The trolley dash - May Gurney style

head of oppo removed to protect the guilty

Have May Gurney decided to cut out the middleman between the supermarket (that looks like a Waitrose trolley, I do hope it hasn't been stolen, Waitrose don't sell their trolleys do they?) and our recycling?

The whole point of residents separating the items into different boxes is to speed up the sorting at the kerbside. This operative has decided to amend the system and tips the contents of numerous blue and black boxes into the Waitrose trolley (some of it is bound to end up on the road) and then push that to the lorry (a further photograph was taken which shows this). 

If that is a better system then May Gurney should introduce it with proper wheeled containers for their oppos to use and not beg, borrow or steal a Waitrose trolley. Recently the local branch purchased a large batch of trolleys at great expense. Within the month half of them had gone walkabout. We all pay for that loss on the cost of our shopping (whichever supermarket you shop at as all suffer trolley abuse to one degree or another).

Loose trolleys are also prone to running into cars and causing damage.

Is anyone at Barnet Council monitoring May Gurney? or are they being left to self monitor in One Barnet fashion which doesn't work. That leads to maverick behaviour.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

The May Gurney slalom course

Winter is coming (sorry) and you will be able to practice your slalom technique on the course that May Gurney are preparing on every pavement in Barnet. Here are two photographs taken near Mustard Mansions yesterday, one by Mr Mustard and one by a friend who lives a little way up the street.

Caught in the non-act

looking the other way; standard May Gurney operating procedure

What chance does a blind person stand, someone in a wheelchair, a double pushchair or even a single, the postman, the meter reader, elderly or disabled members of the public? This sort of stupidity should be stopped. Before May Gurney arrived all of those bins were in the front gardens of the houses.

Mr Mustard tweeted those photographs and a Brunswick Park resident sent him a message:

Hi,

Saw your twitter picture this morning about the May Gurney recycling collections and it reminded me that I've been wanting to rant for a while. (Mr Mustard loves a good rant)

Several months ago, all was well with our recycling collections - we put stuff out in the proper boxes, it was collected. Then something changed - we noticed that a lot of the recycled plastic was suddenly being left behind rather than taken away. I checked carefully, and everything left was properly stamped with the recycleable logo. I carried on leaving stuff out, and it kept being ignored.

Finally, I caught the collectors one week, and tackled them on it. In poor English they tried to explain that they couldn't take the plastic as it was 'the wrong shape'! Apparently, they can now only recycled plastic if it's shaped like a bottle.. words fail me. I was handed a small (May Gurney branded) sheet that explained what could and couldn't be recycled, explaining that only plastic 'bottles' can be taken.

I can understand restrictions on what can be recycled - some plastics are not recyclable. But never have I heard of restrictions being based upon 'shape'.

As I assume our waste has a value to the recycling company (and hence to the Council in terms of contract value?) I just cannot understand why a green policy isn't being followed here.

I thought you might like to highlight this absurd policy on your website as I'm sure many people would be surprised know that money is being thrown away in this manner. Delighted to assist.

Regards,

Now Mr Mustard does believe that the "leader" of the council Richard Cornelius has gone into print saying that no-one has really noticed that recycling has been outsourced. Poppycock Richard, it is just that most people can't get the energy up (unlike Mr Mustard) to complain especially when it is a case of the wrong shaped plastic (could you make it up, is it like that in CWAC quack land?)

Mr Mustard went off and checked the Barnet Council website and it does indeed say bottle shaped plastic only. Did it always say that, Mr Mustard wasn't sure and then he remembered the short hammy film "starring" Cllr Harper. Here it is all over again, luckily only 1m55s.

So there we are, nothing sinister going on and it has only ever been plastic bottles that can be recycled and as it happens the price of plastic has plummeted recently. Why you can't put out other plastic which has a logo on it showing that it can be recycled is one of those eternal mysteries. When we get the new wheelie bin for co-mingled waste things will be different? (they will because no-one will be able to see what is at the bottom of your bin!).

Now back to the main event of May Gurney very dangerously leaving the bins on the pavement. What Mr Mustard wants to know is whether Richard Cornelius doesn't know the service is cr*p because

a. he goes around with his eyes shut

b. he believes the officers who tell him things are hunky-dory

c. he doesn't care

d. he believes everything he himself says

e. the contract comes to an end soon and no-one can be bothered with it

f. he doesn't want to have to question the current One Barnet outsourcing plans based on past factual failures

g. his newspaper columns are ghost written

h. any non libellous idea you may have

May Gurney must be doing that self-monitoring nonsense which is going to be the way of the monster One Barnet contracts as only a thin client will remain who don't have enough time to do the job properly.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Bye bye black box, will we ever meet again?

Now this is a really boring post. A video of a black box being taken away and not returned; will this become a youtube sensation? No!

For some reason the cttv at Mustard Mansions replays at double speed and then when uploading to youtube it got doubled again. You can guess that the May Gurney operatives don't move faster than Usain Bolt but they have bolted with the Mr Mustard black box which is, he thinks, numbered and so it might yet return.

Why has Mr Mustard posted this boring blog? To show Cllr Richard Cornelius that those words he spouted about their being no problems with the outsourced recycling contract are poppycock. The bins are always going for a walk although they usually turn up again at some point.

You will note that Mr Mustard didn't put out his blue box and he will put everything in that box now. Why? May Gurney often tip one box into the other one when they are not full so he is saving them the task. At some point in the next year or so we are getting a new wheeled bin to replace the boxes so until then Mr Mustard will make do with one.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Outsourced recycling isn't pedalling hard enough

Mr Mustard's road is Big Society in action. When it comes to council matters it is well known that knocking on Mr Mustard's door for tea and a chat is the best option. In the last 2 weeks both Mr Mustard and a close neighbour have had trouble with recycling by May Gurney and the council - they are about as much use as a chocolate teapot.

So here is what my neighbour sent to Barnet Council

---

Date: Wed, Sep 28, 2011

Subject: Consistently inefficient service given by recycling firm.

To: first.contact@barnet.gov.uk

Dear Sir/Madam

Our recycling bin was not emptied yesterday even though it was placed next to the opening to the front garden.

I would also like to take this opportunity to point out that I could write on a weekly basis concerning the very poor service given by your refuse collectors, if I could spare the time.

On a weekly basis:

1.    The recycling bin & lid are chucked into the front garden, sometimes onto the flower beds.

2.    The green bin is more often than not left just within the entrance to the front garden    obscuring access for the postman, visitors, etc.

3.    The normal rubbish bin is often left on the street.  On the occasion that the green bin is left in the entrance to the front garden the rubbish men do not empty the grey rubbish bin - as you know ************ Road has very small front gardens & it would not cause any difficulty for the rubbish collectors to move the green bin to access the grey one.

It is my understanding that it is illegal to obstruct the pavement with refuse bins.  Added to which the road is a busy thoroughfare to the High Street with many elderly people & parents with children using the street.

I have raised such issues before & it is apparent that your council officers do not regularly monitor the service given by the refuse collectors.

Yours faithfully,

---

Now if Mr Mustard was at the council he would tell May Gurney to pick her skirts up and get round to pick up the recycling on the same day. Did Barnet Council do that? no they didn't. This is their reply along with my neighbour's comment.

Just found this - why do I need a resumé of what I am supposed to do?????

---

Thank you for your email.

 

Your report of non collection of your recycling box(es) has been referred to May Gurney, who work in partnership with the council to provide the recycling services.

I have requested that your next scheduled collection is ensured. Please place your recycling box(es) on the boundary of your property by 7am.

Please note that all of the following items can be placed in the ‘Black Box’

• Glass bottles and jars (please rinse)
• Paper including Yellow Pages
• Shredded paper (please place this in a bag marked ‘shredded paper’)
• Car and household batteries
• Engine oil (in a sealed container)
• Mobile phones (please remove SIM card)
• Shoes (please place these in a bag to protect them)
• Textiles (please place these in a bag to protect them).

Please note that all of the following items can be placed in the ‘Blue Box’
 

• Plastic bottles (for example plastic milk bottles, shampoo bottles, washing up liquid bottles, please remove all bottle caps)

• Cardboard (please flatten boxes)
• Food tins and drinks cans (please rinse)
• Foil
• Aerosols (no spray paint cans or gas canisters).
• Tetra Pak cartons (please remove lids & flatten)

 

Please ensure you recycling boxes are presented on the boundary of your property by 7am.

Cardboard must be flattened and large pieces of cardboard must be ripped up to that they can fit in the blue box. If your blue box is full any additional cardboard can be tied in manageable bundles and left next to the blue box. Pieces in the bundle must be no bigger than the blue box. 

Other recyclables can be left in clearly labelled bags next to the boxes.

If you need to contact the council during this period regarding your enquiry, please quote your reference number [C.Reference]. For further assistance please do not hesitate to contact me or visit www.barnet.gov.uk

Thank you for your participation in recycling in Barnet.

Yours sincerely,

Gilbert Caspa
Customer Services Officer
Chief Executive Services

---

So the upshot of this email is:

May Gurney can't be bothered to come back and collect your recycling even though it is obviously what you want as otherwise you wouldn't have written.

"C.Reference" is not properly linked in the email.

May Gurney will try not to miss you again next week. 

Your box will of course be there by 7am as it is already there now.

Let's annoy you by telling you of the items that we have failed to collect this week. This is called preaching to the converted. Barnet Council are sanctimonious idiots.

Thank you for your participation! - a pity that Barnet Council don't participate enough.
For further assistance - but you haven't already been of assistance have you Mr GC?
Visit www.barnet.gov.uk - why, it's a useless site.

Chief Executive Services = Chief Executive's Service, presumably.

---

Now as it happens Mr Mustard received the same stupid email in response to his complaint and so he sent the following email which turned out to be a game changer.

Dear Mr Fielder 

Thank you for your email. What is the policy of the Council for dealing with missed blue/black box collections?

Yours sincerely 

because in response he received the following reply

Dear Mr Mustard

Thank you for your email which I am answering on behalf of my colleague Simon Fielder.

You will be aware that we have now been back and cleared your boxes. ( but only because I asked a pertinent question, a policy question - a question that I would not be allowed to ask at the Residents Forum - would you credit it! )

Our policy, where the crew are in the wrong (and they usually are), is to return ASAP to the clear the boxes assuming that the resident wishes us to do so. If the resident is happy to wait until the following week ( a question that you don't ask them but make the assumption for them ) then we will simply ensure that it gets collected without fail the next collection and thereafter. (  of course the crew are in the wrong, they failed to collect the boxes. Of course the resident wants them emptying, that's why he/she put the boxes out for collection and then chased you. Thereafter is a long time. The boxes will be missed again. )

We also have a supervisor’s checklist which we add “problem” addresses too. This means that a supervisor visits after the regular crew to check that the bins have been cleared or if there are not any problems. ( Mr Mustard would be very surprised if he wasn't a problem address & expects that the list is a long one - why not ask to be added? )

Kind Regards ( Kind regards, a bit over-familiar, Mr Mustard isn't one of your mates )

 

Paul Woodward

Recycling Assistant

Waste & Sustainability Team

Environment, Planning and Regeneration

---

So the conclusion which Mr Mustard reaches is that Barnet Council have decided that they won't bother going back to collect over-looked recycling unless the resident specifically asks for it.

My neighbour had to write again to the council and this is what she sent.

---

Dear Mr Gilbert

Thank you for responding to my email concerning the inefficient service we experience by the various refuse collection companies appointed by the Council.

I felt that your response was extremely inappropriate as it did not respond to the issues raised in my email quite apart from the fact that you did not have the courtesy to apologise that the recycling bin had not been emptied nor for the poor service we are consistently exposed to.

I did not require a list from you outlining what could & could not be collected.  I already have the Council's information concerning this as I believe recycling to be critical.

Please would you send me the name & contact details of the Director of the Council's Customer Services Department, by return.

Yours sincerely,  

---

Another unhappy resident. It's not difficult to collect recycling is it?

You know what to do residents. When your recycling is not collected, scream blue murder, or at least ask for it to be taken within 24 hours. It will be & if it isn't send another email to firstcontact@barnet.gov.uk and send an email every 24 hours until the problem is solved.

This is an example of how badly outsourced services are monitored. Very badly. What chance is there that the outsourcing of just about everything will be well done and properly monitored? none at all.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Laughing all the way to the recycling bank

This morning Mr Mustard is not his normal healthy yellow but red with rage. He is splutteringly mad with the overblown & incompetent management at Barnet Council. They want to negotiate extremely complex out-sourcing Contracts and yet Mr Mustard sees the mess they have made of a particularly easy one.

Now imagine you are a supplier who just has to collect a commodity from the doorsteps of residents every week and then sell it. The simplest of Contracts. The Contract sets out that you will be paid your costs of collection and then you get to share in some of the money made from selling off the collected items for which there are known markets at known market prices. What do you expect in the way of a bit of a bonus; 5% maybe or 10% would more than fairly compensate you as some £2.5m worth of goods are collected every year so even 5% would give you a bonus of £125,000 p.a..

And now Mr Mustard surmises that the negotiator for the supplier naturally started his negotiations with an unfeasibly high share fully expecting to be negotiated down to a reasonable amount ( he had after all been to Egypt on holiday and could barter with the best of them and he had also been on some training courses about negotiating ). When he named his opening figure he must have been completely shocked to find it accepted without demur.

So what is this Contract of which Mr Mustard speaks and what is the justification for the high percentage share paid to the supplier. This is what Barnet Council had to say:-

Barnet Council's Recycling Services contract with May Gurney allows for the sharing of income from the sale of recyclable materials collected from households, schools and recycling banks. This applies to all materials and not just to paper. ( It's good to share; well it is for May Gurney )

Within the contract, May Gurney retain the first £702,894.40 of income from the sale of materials. The annual contract price that the Council pays to May Gurney for providing the services is then reduced by the same amount. ( So put another way the first £702,894 of sales belongs to Barnet Council - that's us by the way - the Council Tax Payers )

50% of the income received by May Gurney for the sale of materials above this amount is paid to the Council, and May Gurney retains 50%. There are no specific tonnage targets, but the 50% share of income acts as an incentive to May Gurney to collect a greater tonnage of household materials for recycling, and to achieve the best price possible for these materials

The Council's share of income from the sale of materials in the year ending 31 March 2011 is to be finalised, but will be approximately £889,000. ( May Gurney will collect the same amount for no good reason that Mr Mustard can think of )

Now Mr Mustard is struggling with this concept. The incentive is that you get to keep 50% of what you collect above a certain amount. To incentivize you to get the best price you get free money. Paper is the most collected item and for that there is a market price which you can find at this link paper prices so May Gurney are not adding any value to what they are collecting. They should have been put under a duty in the Contract to get the best price and this should have been monitored by Barnet Council against publicly available data. It's not an incentive; it's a gift.

This Contract started on 1 September 2008 and is a 5 year Contract to 2013 with an option to extend for 2 more years. So if all 7 years have the same over generous payment to May Gurney that is £6million given away.

This Contract is one of the worst bargains for Council Tax Payers that Mr Mustard has yet seen. It is just shocking. And who signed this Contract ( it started with ECT Recycling CIC who May Gurney took over ) on behalf of Council Tax Payers. Firstly the then Mayor, Cllr John Marshall, who can be excused for relying on his Officers although I would advise the current Mayor to carefully read everything she is given because Mr Mustard thinks that with this example one shouldn't rely on the Officers.

The other signatory was Margaret Martinus, the Head of Legal who one would expect to scrutinise a Contract most carefully. I hope that she asked some difficult questions at the time but suspect that she just has to sign Contracts for which the terms have already been negotiated no matter how bad the terms are.

The trouble must have started earlier though. The proposal to award a Contract went to the Cabinet Resources Committee on 25 February 2008, although at that stage the final bidder had not been selected, and afterwards there was a challenge to the award and another meeting was held on 16 April 2008 to discuss this. Those papers are exempt from release to the public. I have put the papers for that meeting up as a page to the right of this blog.

How much blame attaches to Councillors for this bad bargain? The Chair was Mike Freer and Councillors were Finn, Hillan, Harper, Marshall & Offord. So only Cllrs. Finn, Harper & Marshall can easily be asked anything. However, unless they asked to see the background papers they would not have known what the tenders contained and would assume that the Officers could be left to drive a hard bargain.

The Officers who presented the report were :-

Mike Freestone, Director of Environment & Transport ( moved on )
Roger Jones, Chief Environmental Services Manager ( moved on )
Nicola Buck, Environmental Services Manager, Waste Strategy ( still at LBB )

and presumably they had all carefully studied the tenders but didn't think it worth mentioning in the report they presented to Council that there was this 50% bonus for one of the Contractors. Mr Mustard is going to have to do some research to see when these documents might become public as he thinks they will be very interesting.

Mr Mustard would be pleased to receive any emails from Barnet Councillors or Officers explaining why giving away 50% is such a bargain, or even equitable, for Council Tax Payers  ?

Mr Mustard also has a sinking feeling. He read the 208 pages that make up the agenda pack for the Cabinet Resources Committee Meeting which took place at 7pm on 29 June when the Councillors nodded the proposals through in 22 minutes flat. The "Business Case" includes the following line at 8.4 Payment Mechanisms "gain-share for increased level of savings" so the plan is to give away to the supplier some of the profit share from outsourcing.

It's funny ( except that it is quite serious ) but Mr Mustard thought that the whole point of going out to private contractors was to save his money and not to give it away.

Come on Councillors, start rocking the boat and asking really well targeted and difficult questions. Please don't just vote these proposals through when they come back to a future committee without giving them a good workout.

And soon would be a good time to decide not to extend the Contract by 2 years unless the 50% gift gets replaced by something much more modest and to go back out to tender for a new supplier to start in September 2013.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Are Contracts monitored ? May Gurney suggests not

Can Barnet Council monitor a simple contract ?

This is an important question in the light of the very complex contracts that are proposed under OneBarnet.

I would say that the contract which exists with May Gurney to collect the recycling in the blue & black boxes is a simple one. The contract also includes running the Summers Lane facility and collecting the recycling banks around the borough.

( as an aside, some idiot decided that the blue boxes don't need lids even though they contain cardboard and after a week's rain or snow, quite possible in England, they contain a heavy & soggy mess. They also chose a box where the drain holes are not at the lowest point in the box so that rainwater collects in the bottom, you pick up your box and then get soaked as a stream of water runs out. Priceless. ) 

Now Mr Mustard recently read the contract with May Gurney. It contains a whole section about when monies will be deducted from their payment for service failures. Mr Mustard has had cause to complain about the lack of service on many occasions. 

The operatives used to walk straight past his box if if was a millimetre too far from the gate for them but he stopped that nonsense by persistent complaining.

Mr Mustard also had a quiet word with one of the operatives to not keep putting the empty box back in the flower bed.

Needless to say his boxes have often been sent on little holidays down the street despite being numbered.

The way in which boxes are returned is dangerous. The postman is unamused on bin collection day as his round is full of trip hazards.

Here are Mr Mustard's bins before collection ( neat and conveniently placed as always ) 

and afterwards on 3 different occasions just to show this is the normal state of affairs.

So a pretty sloppy approach to customer care.

Now these are the reasons why monies can be deducted from May Gurney :-

4. FIXED CHARGES

4.1 The Authority shall be entitled to deduct from each monthly payment of the Annual Service Payment a sum equal to the total Fixed Charges incurred during the previous month in accordance with this paragraph 4.

4.2 A Fixed Charge may be levied against the Contractor on the occurrence of any of the following Fixed Charge Events:

4.2.1 failure by any member of the Contractor's staff to wear the appropriate uniform and/or appropriate personal protective equipment whilst performing the Services under this Contract;

4.2.2 failure by the Contractor to open the Facility at 08.00 hours;

4.2,3 failure by the Contractor to close the Facility to the public later than 16.00 hours;

4.2.4 all material containers of any one type at the Facility are full and therefore unavailable for users of the Facility to use;

4.2.5 failure by the Contractor to empty a Bring Bank that has been reported to it as full within 24 hours of such notification;

4.2.6 failure by the Contractor to resolve a complaint regarding service delivery time or equipment, within two weeks of the complaint being made;

4.2.7 failure by the Contractor to deliver a box or other agreed container within five (5) Business Days;

4.2.8 failure by the Contractor to deliver a box or other agreed container within seven (7) Business Days;

4.2.9 failure by the Contractor to clear a spillage or breakage within one hour of notification;

4.2.10 failure by the Contractor to clear a spillage or breakage within twenty-four (24) hours of notification;

4.2.11 failure by the Contractor to leave a contamination card in the box or other agreed container;

4.2.12 failure by the Contractor to collect Recyclable Waste and the Re-usable Waste within twenty-four (24) hours of receipt of a report of non-collection;

4.2.13 failure by the Contractor to collect Recyclable Waste and Re-usable within forty-eight (48) hours of receipt of a report of non-collection;

4.2.14 where the Contractor has placed bagged materials on the surface of a carriageway, footway or footpath for subsequent collection;

4.2.15 failure by the Contractor to comply with paragraph 5.9.1 of the Specification, which results in boxes being dragged along with carriageway, footway or footpath;

4.2.16 where there have been two (2) Missed Collections from the same address in any consecutive period of eight (8) weeks;

4.2.17 failure by the Contractor to comply with clause 8 (Health & Safety);

4.2.18 where there have been forty (40) or more Missed Collections per 100,000 households per month, provided that, in each instance, the notification procedure set out in paragraph 4.3 has been applied.

So take a guess about how many deductions were made from payments to May Gurney in the year ended 31 March 2011. That is right - none at all.

So either May Gurney are perfect, and my photographs would suggest that is not the case, or Barnet Council haven't bothered to monitor the service and reclaim monies on our behalf. If you know any of the Fixed Charge Events have taken place please post a comment below and also write to Barnet Council and ask them why they did not make a financial deduction ( it's our money they are failing to safeguard ).

You might like to know the following about Assisted Collections which is in the contract:-

5.4.1 A number of residents, typically some elderly and disabled residents, are unable to leave their black boxes and other agreed collection containers at the edge of their property. In these cases the Contractor shall make individual arrangements with the resident, known as assisted collections, and maintain these assisted collections for as long as is necessary. The Contractor shall provide these arrangements at no additional cost to the Authority. 

If you need this service then telephone the Council on 020 8359 4600 or email them at first.contact@barnet.gov.uk

Mr Mustard found this interesting. If you put out extra materials in plastic carrier bags then May Gurney should also take the bags and recycle them. They don't. They leave them in your box. Tut tut. 

5.10.3 The Contractor shall collect and dispose of/or recycle all plastic carrier bags used to contain additional recyclable materials. The Contractor shall not leave any carrier bags at the property or on/in the surface of a carriageway, footway or footpath in Barnet following collection.

Oh dear, this section of the Contract certainly isn't being adhered to. Given the propensity of victims of falls to sue for damages these days it would be of great economic benefit if May Gurney were to adhere to this requirement.

5.16.4 Notwithstanding where the residents leave their recycling boxes for collection, the Contractor shall ensure that these recycling boxes are placed within the property boundary, and not on the public footway, carriageway or footpath, on garden walls or in gardens. In complying with this section, the Contractor shall ensure that recycling boxes are not placed where it could impede pedestrian or vehicular access to properties.

If your operative isn't doing this why not politely ask him to or email the Council to complain. You can of course expect that the operative will be polite.

5.17.1 The Contractor shall ensure that all its Staff:

a) Receive induction training, to ensure a thorough understand of the standards of the Kerbside Recycling Collection Services, as well as an appreciation of other issues affecting the Authority.

b) Conduct the Kerbside Recycling Collection Services in as quiet, polite and efficient manner as is possible.

Mr Mustard will be returning to the subject of May Gurney, and their payments, in a later blog.

 

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard