Capita Contract Review - not the Secret one

1.      Details of the council’s formal Capita CSG contract review process can be found here:

2.      For more information about the council’s working group meetings being held in secret see this link and this one

For more information contact Cllr Geof Cooke: cllr.g.cooke@barnet.gov.uk

Watching and waiting

There is a lot of talk by motorists of a 5 minutes grace period before they should be given a parking ticket. This is an urban myth which still reaches PATAS quite often.

Mr Mustard does sometimes use observation periods as part of his usually multiple representations but only when NSL's traffic wardens have failed to follow the observations periods set out in the Contract as after all what's the point in there being a specification if it isn't enforced. He hasn't yet had a case turn on this at PATAS but doubtless one day this will be his only argument and he will be ready for it. The council are under a general duty to be fair which they aren't if they allow their contractor to breach the contract and they, the council, profit by it.

The contraventions with observations times are these ones (as written in the contract, the PCN wording might be different as they change a little over time) and if your contravention isn't listed that means a PCN can and will be issued instantly.

On street

5. Parked after the expiry of paid for time - 5 mins

11. Payment without payment of the parking charge - 3 mins

19. Parked in a residents or shared use parking place or zone without clearly displaying either a permit or voucher or pay and display ticket for that place - 3 mins

25. Parked in a loading place during restricted hours without loading - 5 mins*

(* depends on vehicle class so cars will get less observation than commercial vehicles.)

30. Parked for longer than permitted - 5 mins 

Off street

73. Parked without payment of the parking charge - 3 mins

80. Parked for longer than the maximum period permitted - 5 mins

82. Parked after the expiry of paid for time - 5 mins

85. Parked in a permit bay without clearly displaying a valid permit - 5 minutes

Every other codes will pretty much lead to an instant PCN except (in theory) commercial vehicles unloading on a single or double yellow (code 01) which have an untimed observation period set in the contract.

So, don't argue that you only nipped into the newsagents for 5 minutes to buy a newspaper whilst on double yellow as you will lose. Find other arguments or learn a lesson, pay the 50% and make sure you don't get caught again, by following the rules. Parking on single or double yellows is a higher rate contravention which in Barnet costs you £110. If you accidentally break the rules it is better to break a lower rate contravention at £60 such as overstaying the paid for time, or without paying at all, or parking in a residents bay.

For a sense of scale Mr Mustard checked the numbers of PCN which should have been subject to a period of observation. There were 168,179 PCN issued in the year to 31 March 13 and the number issued for the above codes was 45,746 so 27% of PCN are issued after an observation period (which often isn't given) and 73% aren't. You have been warned.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Be a blogger's assistant

Bloggers lead busy lives. They have a huge capacity for work and would like to read all 2,084 pages of the Capita contract for NSCSO but, recognising that another contract is to follow shortly for the DRS joint venture contract, they think it best to spread the load, which is where you come in.

Here are the sections of the contract (items in blue underlining are the links to the documents:

List of Documents Relating NSCSO Contract

1 NSCSO Contract

1.1 Contract Overview

1.2 Contract Document

1.3 Contract Schedules

2 Output Specifications

2.1 Corporate Programmes

2.2 Customer Services

2.3 Estates

2.4 Finance

2.5 Human Resources

2.6 Information Systems

2.7 Procurement (Mr Mustard will read this section)

2.8 Revenues and Benefit

3 Service Delivery Plans

3.1 Corporate Programmes Method Statement

3.2 Customer Services Method Statement

3.3 Estates Method Statement

3.4 Finance Method Statement

3.5 Human Resources Method Statement

3.6 Information Systems Method Statement

3.7 Procurement Method Statement (Mr Mustard will read this section)

3.8 Revenues and Benefit Method Statement

3.9 Enterprise Wide Insight Method Statement

3.10 Schools Method Statement

3.11 Traded Services to Schools

3.12 Transformation Method Statement

3.13 Detailed Transformation Plan

3.14 Transition Method Statement

3.15 Transition Plan

4 Price and Performance Mechanism

4.1 Payment Mechanism

4.2 Payment Mechanism Appendices

5 Service Provider Commitments

5.1 Service Provider Schedule of Commitments

Decide what you fancy reading and send Mr Mustard an email so that he knows who is reading what. Give yourself a code name (as silly as you like) and your name will be appended to the relevant item(s) above so others know what has already been bagged. Then read the items at your leisure, there really isn't a rush as we are in theory stuck with this arrangement for 10 years, although judging by this blog post by Mrs Angry, realisation has dawned that Barnet isn't just any council and has more involved, incisive and knowledgeable residents than most of the country. An opportunity for an early exit will begin to look attractive after several more encounters with the public. 

Once you have read the chosen item please send an email to Mr Mustard who will forward it to the other bloggers. Tell us what you have found that you don't like or is of public interest or against the interests of residents. It might end up in a question at a council committee meeting, in a blog or saved up for future use.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Not the retiring type

New schools, like Colindale, can only be built if we all pay proper taxes

Let Mr Mustard say straight away that he has been told that Ieuan Renowden is a good chap. It looks like he has got in with bad company though.

Executive summary:

There is another "consultant" not paying PAYE

You can take early retirement and then come straight back to work as a consultant.

There is no need to bother with tiresome paperwork like contracts in Barnet Council.

Consultants can set their own charge rate.

Tax dodging is endemic at Barnet Council.

---

Until about 2005 Mr Renowden was the Head of Colindale Junior School. Then he became a Learning Network Inspector and must have been on the council payroll (Mr Mustard does not know if he was simply a shoe-in or if an advertisement and true competition was necessary).

In School Circular #25 of 26 March 2008 it was announced that "Mr Renowden, the Learning Network Inspector for the West will be taking early retirement at the end of this academic year" i.e. in July 2008. He was only 58 at that time so that would be early retirement, if he had stopped working. He took the summer holidays off. His pay at that time would have been in the range of £59,155 to £65,276. The range is now £60,781 to £67,071 (Soulbury Scales 27-33)

So what happened next. Take a look at these payments to IJR Associates Ltd , whose Director is one Ieuan Renowden. Someone at Barnet Council might have put him up to the idea of using a Limited company. For some reason these payments have not been re-routed through Hays from April 11.

Date	Paid £	Service Provided
11/11/2008	6,750	consutancy Oct to Dec 2008
04/12/2008	5,400
08/01/2009	5,850
10/02/2009	1,800	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring, spring 2009
10/02/2009	1,800	consultancy - cover, Learning network Inspector
20/02/2009	1,600	Interim management of Early Years Capital grant
09/03/2009	1,350	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring, spring 2009
09/03/2009	1,350	consultancy - cover, Learning network Inspector
12/03/2009	1,200	Management of Early Years Capital grant
03/04/2009	1,800	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring, spring 2009
03/04/2009	1,800	consultancy - cover, Learning network Inspector
09/04/2009	2,000	Interim management of Early Years Capital grant
11/05/2009	450	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring
11/05/2009	2,700
22/06/2009	4,500
07/07/2009	5,400
22/07/2009	4,050
05/10/2009	5,850	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring
05/11/2009	4,950
01/12/2009	5,400
08/01/2010	4,050
12/02/2010	5,400	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring
03/03/2010	5,400
07/04/2010	6,300
10/05/2010	2,700	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring
02/06/2010	5,400
02/07/2010	5,850
28/07/2010	4,950
04/10/2010	6,300
09/11/2010	4,500
03/12/2010	5,400
11/01/2011	4,050
11/02/2011	5,400
15/03/2011	4,050
13/04/2011	6,300
11/05/2011	3,150	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring, Summer 2011
03/06/2011	5,400
05/07/2011	4,950
02/09/2011	2,700
02/09/2011	1,800	DfE grant for 1 to 1 tuition programme, Local Authority management and monitoring, July 2011
Total	160,050

The daily rate appears to be £450 and using the 195 day school year this would lead to annual payments of £87,750.

Can a consultant really be employed for 3 years on what looks like a pretty constant basis, i.e. like an employee, without them being on the payroll. The problem here is that for part of the time at least Mr Renowden was doing his old job of Network Learning Inspector so if he was on PAYE doing that job in 2007 then he should have been paying PAYE when doing it in for 3 months in 2009 and so Barnet Council are at fault. The length of time that you are doing the job is irrelevant, it is a question of if you are acting as an employee and clearly he was when he was a NLI. Here are the Accounts of IJR.

Accounts of IJR Associates Ltd

If you are wondering what has happened since the payments stopped the answer is on a different blog, here. If you don't want people to know your business then don't put anything on the internet. Mr Mustard will be looking out for more payments to you in the future, once you have come back from around the world, Mr Renowden and he hopes he won't find any.

Normally when consultants are being employed on a doubtful tax basis there is an indemnity in the contract (there is one in the Jacquie McGeachie contract, for example, although it is badly worded) so that the council can recover any tax it ultimately has to pay on behalf of the "consultant". Is there such a clause in the contract with Mr Renowden? No, there isn't. Why is that? It is because a contract does not exist. That is correct. Another £160,000 paid out without any contract whatsoever. Disgraceful. This missing contract did not get picked up in the review of procurement presented to the Audit Committee on 6 September 2011. How many others were missed?

If you are aware of any other Barnet Council or ex school ex-employees retiring or being made redundant and then coming back fairly quickly as consultants please do send the details to Mr Mustard. Your identity will not be disclosed (if in doubt create a gmail address just for this communication).

The BBC have been looking at Town Hall Tax Dodgers and report that there might be 100 across all local authorities. They are being very cautious for some reason. There are 33 London councils who will probably account for 1,000 on their own. Mr Mustard has identified several so far in Barnet alone and there are more to come from his records. No dodger is safe.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Will the Parking Contract Award be appealed?

"It's not cricket" is the cry to be heard at football stadia around Barnet!

Barnet Council don't have a good reputation in procurement for sticking to the rules very well and so there is every chance that somewhere in the award of the parking contract they will have fallen foul of EU guidelines or their own procedures. Here is the paperwork which was presented to the Cabinet Resources Committee on 14 December 2011 and following which a vote was taken to award the contract to NSL whose numerous failings can be read about on the internet.

Barnet Council Award of Parking Contract

We are now in the "Alcatel" period which is a standstill period of 10 days to allow time for an appeal to be launched. It saves time and money to give the losers time to stop and think and avoids a council wasting time and money getting going with the new provider and then see the award overturned.

Barnet Council are so coy about the names.

Let Mr Mustard see if he can take some lucky guesses at who Companies A, C & D are for you.

APCOA must be in the running and sound like Company C. They operate parking enforcement for loads of authorities and so patently can do the job. Mr Mustard expects they will appeal on the grounds of lack of objective scoring.

Company A looks like it might be Mouchel who came first in the scoring at the PQQ stage, 8 points ahead of NSl and magically dropped to second and 4 points behind NSL in the final round of scoring. Either scoring isn't consistent or something funny has gone on. Now Mouchel do have some financial woes but as long as they don't touch client monies and are paid at least a month in arrears they could still be used as replacing them would be easily achieved should they go under. They do have form for appealing, against Westminster Council's parking contract award, and so hopefully they will flex their muscles here in Barnet.

Company D is clearly On Time Parking whose cheerful operator rescued Mr Mustard's broken down motor from the side of the road once many years ago. They are local which is good and keeps the jobs locally. They might well have proved to be the wisest choice. A growing local company keen to impress. Mr Mustard is uncertain as to whether they will put the money into an appeal but it might be a worthwhile investment to help them break further into the market. Big money is available in fees for the successful operator. Hammersmith, Haringey and Fulham boroughs already use them.

We will know the answer in the next 10 days. Howzat!

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

RM = Ready Money

When Mr Mustard saw the Delegated Powers Report had been issued to remove 408 parking meters at £128 a time and put up new high posts to replace low ones at the same time, at a total cost of £81,000 he thought the cost was a bit steep. All you have to do is disconnect them, pull them out of the ground using a lorry mounted grab and concrete over the hole. It won't take long per machine.

Mr Mustard saw that the winning tender came from a company called RM Countryside Ltd. Lucky them, thought Mr Mustard, let's see what else they have done because he hadn't really noticed them much before.

So he sent in a FOI request for copies of all invoices since 1 April 2010 as he thought there would be a dozen or two. Mr Mustard was way out and so instead he settled for the 20 largest and a list of all invoices as far back as it went.

At this stage Mr Mustard would like to thank two of the management accountants who handled his enquiries promptly & courteously. Mr Mustard hasn't name checked you as you are doubtless not "senior staff" but as you know who are you are, you can have your names added into the blog if you want. The Information Commissioner surmised that Mr Mustard has a low opinion of Barnet Council staff but that is not true; he is frequently helped by non-senior officers. It is the overpaid and under-inspiring management who Mr Mustard has a low opinion of and here is why.

So in the box below are 6 years worth of invoices issued by RM Countryside to Barnet Council. It might take you a while to scroll through these as there are 2,800 invoices worth £2.6million. Strike a light!

RM Countryside All Transactions

This is over £1,000,000 more than was paid to MetPro without a contract or proper checking. Let us hope that all of this work has been properly tendered for and recorded in writing and, parking meter removal aside, isn't just a case of someone ringing up RM and asking them to do the job and send in an invoice, like on MetPro.

Mr Mustard wonders if EU regulations might apply to this work as it is over the approx £150,000 threshold and if so has the appropriate advertisement been placed. He doesn't remember seeing any for the types of work undertaken by RM or adverts in the local paper.  The MetPro contract wasn't advertised in the OJEU.

Mr Mustard does remember seeing a list of contracts on the Barnet Council website that they put out of all contracts at April 2011. Can you find RM on there in the box below? Mr Mustard can't. paid £2m and not contract. Do you feel a sense of deja vu? MetPro.

Contracts Disclosed at April 11 by Barnet Council under FOI

Mr Mustard is given to understand that one of the Directors of RM worked in the old direct works departments of the council and then started the company after he left. Do you suppose he still has his feet under the table? Is he at an unfair advantage because of this? Shouldn't the council be especially careful to show that there hasn't been any favouritism?

One of Mr Mustard's FOI questions was sent in order to obtain a list of companies that are allowed to use the council logo. MetPro had been using it without permission. Guess what? RM Countryside use it on their website. Is their name on the list of companies who have permission?  no it isn't. Another MetPro parallel.

No firm should get more than 25% of their work from the council in order that a culture of dependence does not arise and so that if the council stop the work it does not cause failure and problems of unfinished work for the council. The council have admitted that basically they don't know what percentage of RM Countryside's work comes from the council; they rather quaintly said to Mr Mustard "I think this is a valid concern". I can tell the council that the vast majority of RM Countryside's work comes from the council. How? It is a rule of the vat office that invoice numbers are issued in number order. If you go to 2011 and look at the invoice numbers of RM in the left hand column there simply aren't many gaps. So Barnet Council had the answer in front of them but didn't notice and have no system.

Why is the Commercial Director, responsible for procurement, Craig Cooper paid £132,480 a year? The Audit Committee are meeting this Thursday at 7pm at Hendon Town Hall. He is presenting the results of the Procurement Action Plan which says that procurement is now fab ( a translation from councilspeak  ). What a complete travesty of a report. He is going to be questioned about it. Better make up some good answers Mr Cooper. I think one of Mr Mustard's questions will be "Do you know what you are doing?" Sadly, he already knows the answer.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

FOI 1043 - CCMPS

Let us continue with Mr Mustard's FOI requests.

This was another very simple request, for just one item, and look what a meal the council made of it. This table records the various steps that had to be taken.

Summary of steps taken on FOI 1043
Step	Date	From	To	What ?
1	13-Jun	Mr M	foi@barnet	Request for copy CCMPS contract
2	14-Jun	LBB	Mr M	Acknowledgement
3	23-Jul	Mr M	LBB	Reminder to reply
4	23-Jul	LBB	Mr M	Out of office
5	23-Jul	Mr M	foi@barnet	Reminder to reply
6	08-Aug	LBB	Mr M	Answer promised for 22 August
7	18-Aug	Mr M	LBB	Expressing dismay at time to reply
8	18-Aug	LBB	Mr M	Out of office
9	22-Aug	LBB	Mr M	Reply received - sort of
10	22-Aug	Mr M	LBB	Queries reply received
11	22-Aug	LBB	Mr M	Acknowledgement
12	20-Sep	LBB	Mr M	Further reply with DPR & Order

So what did Mr Mustard want to see - a copy of the contract for the services of Chris Malyon, the Assistant Director of something or other, oh yes, that's it, the AD of Commercial Services, previously of Capita ( what's that Mrs Angry - conflict of interest during a period of intensive outsourcing activity - possibly if only accidentally - old school tie and all that ). Mr Mustard has just noticed that Mr Malyon called himself the AD of Commercial Services but the council's paperwork says he was the AD of Commercial Assurance - what hope if there when an AD can't even get his own job title correct?

Mr Mustard always thinks that he will get his simple requests, like this one, answered by return of post, but he never does.

Step 1 : Mr Mustard asked for an unredacted copy of the contract as he knew that the daily pay rate was £650. Given the huge number of consultants at Barnet Council he thought that there would be a "fill in the gaps" contract and he would simply be sent a copy of it. Too easy!

Step 2 : Usually an acknowledgement gets issued within a day or two.

Step 3 : As the reply was overdue Mr Mustard sent a polite reminder. It said "Dear FOI, This reply is overdue, yours sincerely"

Step 4 : Mr Mustard received a reply by return. Unfortunately it was an out-of office reply. Here it is  ( Mr Mustard has decided to spare the blushes of the procurement manager involved by not using their name but their performance has been dismal - only a 2/10 )

I will be out of the office on annual leave 25 July to 5 August 2011. I will not be able to access emails during this time but will respond/action asap thereafter.

Should you have a clarification relating to Dollis Valley Regeneration please forward this to barnet@4projectsmail.com copying dollisvalleyregencd@barnet.gov.uk.

If you have a clarification regarding Granville Road NW2 please forward this to granville.road@barnet.gov.uk

If your query relates to procurement please forward this to 
Colin Attree email: colin.attree@barnet.gov.uk 020 8359 7194 or 
Martyn Carter email: martyn.carter@barnet.gov.uk 020 8359 7267 or 
Nasreen Tayab email: nasreen.tayab@barnet.gov.uk 020 8359 3367 or 
Nadeem Ghani email: nadeem.ghani@barnet.gov.uk 020 8359 4558 or 
Caroline Pereira email: caroline.pereria@barnet.gov.uk 020 8359 7057

If your query relates to FOI - then tough ( Mr Mustard's addition to the response !).

Mr Mustard used to lead a team of 15 staff. He would never let them just set the out-of-office and expect the customer to do the running around. What should happen in a well run office? another staff member should have access to your emails and forward them on to whoever is delegated to answer them during your absence. This employee was away for 10 days. Barnet Council have a target that 85% of correspondence is to be answered within 10 days - this target is often missed and no wonder.

Step 5 : Mr Mustard simply resent the email, that was to a named contact, to the FOI department.

Step 6 : Mr Mustard wonders if there is a game that Barnet Council plays - "Who can get the most withering email from Mr Mustard" - Mr Mustard predicts that Cllr Thomas might well win next week ( for 2011 anyway ). This is the ridiculous reply that Mr Mustard received ( please consider that a proper response was already well overdue ) and which he has annotated in red

I have returned from annual leave today ( lucky you ) and note receipt of your follow-up email. As I do not hold this information ( I am not responsible ) and, as mentioned in my earlier email have a co-ordinating role in obtaining the information you request ( don't blame me for council incompetence, I am only a procurement manager), I will highlight that your request is now overdue and requires prompt attention ( Mr Mustard had already done that to foi@barnet.gov.uk and they did zilch ). Please be advised that it is estimated that information will be available for 22 August 2011 ( do you every get really mad when people write stupid things to you? ) this estimation has been based on overlapping annual leave commitments ( there is no commitment to service to the council tax payer ) if it is available earlier it will be released prior to that date. ( It is more likely that Cllr Brian Coleman will start catching the bus to council meetings ).

Step 7 : 10 days later, he was busy, Mr Mustard expressed his disappointment!

I am disappointed by your email of 8 August 2011.

You do not say which entire department is on holiday such that the 2 minute job of providing this contract, which I requested on 13 June, cannot be fulfilled.

Barnet Council per se does not go on holiday. It is the duty of Barnet Council to answer all requests promptly and within 20 working days. Barnet Council has already been on the watch list of the Information Commissioner in 2010 and it would appear that the council did not learn much from that episode.

I have not raised a formal complaint with the Information Commissioner but have sent them a copy of this email so that they can see the lack of dedication to dealing with even the most simple of requests.

Which was a much milder email than Mr Mustard had every right to send ( The Right Honourable Eric Pickles MP said that Mrs Angry had every right to be angry; if you should happen to bump into Cllr Thomas, Uncle Eric, could you give him a nudge in the right direction i.e. away from blabbing rubbish to the local papers and instead get him to sort out the council - thank you ) 

Step 8 : Mr Mustard received another out of office. Procurement has been a complete disaster ( MetPro didn't have a contract but did have £1.6m of our money for those who don't know ). Mr Mustard wonders if that is at all related to the managers seeming to be on one big holiday.

Step 9 : 22 August, as promised; better late than never.

Further to the email of 8 August 2011 please find attached the information which you requested in your earlier email of 13 June 2011. I am in receipt of your email of 18 August 2011 the contents of which are noted. ( I have noted = I have done nothing )

The information was an out of focus signed contract and a blank of what was supposed to be the same contract.

click to enlarge - back to return

So this is a contract between CCMPS & Hays, and there is a separate contract between Hays and Barnet Council which includes all consultants ( Mr Mustard has not yet asked to see this but probably will now )

Click on this contract to enlarge it and at the top right you will see that the imprint date is 01-10

 

On this page you see the date of signature of 23 May 2011. According to his linked-in page Mr Malyon started at Barnet in November 10 and yet the Delegated Powers Report to authorise his role was only signed on 15 February 2011. All very odd.

With his usual eye for detail Mr Mustard noticed that the imprint date on the blank contract was a different one ( 06/11 ) to the one on the signed version. Oh dear, completely irrelevant then and necessary to have the correct version. Evidently the un-named procurement manager didn't check it before sending it out as fact.

Looking at the sub paragraphs which start with a 2 there are 9 of them and on the signed version there are 10 sub-paragraphs starting with a 2.

At this point Mr Mustard would like to point out that the escalating time cost of answering this FOI request, which should have taken 2 minutes, was entirely caused by Barnet Council's labyrinthine & incompetent administrative machinations.

Anyway, faced with inconsistency Mr Mustard wrote again ( in case Barnet Council think they can bore Mr Mustard to death then please remember that his alter ego a debt collector and it was once necessary for him in his professional life to make over 150 phone calls on a certain subject to get the answer - he is not going to be put off by amateurish attempts to frustrate due process ) as follows:-

Step 10:

Thank you for your email of today.

I note that the signed Contract you have sent me has a version date at the top of 01-10 and the blank contract that you have supplied is the 06/11 version and so must be different. Please supply a clear copy of the 01-10 version.

I also note that the contract is dated 23 May 2011 and I see from the list of payments over £500 that payments were made to CCMPS in February 2011.

Was there a written contract which covered the period from February to May 2011?

If not, please say so.

if there was please provide a copy of the signed contract.

What fee is/was paid to Hays Specialist Recruitment Ltd in respect of the Contract(s) with CCMPS Ltd

Step  11 : another acknowledgement.

Thank you for your request received by us on 22 August 2011

This request has been raised with officers that hold information and/or response that you request. You are entitled to a prompt response which in any event should be sent within 20 working days from the date of receipt.

This response brought to mind the game that he sometimes sees on TV "The Million Pound Drop" whereby a confident contestant can "stop the clock". Barnet Council employees play their own version, where they try to waste a million pounds on wrong answers to FOI responses and they"start the clock" to get the 20 days running again. It was entirely wrong of you Procurement Manager ( you have done nothing for the reputation of the disgraced procurement section - Captain Cooper will be waving the ceremonial sword in your direction ) to start the 20 days off again as Mr Mustard had not asked a new question. He correctly queried that your earlier answer was incorrect. You should have been falling over yourself in your haste to correct a wrong answer.

Step 12 : The answers arrive.

Thank you for your request received by us on 22 August 2011 for the following information:Thank you for your email of today.

I note that the signed Contract you have sent me has a version date at the top of 01-10 and the blank contract that you have supplied is the 06/11 version and so must be different. Please supply a clear copy of the 01-10 version. We have been informed that the 06/11 version is the same as the 01-10 version, the version supplied was the clearest available.

 

I also note that the contract is dated 23 May 2011 and I see from the list of payments over £500 that payments were made to CCMPS in February 2011.

Was there a written contract which covered the period from February to May 2011? If not, please say so These payments were covered by Purchase Order 4400160882 purchase orders are a form of contract. Copy of purchase order attached for information. Authorisation for value of Purchase Order was provided by copy DPR attached for information.

if there was please provide a copy of the signed contract. As stated Purchase Order 4400160882 is a form of contract

What fee is/was paid to Hays Specialist Recruitment Ltd in respect of the Contract(s) with CCMPS Ltd The Hays charge for CCMPS, is £25.00 per timesheet. Timesheets are done on a weekly basis.

You may have been informed that the 06/11 version is the same as the 01-10 version but is it? Anyone who knows anything knows that at reprint time if changes are made the date is changed, otherwise the document is reprinted with the old date. Also if you had compared the two documents then you would have seen they were different, are you sure you are good enough to be a procurement manager, or did you just not care about your reply? 

"Purchase orders are a form of Contract". How very unamusing. Many man hours have been spent on the Procurement Action Plan, including by the Audit Committee. Action 2 says "Formal written contracts should be established for all services commissioned by the Council as required by the Contract procedure Rules." The task set was "Put in place contracts for all current spend for all vendors where spend exceeds £25k and no contract currently in place". The PAP doesn't say "a late issued purchase order will do the job of a contract nicely." The report to the Audit Committee of 6 September 2011, contributed to by Crapitain Cooper. Commercial Director and Mick Stokes, Assistant Director of Commercial Assurance, assured the committee that "For the purposes of preparing the corporate contracts register, the highest threshold test has been used to define a compliant contract: a contract that is signed/sealed by both parties is in existence and its location is known and it is available for scrutiny." Obviously back in February, before the pretty poor procurement practices were thrust into the spotlight by MetPro, things were different and a purchase order was better than no paperwork at all.

You need to study this DPR next ( you might want to print this entire post out to study it, see the icon at the bottom of the page )

as ever, click to enlarge; back to return

So this DPR was authorised on 15 February 2011 and yet somehow CCMPS were paid on 2 February 2011. The cart came before the horse, and before Crapitain Cooper's Ford Cortina!

Look at the Full Year Cost ( including on-cost ) that an employee would cost - £119,560 to £130,300 which makes one think that this is all that this DPR is sanctioning. Not so, we were so fortunate to get this bloke for 20% less than the agency rate, at the very unreasonable rate of £650 a day. So if we assume 220 days will be worked in a year ( 260 less 10 bank holidays and 25 days holiday less a few other odd days ) then the cost would be £143,000 which is quite a lot more than the salary scale. If you look now at the purchase order above it is for £145,000 so rather than being cheaper than an employee, he was much more expensive.

There are still some worrying aspects to this rigmarole.

Go back and take a look at the signed contract. It says "Generated by CamScanner from intsig.com"  which means that someone used an iPhone, or similar, to scan this document. If council staff, or Hays staff, are going around scanning documents using their phones ( no wonder it is such a poor scan ) then that leaves a great big hole in data protection at the council ( Mr Mustard wonders if the AD of Audit & Risk Management reads the blog ? you should read them all Mary-Ellen so you find out what is going on at the council - we are your free armchair auditors ). Barnet Council spent £202,000 on scanning software ( Wisdom EDMRS ) and has 5 scanners that each cost over £2,000 and so instead of using them some genius thinks he/she will take an out of focus picture with his/her mobile phone.

Why are Hays being paid £25 per week to process and pay the timesheets? Seems like an extra administrative step that isn't needed and isn't worth £1,000 p.a. 

So Cllr Thomas what do you think of that little lot? A lot more questions than answers and some doubtful dealings. Maybe you might like to spend your time finding out what goes on in the Council rather than moaning to the local paper about armchair auditors? 

If you haven't had enough yet there is lots more to come.

Send Mr Mustard your apology as soon as you like.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard