  If you require an urgent response please contact
[1][email address]

 

Thank you

 

 

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Dear Maidstone Borough Council, Gina Clarke

You have still not provided an answer?

How is it possible for Maidstone Borough Council to conceal forever who you have been awarding £40,000 to, is this to the partnership or company that trades as J E Baring & Co that has been awarded these public funds?

Or have you been paying a non-limited business:

J E BARING & CO 3483212
Senior Executive MR ALLAN HOOPER
https://companycheck.co.uk/nonLimitedCom...

Yours faithfully,

Ed Boyce

Complaints & FOI (MBC), Maidstone Borough Council

Dear Ed Boyce

As previously stated, if you are dissatisfied with the outcome of the internal review you should contact the ICO.

Yours sincerely

FOI Team
Policy & Information Team
Maidstone Borough Council, King Street, Maidstone, Kent ME15 6JQ
e [email address] w www.maidstone.gov.uk

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Complaints & FOI (MBC),

Not satisfied with what?

Maidstone Borough Council are yet to provide and clarify exactly which legal entity you have been paying £40,000 of public money to, especially when you claim to be providing transparent services, concealment cannot not be construed as transparency.

Please provide accurate complete information.

Yours sincerely,

Ed Boyce

Gadawodd Ed Boyce anodiad ()

J E BARING & CO
63-66 HATTON GARDEN, LONDON, EC1N 8LE
Company Status ACTIVE 3483212
Company Type Non-Limited Business
Senior Executive MR ALLAN HOOPER
Position Manager
https://companycheck.co.uk/nonLimitedCom...

MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
Maidstone House, King Street, Maidstone, Kent, ME15 6JQ
Company Age 18 Years
Company Status ACTIVE 2625039
Company Type Non-Limited Business
Senior Executive MRS ALISON BROOM
Position Chief Executive
https://companycheck.co.uk/nonLimitedCom...