We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are Li Lee HK buyers please sign in and let everyone know.

The Elliot Group Website/ Councillor Ann O’Byrne

We're waiting for Li Lee HK buyers to read a recent response and update the status.

Dear Liverpool City Council,

To: A Lewis / Your Ref: 555 555
Please see my reply back to you and could you go over these and reply back.

1. Liverpool City Councils, answer to question 1, is that the properties were marketed in 2015. They then go on to say that none of the offers matched their aspirations or financial expectation.

Further they add that one of the interested parties was, The Elliot Group, who offered substantially higher offer than any other offer received for a town house conversion scheme.

They then justify not “going back to the market on the grounds”


Contract Standing Orders, said that the disposal of property to developers who are proposing schemes which will have a regenerating effect on the city and investment, which in the view of the relevant Director, in consultation with the Cabinet Member , could be prejudiced by inviting tenders,

This answer throws up a lot of questions.

1. What are the council’s expectations for the property?
2. How many people expressed an interest in the properties?
3. How many people actually tendered for the properties?
4. What was the highest bid?
5. Who made the highest bid?
6. What were the individual bids?
7. How much was the substantial offer from The Elliot Group.
8. How did The Elliot Group match the Councils expectations for the property?

Secondly, what are the “Contract Standing Orders”?
1. Under what circumstances do they apply to the tendering process?
2. Which section or part or paragraph of the Contract Orders was applied to the decision to allow The Elliot Group to be the sole contractors?
3. Who was the relevant director who made the decision?
4. Who was the relevant cabinet member who made the decision?
5. Will the council provide copies of all evidence used in forming the decision?
6. Will the council provide copies of all evidence used in promulgating the decision?
7. Why would the offer from The Elliot Group be prejudiced, in inviting further tenders?
8. Will the council provide full written reasons for the decision to award The Elliot Group the contract?

Question 3


The council’s response is to invoke Section 43 (2), FOIA.

Consider The questions are in the public interest, because of the council’s response to question 1, that being that they avoided using the lawful tendering process using executive powers; they should not use Section 43 (2) in these circumstances.

Answer to question 4, 5, and 6, are as above and should be answered as they are in the public interest.

Answer to question 10.


1. What are the terms and conditions of the licence granted?
2. Who was the licence granted to?
3 Name the individual who was granted the licence?
4. Under what circumstances are such licences granted?
5. Which Liverpool City Council department granted the licence
6. Which Liverpool City employee or agent granted the licence.

Answer to question 11.


The council marketed the properties in 2015.
1. When?
2. How?
3 Under what terms?
4. What were the council’s requirements and expectations?
5. How many tenders received?
6. What was the difference between winning (TEG), and next best bid?
7. Provide all copies of all documents and records of how that decision was made.

Answer to question 13.


1. How was the local community consulted?
2. Who was the director of regeneration at the time?

Answer to question 16.


1. Provide all documentary records and minutes from Ann O’Byrne in regard to her input and reasons for her decisions in the sale of said properties.

Answer to question 31.


What is the reason no council tax is payable on the said property?

Answer to question 32 and 33.


Enclosures on The Elliot Group Website.

Answer to question 34.


Why is The Elliot Group the only contractor involved?

Answer to question 35.


The Elliot Group does, either expressly or by inference, portray themselves as the legal owners of the said property.

Answers to questions 40 and 41.


The answer is in the public interest.

Answer to question 43.


Why don’t the council hold such information on Councillor Ann O’Byrne?
She is an elected council official, who claims expenses at public cost.
She must be accountable for her time. She is accountable to the council tax payers of the city of Liverpool.

Answer to question 44.


As above.

Answer to question 45.


What were the appropriate checks that the council undertook?

Answer to question 47.


Why don’t the council hold such information, all Liverpool City Council employees’ receive payment of salary and councillors receive exspenses, they are accountable to the council tax payers of the city, and thus they have a duty of care to them.

Yours faithfully,

Li Lee HK buyers

Regeneration and Employment, Liverpool City Council

1 Attachment

Information request
Our reference: 557377

Dear Regeneration and Employment,

I still am awaiting your reply.
Yours sincerely,

Li Lee HK buyers

Information Requests, Liverpool City Council

2 Attachments

Dear Mr Lee


Please see attached response to your FOI Request as submitted to Liverpool
City Council. Our apologies for the delay, which has been necessitated in
view of the scale and extent of the questions raised in the multiple
requests you made.




Information Team


Information Requests

Liverpool City Council

[1][email address]

[2]LCC auto signature (2)


show quoted sections


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

We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are Li Lee HK buyers please sign in and let everyone know.