Showing posts with label sap. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sap. Show all posts

21 March 2012

No-one knows anything?

picture credit : bbc audio


One would rather hope that the Council had a list of all long term contracts it has placed. Apparently not. Here is a Freedom of Information request from 1 December ( revised 19 December ) and the non-answer which arrived somewhat late, after a nudge, on 6 March 2012.

Dear Mr. Mustard,

I am writing regarding your request, received by the London Borough of Barnet (the Council) on 1 December 2011, for the following information:


1. Please provide lists of suppliers with whom there is currently an approved list of suppliers to the Environment Planning & Regeneration directorate giving the date of approval, the maximum contract value and the approved types of work.


2. Please also provide a list of all suppliers with term agreements for all directorates ( I have assumed the number is modest ) giving the date & duration of the agreement and the kinds of work carried out by that supplier which is covered by the term agreement.

3. Please also provide a list of all suppliers with framework agreements for all directorates ( I have assumed the number is modest ) giving the date & duration of the agreement and the kinds of work carried out by that supplier which is covered by the framework agreement.

This was further clarified on 19 December with the following:

Thank you for quoting my reference. I am interested in any contractor who has a contract in place with EPR, whether or not they also happen to work for other departments.


Term contracts, or agreements, get a mention at para 6.14 of the Contract Procedure Rules.

If we turn the question around it might help. I am looking for a list of all contracts currently in place with EPR of any kind which cover regular suppliers of repeated similar items over a period of months or years as opposed to one-off tenders for specific items. I tried to set out the varied kinds of contract which the council seem to have ( I may have missed some? ) so that I got them all whatever they are called. Does that help? It would be helpful to have an outline of the work types for each contract.

We have processed your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the FOIA). I apologise for the delay in providing this response.


Response


1. I can confirm that information is held relating to your requested. However, I estimate that identifying, locating, retrieving and extracting the information referred to in Part 1 of your request would exceed the appropriate costs limit under section 12 of the FOIA. This is currently £450, or 18 hours of officer time at a standard rate of £25 per hour.


The information in this case is not held centrally, either in the Council as a whole or by EPR itself. In order to comply with your request for information, each service area in EPR would have to run a report from our database and examine it line by line in order to identify similar items. As EPR contains 5 divisions, each containing a number of services areas, this would be an extremely lengthy process and the Council has estimated that it would easily exceed 18 hours of officer time to identify, locate, retrieve and extract this information.


2. I can confirm that information is held relating to your request. However, as above, I estimate that identifying, locating, retrieving and extracting the information would exceed the appropriate limit. Again, the information is not held centrally or in directorates in this form, production of the information would entail line by line examination and analysis of spend reports for all departments and service areas across the Council. Again, this would be an extremely lengthy process, and would take the response well over the 18 hour limit, especially when aggregated with the response to part 1.


3. Would exceed appropriate limit, as above.


Refusal Notice


I estimate that identifying, locating, retrieving and extracting the information requested by you would exceed the appropriate costs limit under section 12 of the FOIA. This response therefore acts as a Refusal Notice. It is possible that if you narrow the scope of your request we may be able to provide related information. I cannot, however, guarantee that this will be the case.


Your rights


If you are unhappy with the way your request for information has been handled, you can request a review within the next 20 working days by writing to the FOI Officer at: The London Borough of Barnet, North London Business Park, Oakleigh Road South, London, N11 1NP (email foi@barnet.gov.uk).


If, having exhausted our review procedure, you remain dissatisfied with the handling of your request or complaint, you will have a right to appeal to the Information Commissioner at: The Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF (telephone: 08456 306060 or 01625 545745; website www.ico.gov.uk). There is no charge for making an appeal.


Yours sincerely


JH

Information Governance Officer

The council was quite late in providing this non-reply.

Mr Mustard finds himself quite worried that this Directorate does not have a list of all the contracts which are in place for a year, 2 years, 5 years, 10 years etc. so that it can renegotiate them in good time before they expire and also so they don't try to put in place a contract for the supply of something when there is already a term agreement in place for everything which covers that one-off purchase.

Over £20m has been thrown at SAP. Surely the council can run a report which produces what should be a fairly short list of all term agreements / contracts? SAP really is appalling value.

There is a duty under FOI to be helpful. Mr Mustard does not think that the council have been in this instance and so will ask some more questions.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

10 February 2012

Lamentable lie or ignominious incompetence?

www.motifake.com/

It almost doesn't matter whether
  • Barnet Council lied to Mr Mustard or
  • were simply uselessly ignorant of the facts or
  • couldn't be bothered to find out as it's only that pesky blogger again or
  • if management misdirected an employee or
  • some other answer. 
 as lying or not knowing are nearly as bad as each other.

So let us start with the question. Mr Mustard (a former employee of the Inland Revenue) has been tracking down all the employees who think they can dodge PAYE and not surprisingly Barnet Council try to stymie the investigations at every stage. Mr Mustard was scenting blood when he asked this question, which was asked after other similar ones had failed, his ref #1197 (numbering started at 1000, not at zero)



Dear Sir or Madam

Please provide for all temporary employees of any kind ( interim / temporary / consultant / acting / service companies / any other description ) being paid at the rate of a senior employee ( i.e. annual rate of £58,200 and above or £4,850 a month ) the amount that was paid to Hays in respect of work done during November 2011 giving for each such person or service company:-

the name of the service company and the respective employee doing the work, or of the employee if they do not have a service company, and title of the post they are carrying out

the amount paid in each case

the number of days worked in November 11 in each case.

Yours sincerely


Mr Mustard
6 January 2012

Now the reason that Mr Mustard had to ask this question was because payments like those of £1,000 a day that were formerly being paid to Halliford Associates Ltd ( for Andrew Travers the Chief Finance Officer ) were, after 1 April 2011 being paid through Hays to try and get them covered by a legitimate contract, the Contract Procedure Rules presenting difficulties every time a new person was taken on who was allergic to PAYE. The answer to this question would have got them all out in the open.

Payments to Jacquie McGeachie HR Consulting Ltd of over £130,000 in 2010/11 were simply not on the published lists as Mr Reasonable established.

Now hear comes the main content of the non-answer with emphasis by Mr Mustard:

Response

All payments to Hays for the services of temporary employees appear on the over £500 spend list. As you already know, the council has a contract with Hays whereby Hays supplies the council with temporary employees.

Information about the individuals employed, amount paid and hours worked is not held by the Council but by Hays. We are therefore unable to provide the information you are requesting as this is held by a third party – Hays.


30 January 2012

The officer who answered was quite junior and Mr Mustard knows they get put upon by senior management and so he has withheld the name of the officer who replied. He did have to reply to them though to express his displeasure at the pathetic non-answer he had received as it beggared belief. Here is what he sent:

Dear Redacted

I note that you hold a relatively junior position and I think that you must have been instructed what to say in your email so please do not take this email personally.

You have not answered my request under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act as you have not answered it at all.

You claim that the payments are listed on the over £500 spend list. The 616 individually listed amounts paid to Hays HR in November 2011 total £693,669. The names of the temporary employees are not provided nor the names of the service companies which many of the senior executives get paid through. Therefore it is impossible for me to answer my own question. Could I have done so I would not have asked it.

There is a general duty on you under the Freedom of Information Act to be helpful. You have not been.

As to the second part of your non-answer I am now most concerned about the financial management exercised by the council. The following six employees ( and possibly others ) are paid through a service company and/or Hays



Julie Taylor Assistant Chief Executive
Chris Palmer Interim Assistant Director Communications
Bill Murphy Assistant Director - Customer Services & Libraries
Andrew Travers DCE & Chief Financial Officer
Jacquie McGeachie Interim Assistant Director - Human Resources
Mick Stokes Assistant Director Commercial Assurance

It surely cannot be the case that Hays simply pays these individuals ( via their service company ) any amount that they ask for. I understand from a different FOI answer that each person submits an invoice to Hays in order to get paid. Hays then invoice the council. 

There must be some sort of audit trail which enables the council to be sure that they are paying the correct amount to Hays otherwise there is nothing to stop one of these individuals making an innocent error and invoicing for 5 days in a particular week when they only worked 2 of them. 

Please reflect on the response that you have given and decide if you wish to stick with it as it evidences a complete lack of financial control, or please now answer the question as asked.


This is not a request for a formal review. It is a request for my original questions to be answered in an applicant and purpose blind manner in accordance with the FOI legislation.


Yours sincerely

 
Mr Redacted ( aka Mr Mustard )
30 January 2012


It was only 10 days ago that Mr Mustard sent that difficult to answer email and so the council, especially the senior management, are still trying to put a plan together for extricating themselves from the quagmire and send a reply. Their predicament has just got worse. Look at this email exchange ( ref #1191 )

Dear Sir or Madam

The council use Chris Palmer as interim Assistant Director of Communications and he was originally supplied via Renouval Ltd although is now ( since 1 April 2011 I think ) paid via Hays.

Please tell me:

1       The first date of employment
2    The efforts made to fill the post in the 6 months prior to the answer to Q1 whether via recruitment agents, newspaper or specialist magazine advertisements, the council website or any other source whatsoever and tell me the cost of each method and supply copies of any printed advertisements.
3    Please provide a copy of the signed contract with Renouval (signatures redacted) which should have been in place since the answer to Q1
4    I note that the appointment was initially for 1 year. Please provide a copy of the written contract extension or new contract. How long is the new appointment for please?
5    I cannot find a DPR. Please provide a pdf of it or provide a link to the exact page on which it can be found.
6    How many other companies were invited to tender for the service?
7    Please explain how Hays know that they can pay a consultant such as Mr Palmer/Renouval Ltd and be confident that the council will accept their invoice as correct i.e. what I am asking to see is the paperwork trail that has to be in place to facilitate correct payment and please provide just one example from the last 6 months e.g. a timesheet that Mr Palmer/Renouval Ltd ( as the case may be ) has to get signed in order to be paid or whatever documentation provides an audit trail of time worked and ensures that the council pays the correct amount for services received.

Would it be too much to ask to have straight answers from a professional FOI officer please and not have the answer worked upon in any way by Mr Palmer himself? He cannot change the facts and I will look behind the presentation in any event. You may provide him with a copy of the answer.

Yours sincerely

Mr Mustard
29 December 2011

Now the eventual reply sadly didn't come from a professional FOI officer (although the acknowledgement did come from a Governance Officer, the one who is too shy to reveal their name), nor did it obviously come from the subject of the question Mr Chris Palmer but nearly as bad, it came from someone in his department who is junior to him and it was a most illuminating answer:


Dear Mr Mustard
Request for Information under FOIA
I am writing in respect of your recent enquiry for information held by Barnet Council under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act.

In response to your questions:

1 The first date of employment

As Head of Media, 5 May 2009. Contracted through Marina Perotta Associates. From 6 April 2010, in post as interim AD (Comms), following a service restructure. Contract to Renouval Ltd to supply services. It was felt that Mr Palmer was essentially fulfilling the role of AD (Comms) so it was appropriate to appoint him on an interim basis while the council goes through a restructure.

2 The efforts made to fill the post in the 6 months prior to the answer to Q1 whether via recruitment agents, newspaper or specialist magazine advertisements, the council website or any other source whatsoever and tell me the cost of each method and supply copies of any printed advertisements.

Given the specialist nature of the post the council spoke to several recruitment agencies and interviewed a range of candidates, eventually appointing Marina Perotta Associates to provide Chris Palmer to fulfil this role on an interim basis.

3 Please provide a copy of the signed contract with Renouval (signatures redacted) which should have been in place since the answer to Q1

Attached.

4 I note that the appointment was initially for 1 year. Please provide a copy of the written contract extension or new contract. How long is the new appointment for please?

The new contract is through Hays. This is an interim appointment for 12 months at a time with a one-month break period, depending on the council’s requirements.

5 I cannot find a DPR. Please provide a pdf of it or provide a link to the exact page on which it can be found.

Please find attached a DPR on the restructure of the Chief Executive’s Service from 19 May 2010 and the General Functions Committee paper from 19 November 2009.

6 How many other companies were invited to tender for the service?

In the first instance it was felt that Mr Palmer was fulfilling the role of AD (Comms) and would be a suitable interim appointment. This post is now filled through Hays Limited. I understand you have previously received a copy of the council’s contract with Hays Limited. Indeed; not seen it yet though.

7 Please explain how Hays know that they can pay a consultant such as Mr Palmer/Renouval Ltd and be confident that the council will accept their invoice as correct i.e. what I am asking to see is the paperwork trail that has to be in place to facilitate correct payment and please provide just one example from the last 6 months e.g. a timesheet that Mr Palmer/Renouval Ltd ( as the case may be ) has to get signed in order to be paid or whatever documentation provides an audit trail of time worked and ensures that the council pays the correct amount for services received.

Hays invoices are checked against the council’s SAP system before being signed off by the appropriate director. 

We trust this satisfies your request.

If you are unhappy with the way your request for information has been handled, you can request a review within the next 20 working days by writing to the FOI Officer at: The London Borough of Barnet, North London Business Park, Oakleigh Road South, London, N11 1NP (email foi@barnet.gov.uk).

If you remain dissatisfied with the handling of your request or complaint, you have a right to appeal to the Information Commissioner at: The Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF (telephone: 08456 306060 or 01625 545745; website: www.ico.gov.uk).

There is no charge for making an appeal.

Yours sincerely

Johnathan Schroder
Internal Communications Manager
Chief Executive's Service
London Borough of Barnet, North London Business Park, Oakleigh Road South, London N11 1NP
Tel: 020 8359 7954
 7 February 2012 ( somewhat late; an apology was not proffered )

Mr Mustard will come to the rest of the answers on another day but for now he picked up on the answer to point 7.

Dear Mr Schroder

Thank you for your email.

Your response to Q7 isn't providing any detail whatsoever. SAP is just a piece of software (albeit a large one).

What document or documents are the Hays invoices checked off against please?

Yours sincerely
Mr Mustard
7 February 2012


Dear Mr Mustard

In relation to your last email, our administration system, SAP, contains a record of Chris Palmer’s presence at work, and electronic invoices submitted by Hays are checked against this record prior to being signed off.

Kind regards

John.
Johnathan Schroder Internal Communications Manager
Chief Executive's Service London Borough of Barnet, North London Business Park, Oakleigh Road South, London N11 1NP Tel: 020 8359 7954
7 February 2012 ( that's more like it; clarification on the same day )


So there we have it; two completely different explanations. Mr Mustard is satisfied that the final explanation is the correct one as it is the only logical way of working. It does make the earlier answer look pretty sick. With a bit of luck someone with some sense in the upper echelons of Barnet Council will grab enquiry no #1197 and get the information out sharpish. Doubtless it will come with some tortuous wording that attempts to convince me that black is white.

The council would do well to get its house in order now and put every employee who should be paying PAYE, onto the payroll, so that when HM Revenue and Customs eventually got round to North London Business Park, which they will, the interest and penalties are not so steep.
Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

20 July 2011

Interim mis-management

You will find below the Contract with Garfield Associates Ltd.

Mr Mustard is not surprised that Barnet Council have sent him an out of date Contract ( at least there was one unlike MetPro ) nor that Mr Garfield is still being used at least 5 months after his Contract ran out ( he is in the over £500 expenditure list for May 2011 ) or that Mr Garfield now sometimes gets £500 a day ( inflation you know, very bad in Barnet ).

No, what does surprise him is that there is a standard Contract for Interims. That must be because there are so many of them? Mr Reasonable has spoken to Mr Mustard about organisations he has known which have become paralysed by consultancy - he fears, and I share his concern, that Barnet Council are going the same way. 

OneBarnet - how many consultants ?




Yours frugally


Mr Mustard

23 June 2011

SAP - 7 years on

Mr Mustard looks through the over £500 spending lists that Barnet Council publish.

He came across these payments to Garfield Associates Ltd :-

Date paid Invoice # Payment £ Daily Rate Days Invoice period
05/10/2010 LBB-001 4,000 400 10 6-10 September 2010
13-17 September 2010
05/10/2010
4,000 400
Credited incorrectly
19/10/2010 LBB-002 4,000 400 10 20-24 September 2010
27 Sep – 1 Oct 2010
19/10/2010 LBB-003 4,000 400 10 4-8 October 2010
11-15 October 2010
19/10/2010
-4,000

Debited
01/11/2010 LBB-004 4,000 400 10 18-22 October 2010
25-29 October 2010
29/11/2010 LBB-005 4,000 400 10 1-5 November 2010
8-12 November 2010
29/11/2010 LBB-006 4,000 400 10 15-19 November 2010
22-26 November 2010
07/12/2010 LBB-007 2,500 500 5 29 Nov – 3 Dec 2010
15/12/2010 LBB-008 2,500 500 5 6 Dec - 10 Dec 2010
21/12/2010 LBB-009 2,500 500 5 13 Dec – 17 Dec 2010
18/01/2011 LBB-010 2,500 500 5 20 Dec – 24 Dec 2010
18/01/2011 LBB-011 2,000 500 4 4-7 January 2011
18/01/2011 LBB-012 2,500 500 5 10-14 January 2011
08/02/2011 LBB-013 2,500 500 5 17-21 January 2011
08/02/2011 LBB-014 2,500 500 5 24-28 January 2011
08/03/2011 LBB-015 2,500 500 5 31 Jan – 4 Feb 2011
08/03/2011 LBB-016 2,500 500 5 7 Feb – 11 Feb 2011
08/03/2011
2,500


08/03/2011 LBB-017 2,000 400 4 14 Feb – 18 Feb 2011
10/03/2011 LBB-018 2,000 400 5 21 Feb – 25 Feb 2011
25/03/2011 LBB-019 2,000 400 5 28 Feb-4 March 2011
25/03/2011 LBB-020 2,000 400 5 7 March – 11 March 2011
28/03/2011 LBB-021 2,000 400 5 14 March-18 March 2011
28/03/2011 LBB-022 2,000 400 5 21 March – 25 March 2011
31/03/2011
-2,000




61,000



There are for the services of a Mr David Garfield who is either acting as "Lead Change Manager - SAP Optimisation" at £400 a day on some of the days and "Lead Change Manager / Assistant Project Manager - SAP Optimisation" at £500 a day on other days.

One would have thought that after running SAP for 7 years a Council employee might have got the hang of it ?

Another £5,600 was paid out in April. Nice work if you can get it.

SAP is just a glorified database with a set of rules - how hard can it be ?

Now looking at the actual payments what do you notice ?

A good start to the relationship - a double payment of £4,000 on 5 October 2010 which was corrected on 19 October 2010. It was coyly described as "credited incorrectly" - I would suggest that is "paid incorrectly".

Many of the invoices are for a week to a Friday and they are being paid on the following Monday. That is indecent haste and probably means that the necessary checking is not thorough as the earlier double payment indicates. Barnet Council really should be taking 30 days credit from the vast majority of suppliers. The effect on cashflow and borrowing would be enormous.

There was another double payment of £2,500 on 8 March 2011 which was, by the looks of it, partially clawed back in the sum of £2,000 on 31 March 2011. Does Garfield Associates owe the Council £500 ? I have no reason to doubt that Mr Garfield is an honest man and will tell the Council about this if he has not done so already.

We know that Procurement is in a mess. It is no surprise if that spreads to Accounts Payable who are dependent on Procurement to do their job properly for their own efficiency.

The final point is that Mr Garfield looks awfully like an employee and should be on PAYE.

If any reader works for HM Revenue & Customs and wants to increase the tax take of the Country then you know what to do.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard