Please find set out below the information in response to the above request, apologies for the delay:

1.    You state that "the circulation list is in accordance with Internal Audit’s standard reporting protocol" yet then go on to say, " both the Head of Internal Audit and Audit Manager would review and agree the circulation list". Providing a copy of the "standard reporting protocol" would perhaps clarify this answer?

The protocol and standard practice referenced in our previous answer are not written documents. We refer to what is Internal Audit’s working practice when circulating reports. As the report was from within Internal Audit, at the time of the report in question, the circulation would have been determined jointly by the Audit Manager and the Head of Audit before release. The circulation list for a final report would normally include the relevant Head of Service and Executive Director, plus other officers as judged to be relevant to the specific report.

2.    Please confirm who has received a copy of the original report.

A copy of the original report has been circulated to the Chief Executive, Acting Executive Director of Environment, Development & Housing, Head of Housing,  Head of Housing Strategy D&PS, Contract Compliance Manager, Partnering Business Manager, (Acting) Executive Director of Finance and Resources, (current) Director of Finance and Resources, (current) Head of Legal Services, Communications Officer.

3.    In relation to the 46 inspections you state, "We believe that sufficient inspections were completed to enable the council to try to begin to quantify the size of the concern." Could you please explain what this actually means and if "to try to begin to quantify" resulted in an accurate assessment of the size of the fraud?

The statement means that the 46 inspections provided sufficient evidence for the council to confirm that over charging had occurred and to initiate a process to recover the overpayment.  

4.    In relation to Mears failing 30 of 468 inspections and the BHCC audit failing 7 of the 8 inspections that Mears had passed you claim that "The Council does not hold further information in relation to this request." Could you please confirm this statement is correct as given this is at the centre of the work carried out by the internal audit team it would appear, at the very least, to be rather strange?

The Council does not have information as to why this is the case and therefore our initial response that the Council does not hold this information is the correct response.

5.    You state that "A conclusion was reached that overcharging had occurred by one subcontractor based on the work of internal audit and housing officers." Could you confirm that this conclusion was reached by internal audit and housing officers and not Mears PLC as previously reported? Could you also state which housing officers?”

Yes the conclusion was reached by internal audit and housing officers. The key housing officer was the Head of Housing Strategy D&PS. 

Should you have any further queries about this request, please contact us via email to [Brighton and Hove City Council request email] quoting the reference number given above.

If you are not satisfied with the handling of your request, you can appeal (Internal Review) within 2 months of the completed FOI. Write to:

Freedom of Information Appeals

Brighton & Hove City Council

ICT 4th Floor

Bartholomew House

Bartholomew Square

Hove BN1 1JE

[Brighton and Hove City Council request email]

If you are still not satisfied after your Internal Review has been investigated, you can escalate your complaint to the Information Commissioners Office. The contact details are:

The Information Commissioners Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire SK9 5AF

Helpline: 0303 123 1113 (local rate) or 01625 545 745 (national rate)

e-mail: [email address]

Website: www.ico.org.uk

Re-use of Public Sector Information and Copyright Statement

Where information has been supplied, you are advised that the copyright in that material is owned by Brighton & Hove City Council and/or its contractor(s) unless otherwise stated. The supply of documents under the Freedom of Information Act does not give the recipient an automatic right to re-use those documents in a way that would infringe copyright, for example, by making multiple copies, publishing and issuing copies to the public. Brief extracts of the material can be reproduced under the “fair dealing” provisions of the Copyright Design and Patents Act 1998 (S.29 and S.30) for the purposes of research for non-commercial purposes, private study, criticism, review and news reporting. Authorisation to re-use copyright material not owned by Brighton & Hove City Council and/or its contractor(s) should be sought from the copyright holders concerned. If you are considering re-using the information disclosed to you through this request, for any purpose outside of what could be considered for personal use, then you are required under the Public Sector Re-use of Information Regulations 2005 to make an Application for Re-use to the organisation from which you have requested the information. Applications for Re-use should be directed to the Data Protection Manager at the address above.