Fraud and corruption allegations

Brian Sanders made this Freedom of Information request to Slough Borough Council

This request has been closed to new correspondence. Contact us if you think it should be reopened.

The request was refused by Slough Borough Council.

Dear Slough Borough Council,

Please provide the following :-

All allegations put to the council regarding corruption and fraud at the council or its agents or subcontractors since 1 April 2011

Details should include :-

1) Detail of allegation made (without personally identifiable information)
2) Action taken
3) Investigation result (if applicable)

Yours faithfully,
Mr B Sanders

FOI, Slough Borough Council

Thank you for your email.

 

Providing excellent customer services is one of the council’s key
priorities.

 

Your enquiry will now be forwarded to the relevant department to answer.

 

We will reply fully to all written enquiries within 10 working days
although we aim to reply to emails sooner than this.

 

If your enquiry is a Freedom of Information request, the council may take
up to 20 working days to respond.

 

 

If you do not receive a satisfactory response by this time you can contact
our complaints department. More details here:

[1]http://www.slough.gov.uk/council/complai...

 

'Disclaimer: You should be aware that all e-mails received and sent by
this Council are subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and
therefore may be disclosed to a third party. (The information contained in
this message or any of its attachments may be privileged and confidential
and intended for the exclusive use of the addressee).  The views expressed
may not be official policy but the personal views of the originator.  If
you are not the addressee any disclosure, reproduction, distribution,
other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited. 
If you received this message in error please return it to the originator
and confirm that you have deleted all copies of it. 
All messages sent by this organisation are checked for viruses using the
latest antivirus products.  This does not guarantee a virus has not been
transmitted.   Please therefore ensure that you take your own precautions
for the detection and eradication of viruses.'

References

Visible links
1. http://www.slough.gov.uk/council/complai...
http://www.slough.gov.uk/council/complai...

_Freedom of Information, Slough Borough Council

Please accept this email as receipt of your FOI request which is now receiving attention.

SBC, FOI Officer

show quoted sections

_Freedom of Information, Slough Borough Council

Dear Brian,

 

Please find below the response to your FOI request:

 

Allegation Type     Action Taken Result

   
Abuse of Council Investigation and Staff member removed
position in subletting prosecution and convicted 2 yrs 10
SBC property. months.
Abuse of position No evidence supplied No further action
bribery taken

 

 
Abuse of position Investigated – no evidence No further action
found taken

 

Please note that the information in the table contains matters put to the
Council by external parties/evidence.

 

If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request you can ask for
a review of your reply.  To request a review please contact the Freedom of
Information Officer at Slough Borough Council, St Martin’s Place, 51 Bath
Road, Slough, Berkshire, SL1 3UF, telephone 01753 875070, email
[1][email address]

 

For further information you can also contact the Information Commissioner
at:

 

Information Commissioner’s Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

 

Telephone: 0303 123 1113 or visit: [2]www.ico.org.uk.

 

Kind Regards

 

SBC, FOI Officer

 

 

 

'Disclaimer: You should be aware that all e-mails received and sent by
this Council are subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and
therefore may be disclosed to a third party. (The information contained in
this message or any of its attachments may be privileged and confidential
and intended for the exclusive use of the addressee).  The views expressed
may not be official policy but the personal views of the originator.  If
you are not the addressee any disclosure, reproduction, distribution,
other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited. 
If you received this message in error please return it to the originator
and confirm that you have deleted all copies of it. 
All messages sent by this organisation are checked for viruses using the
latest antivirus products.  This does not guarantee a virus has not been
transmitted.   Please therefore ensure that you take your own precautions
for the detection and eradication of viruses.'

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
mailto:[email address]
2. http://www.ico.org.uk/
http://www.ico.org.uk/

Dear Slough Borough Council,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Slough Borough Council's handling of my FOI request 'Fraud and corruption allegations'.

I have explicitly asked in my request for

1) Detail of allegation made (without personally identifiable information )

I have been provided with a three word 'allegation type' - hardly the detail I requested. Could you please review and provide the information requested.

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

Yours faithfully,

Brian Sanders

FOI, Slough Borough Council

Thank you for your email.

 

Providing excellent customer services is one of the council’s key
priorities.

 

Your enquiry will now be forwarded to the relevant department to answer.

 

We will reply fully to all written enquiries within 10 working days
although we aim to reply to emails sooner than this.

 

If your enquiry is a Freedom of Information request, the council may take
up to 20 working days to respond.

 

 

If you do not receive a satisfactory response by this time you can contact
our complaints department. More details here:

[1]http://www.slough.gov.uk/council/complai...

 

'Disclaimer: You should be aware that all e-mails received and sent by
this Council are subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and
therefore may be disclosed to a third party. (The information contained in
this message or any of its attachments may be privileged and confidential
and intended for the exclusive use of the addressee).  The views expressed
may not be official policy but the personal views of the originator.  If
you are not the addressee any disclosure, reproduction, distribution,
other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited. 
If you received this message in error please return it to the originator
and confirm that you have deleted all copies of it. 
All messages sent by this organisation are checked for viruses using the
latest antivirus products.  This does not guarantee a virus has not been
transmitted.   Please therefore ensure that you take your own precautions
for the detection and eradication of viruses.'

References

Visible links
1. http://www.slough.gov.uk/council/complai...
http://www.slough.gov.uk/council/complai...

Ward Jane, Slough Borough Council

This is to acknowledge receipt of your email which is receiving attention

show quoted sections

_Freedom of Information, Slough Borough Council

1 Attachment

Dear Brian,

 

The Monitoring Officer has reviewed your FOI request and has asked me to
forward to you the attached press release and revised table below.

 

I believe this now concludes your request for a review.  If you disagree
with our response to your request for an internal review you have a right
under Section 50 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to appeal against
the decision by contacting the Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe
House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, SK9 5AF, [1][email address]

 

Kind regards,

 

SBC, FOI Officer

 

 

 

Allegation Type Action Taken Result

i.e i.e i.e

suspected staff Investigation initiated Staff member left the
misconduct council  
 
Suspected staff fraud No evidence found
 
Supplier misconduct
Abuse of Council position Investigation and Staff member convicted
in subletting SBC prosecution 2 yrs 10 months.
property.
Irregularities in selling Investigation initiated Staff member no longer
SBC property with organisation

 
Abuse of position in Investigation initiated No further action (NFA)
letting SBC garages
     
     

 

Abuse of position Unknown Staff member no longer
bribery with organisation

 
Abuse of position Escalated to line manager, Staff member no longer
Unknown beyond. with organisation

 
Abuse of position Investigation unable to commence No further action
due to limited referral
information .

 

 

 

'Disclaimer: You should be aware that all e-mails received and sent by
this Council are subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and
therefore may be disclosed to a third party. (The information contained in
this message or any of its attachments may be privileged and confidential
and intended for the exclusive use of the addressee).  The views expressed
may not be official policy but the personal views of the originator.  If
you are not the addressee any disclosure, reproduction, distribution,
other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited. 
If you received this message in error please return it to the originator
and confirm that you have deleted all copies of it. 
All messages sent by this organisation are checked for viruses using the
latest antivirus products.  This does not guarantee a virus has not been
transmitted.   Please therefore ensure that you take your own precautions
for the detection and eradication of viruses.'

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
mailto:[email address]

Mr Janik left an annotation ()

SBC's top management refuses to accept allegations unless the articulator discloses their full identity and then produces the PROOF.

Dear _Freedom of Information,

Thank you for providing detail for one of the fraud allegations - the one that is already in the public domain via the courts. You have provided a press release and considerable detail about a housing fraud allegation, but have failed to provide any real detail about the other allegations to an equivalent level.

I fail to see how changing 'abuse of position' to 'suspected staff fraud' and similar for the other allegations provides any serious detail to the public about these allegations. I am expecting the same amount of detail as you have provided for the housing fraud.

It is essential in a democracy that local government is open, honest and transparent, and conforms to good governance processes - this response is not doing any of this.

How can local people have oversight of the council if requests for information of overwhelming public interest are treated in this manner ?

Please provide much more detail about all the allegations rather than just the housing fraud issue which was already in the public domain.

It would seem a waste of the ICO's time to ask them to compel you to reveal this information, so I would appreciate it if you would reconsider yourself and provide a lot more detail.

Yours sincerely,

Brian Sanders

_Freedom of Information, Slough Borough Council

Mr Sanders

Thank-you for your email below.

I have spoken to the Monitoring Officer who undertook the review of your original request.

It is his view that the council are unable to provide detailed information where no evidence was produced or no wrong doing was found. I understand you may be disappointed with this decision but unless the council is able to prove wrong doing it would not be correct to provide details of matters which have not be substantiated or those which remain simply allegations.

Regards, SBC FOI Officer

show quoted sections

Dear _Freedom of Information,

Thanks for you response.

In summary :-

a) Slough Council is in possession of the information requested
b) Slough Council does not wish to provide the information.

With the greatest respect, a view of the monitoring officer is not relevant as this request is covered under the FOI Act. If you are denying this request can you please state very precisely exactly which reason under the act you are invoking.

Yours sincerely,

Brian Sanders

_Freedom of Information, Slough Borough Council

Mr Sanders

I have sent your email to the Monitoring Officer who will respond.

Regards SBC FOI Officer.

show quoted sections

_Freedom of Information, Slough Borough Council

1 Attachment

Mr Sanders

The Monitoring Officer has carried out a review of your FOI request.
Please find attached his response which he has asked me to forward to you.

This now concludes your request.

Regards, SBC FOI Officer.

show quoted sections

Brian Sanders left an annotation ()

This refusal was appealed to the ICO case FS50515046 and the complaint against the council was upheld. The decision notice can be found here :- http://ico.org.uk/~/media/documents/deci...

Janik2 left an annotation ()

Slough Borough Council has a history going back to at least 2002 of senior officials deliberately concealing criminal activities including fraud.

Congratulations to Brian Sanders.

In my opinion SBC Monitoring Officer Kevin Gordon is useless. He hides away, perhaps too scared to reply because he knows SBC is doing wrong and revealing information will conflict with SBC's concealment culture.

SBC is, in my honest opinion, a putrid cesspit - funded by the unsuspecting council tax payers.

P Freeman left an annotation ()

So, where is the information that the ICO ordered to be released?

Brian Sanders left an annotation ()

Slough Council appears to be trying to not publish the details they were ordered to release here where the request was issued, which completely frustrates the point of the request which is to inform public debate. The details to complete the response should be published here.

P Freeman left an annotation ()

I guess this needs to be referred back to the ICO as SBC have failed to do as ordered and so, presumably, are in statutory breach of the FoIA and are acting illegally.

Janik2 left an annotation ()

Just heard a few minutes ago about the awarding of a Slough Council contract, 10 days after closure of bids, to an entity that had NOT submitted their bid. The entity told witnesses they were told by the council their bid would be accepted, even though it had NOT been prepared at that time. The entity then prepared their bid and got the contract.

Mr Janik

P Freeman left an annotation ()

Public sector procurement is one of the areas of government which is quite highly regulated, so if that is true, then it is likely to be in breach of the law and should be reported to the police for investigation.

Janik2 left an annotation ()

Thames Valley Police ?

- some are too close to some in Slough Unitary Authority

- some leak information to some in Slough Unitary Authority.

- one officer repeatedly refused to accept a complaint of £3,000 a time regularly fraud, involving assets worth over £100,000 each, at Slough Unitary Authority despite the complainant having 2 witnesses.

- some have falsified information in an attempt to secure a criminal conviction for the personal benefit of their "friend".

An honest one did try to do an investigation but told the complainants that someone at the council had "tided-up the records" so an investigation was impossible. The amount? Just a mere £7 million.

Mr Janik.

P Freeman left an annotation ()

My own experience of Thames Valley Police is not a good one.

They didn't seem to be able to undertake the basics of policing like building a case from a sequence of smaller incidents or arresting an assault suspect. They refused to investigate an allegation of racial abuse. Following a face-to-face meeting, the local Superintendent promised to write to me about my complaint but didn't.

Devon & Cornwall Police seem no better - see Telegraph video of Graham Brown and utter lack of any news on the police investigation that followed.