Outrageous 20 Page Wirral Council Contract over Secret Hourly Legal Rates

Outrageous 20 Page Wirral Council Contract over Secret Hourly Legal Rates

Outrageous 20 Page Wirral Council Contract over Secret Hourly Legal Rates

                                                         
Before Bill Norman left Wirral Council’s employment he said during a public meeting that Wirral Council had much less in-house solicitors than the previous Council that had previously employed him. Currently Wirral Council has sixteen fifteen people in-house to give legal advice (David Abraham, Ali Noman Bayatti, Louise Kate Bragg, Gregory Oghenebrume Eyitene, Angela Mary Green, Colin John Bennett Hughes, Victoria Michelle Leece, Rosemary Ann Lyon, Elizabeth Macgregor, Anne Frances Quirk, Cecilia Mary Rathe, Sally Jayne Rotherham, Joanne Elizabeth Rutherford, Lucy Victoria Shaw, Surjit Tour and Karen Christina White).

As a result of having more legal work than people employed to do it, work gets outsourced. Some of this is through the North West Legal Consortium that have a website here. Basically it’s a collaboration between a number of local Councils and others (such as Merseytravel, The Office for the Police and Crime Commissioner for Merseyside and The Office for the Police and Crime Commissioner for Lancashire) for legal services from firms such as Weightmans LLP and Eversheds LLP. The “outrageous” clause in my opinion in the contract is this though:-

17. Confidentiality

The Consortium has entered into agreement with Solicitors Firms and Barristers Chambers in relation to discounted fee rates. Each of these rates is commercially confidential to that Firm or Chambers and as such should not, without the prior written consent of that Firm or Chambers be disclosed to any other Firm or Chambers or any other third party outside of the Consortium. Authorities should use reasonable endeavours to ensure either by themselves their servants or agents that they treat such Confidential Information as confidential and safeguard it accordingly; and they hereby agree to use reasonable endeavours not disclose such Confidential Information to any other person without the Solicitors Firm or Chambers prior consent.

What this means is that they can charge a three figure sum an hour for legal advice and despite the public’s right to inspect these documents and make copies (without redactions) Wirral Council will just black box out the amounts on for example this Weightmans table of prices here and here.

With this level of redaction (which extends to the invoices themselves too), how can the Wirral public know they’re getting value for money at these “discounted fee rates”? What’s the rate they’re classed as discounted from anyway? Links to the whole North West Legal Consortium contract are provided below.

North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 1
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 2
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 3
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 4
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 5
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 6
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 7
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 8
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 9
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 10
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 11
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 12
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 13
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 14
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 15
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 16
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 17
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 18
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 19
North West Legal Consortium Collaboration Agreement Page 20

EXCLUSIVE: 36 More Pages of North West Regional Development Agency’s Contract With Wirral Council for Business Grants Program

EXCLUSIVE: 36 More Pages of North West Regional Development Agency’s Contract With Wirral Council for Business Grants Program

Continuing from yesterdays’ blog post of the first ninety pages of the North West Development Agency’s contract with Wirral Council, here are the next thirty-five pages. As European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) money was involved, these are the standard conditions of the European Regional Development Fund grant.

Page 91 – Cover Page (Standard Conditions of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) Grant)
Page 92 – Contents Page (1)
Page 93 – Contents Page (2)
Page 94 – This states various facts about the European Funding
Page 95 – This starts the agreement with a list of definitions
Page 96 – This continues the definitions
Page 97 – This continues the definitions
Page 98 – This continues the definitions
Page 99 – This continues the definitions
Page 100 – This continues the definitions
Page 101 – This continues the definitions and starts a section on interpretation
Page 102 – This continues the section on interpretation and starts one on eligible expenditure
Page 103 – This continues the section on eligible expenditure, has one on the application and starts a section on grant claims
Page 104 – This continues the section on grant claims
Page 105 – This continues the section on grant claims
Page 106 – This has sections on the expenditure profile, has a section on decommitment of ERDF resources and starts a section on provisions related to the fixed assets and major assets
Page 107 – This continues the section on provisions related to fixed assets and major assets
Page 108 – This continues the section on provisions related to fixed assets and major assets and starts a section on material changes to the project and starts a section on legislation
Page 109 – This continues the section on legislation, has a section on publicity and starts a section on events of default and rights reserved for breach of the funding agreement
Page 110 – This continues the section on events of default and rights reserved for breach of the funding agreement
Page 111 – This continues the section on events of default and rights reserved for breach of the funding agreement and starts one on assignment or charging of the funding agreement
Page 112 – This continues the section on assignment or charging of the funding agreement and starts one on monitoring progress, tendering and notification
Page 113 – This continues the section on monitoring progress, tendering and notification
Page 114 – This continues the section on monitoring progress, tendering and notification and starts one on audit requirements
Page 115 – This continues the section on audit requirements
Page 116 – This continues the section on audit requirements
Page 117 – This continues the section on audit requirements
Page 118 – This continues the section on audit requirements and starts one on freedom of information
Page 119 – This continues the section on freedom of information and starts one on data protection
Page 120 – This continues the section on data protection
Page 121 – This continues the section on data protection and starts one on security requirements
Page 122 – This has a section on grant recipient warranties and starts a section on notices
Page 123 – This continues the section on notices and has sections on value added tax, good faith and cooperation, insurance, Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1998 and jurisdiction
Page 124 – This has a section entitled miscellaneous
Page 125 – This ends the miscellaneous section
Page 126 – This is the cover page for Annexure A

EXCLUSIVE: 90 Pages of North West Regional Development Agency’s Contract With Wirral Council for Business Grants Program

EXCLUSIVE: 90 Pages of North West Regional Development Agency’s Contract With Wirral Council for Business Grants Program

The astute among you will no doubt be aware that the North West Regional Development Agency was abolished last year, however I would guess that in its absence that its functions under the contract are now done by the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills.

There is more to the contract than the first ninety pages, although the other pages can wait for another day. The contract between the North West Regional Development Agency and Wirral Council was for business grants and has been the subject of recent whistle blowing concerns.

Page 1 (this is just a cover page with the North West Regional Development Agency’s contact details on)

Page 2 (this is the first page dated 17th September 2009 stating it’s a grant funding arrangement between Wirral Council and the North West Regional Development Agency for business start-up)

Page 3 (this is an index page to the contract detailing various sections and page numbers)

Page 4 (this is the second index page to the contract detailing various sections and annexes)

Page 5 (this is the first page of the contract which details who it’s between, what it’s for and starts with a list of definitions of terms)

Page 6 (this continues the list of definitions of various terms in the contract)

Page 7 (this continues the list of definitions of various terms in the contract)

Page 8 (this continues the list of definitions of various terms in the contract)

Page 9 (this continues the list of definitions of various terms in the contract)

Page 10 (this continues the list of definitions of various terms in the contract)

Page 11 (this continues the list of definitions of various terms in the contract)

Page 12 (this continues the list of definitions of various terms in the contract)

Page 13 (this ends the list of definitions of various terms in the contract and details how certain references are to be interpreted)

Page 14 (this continues with how certain references are to be interpreted and starts to detail the roles of the North West Regional Development Agency and the accountable body)

Page 15 (this continues with detail as to the roles of the North West Regional Development Agency and the accountable body and goes on to representations and warranties)

Page 16 (this continues the representations and warranties)

Page 17 (this details conditions and what the accountable body’s obligations are)

Page 18 (this details when the contract will start, end and starts a section on consents)

Page 19 (this has sections on public procurement and the accountable body’s contractors and employees)

Page 20 (this has sections on onward liability, legislation, material alteration of the project and insurance)

Page 21 (this continues the section on insurance and has sections on reinstatement and notification by the accountable body)

Page 22 (this continues the section on notification and has sections on further assurance, good faith and co-operation and indemnity)

Page 23 (this continues the section on co-operation and indemnity and starts a section on monitoring of providers)

Page 24 (this has sections on provision of information by the accountable body and inspection and audit facilities)

Page 25 (this continues the section on inspection and audit facilities)

Page 26 (this has sections on maximum grant and conditions)

Page 27 (this continues the section on conditions and starts a section on repayment)

Page 28 (this continues the section on repayment and starts a section on review letter and variations)

Page 29 (this section is on events of default, remedies and termination)

Page 30 (this continues the section on events of default, remedies and termination)

Page 31 (this continues the section on events of default, remedies and termination)

Page 32 (this continues the section on events of default, remedies and termination and starts sections on novation, post completion and publicity)

Page 33 (this continues the section on publicity and has sections on North West Regional Development Agency logo & England Northwest’s brand and European Regional Development Fund funding)

Page 34 (this continues the section on European Regional Development Fund funding and has a section on intellectual property rights)

Page 35 (this continues the section on intellectual property rights and starts a section on reputation of the agency)

Page 36 (this continues the section on reputation of the agency and has sections on assignment and confidentiality)

Page 37 (this continues with the section on confidentiality and starts a section on Freedom of Information)

Page 38 (this continues the section on Freedom of Information and starts a section on Data Protection)

Page 39 (this continues the section on Data Protection and starts a section on default or termination of accountable body)

Page 40 (this has sections on status of accountable body, obligation to use CRM and notices)

Page 41 (this has sections on Value Added Tax, jurisdiction and miscellaneous)

Page 42 (this continues the miscellaneous section)

Page 43 (this continues the miscellaneous section and requires the accountable body to comply with obligations in the schedule)

Page 44 (this is the title page for Schedule 1 (Service Providers))

Page 45 (this is the start of the list of service providers)

Page 46 (this is the end of the list of service providers)

Page 47 (this is the title page for Schedule 2 (European Regional Development Fund Offer Letter))

Page 48 (this is page 1 of the European Regional Development Fund Offer Letter)

Page 49 (this is page 2 of the European Regional Development Fund Offer letter)

Page 50 (this is page 3 of the European Regional Development Fund Offer letter)

Page 51 (this is what the grant recipients had to sign)

Page 52 (this is the offer letter and acknowledgement (schedule 1 (project specific conditions) part A (General) and part B (Delivery Structure))

Page 53 (this continues the project specific conditions part B (Delivery Structure) and part C (Equality and Diversity))

Page 54 (this continues the section on part C (Equality and Diversity))

Page 55 (this continues the section on part C (Equality and Diversity) and has part D (Intellectual Property Rights))

Page 56 (this is Schedule 2 (Project Specific Eligible Expenditure) Part A (Eligible Revenue Expenditure) and Part B (Eligible Capital Expenditure))

Page 57 (this is the first of the tables referred to in part A on salaries)

Page 58 (this is the second of the tables referred to in part A on overheads)

Page 59 (this is the third of the tables referred to in part A on premises)

Page 60 (this is the fourth of the tables referred to in part A on fees)

Page 61 (this is the fifth of the tables referred to in part A on other revenue)

Page 62 (this is the cover page for Schedule 3 (the targets))

Page 63 (this is part 1 of the Monitoring and Evaluation plan for Business Start-ups Phase II)

Page 64 (this continues the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan detailing its role)

Page 65 (this continues the role of the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan)

Page 66 (this details a timetable for receipt of project monitoring, other reports and claims)

Page 67 (this details the timetable after 30th April 2013)

Page 68 (this continues the timetable after 30th April 2013)

Page 69 (this details what the quarterly progress monitoring reports are)

Page 70 (this details what details are to be in the quarterly monitoring reports)

Page 71 (this continues with the details about what’s to be included in the quarterly monitoring reports)

Page 72 (this continues with the details about what’s to be included in the quarterly monitoring reports and has a section on record keeping/verification)

Page 73 (this continues the section on section on record keeping/verification)

Page 74 (this continues the section on record keeping/verification)

Page 75 (this continues the section on record keeping/verification)

Page 76 (this continues the section on record keeping/verification)

Page 77 (this continues the section on record keeping/verification and has sections on risk & management and programme milestones)

Page 78 (this continues the section on programme milestones)

Page 79 (this page starts Part 2 (Evaluation Plan))

Page 80 (this continues the Evaluation Plan)

Page 81 (this details the sources of information)

Page 82 (this continues with the sources of information)

Page 83 (this continues with the sources of information)

Page 84 (this details which organisations the evaluation findings are disseminated to)

Page 85 (this is an annex containing an agenda for monitoring/audit meetings)

Page 86 (this is the cover page for the offer letter and acknowledgement (Schedule 4 (Expenditure Profile)))

Page 87 (this is annex 2.1 a project finances input sheet)

Page 88 (this is annex 2.2 detailing project finances by year in £thousands)

Page 89 (this is a table (continued at page 90) detailing expenditure by quarter)

Page 90 (this is the second part of the table started on page 89)

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) 22nd August 2013 APP/13/00842: Corbiere, Thorsway, Caldy, CH48 2JJ – Demolition of existing house and erection of new dwelling within a similar footprint

A report on the Planning Committee meeting of Wirral Council on the 22nd August 2013 about planning application APP/13/00842: Corbiere, Thorsway, Caldy, CH48 2JJ – Demolition of existing house and erection of new dwelling within a similar footprint

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

After the decision on the Tesco in Wallasey Village was made, the Planning Committee went on to consider an application for Corbiere in Thorsway, Caldy.

The officer said that Cllr Jeff Green had requested the decision be made by the Planning Committee (and not by officers) and that there was a qualifying petition of twenty-nine against it as well as five letters of objection. The application was in a conservation area and was for a two storey house. The officer said that the property had not been occupied for the last two years and that the application was recommended for approval.

The petitioner, David James said he lived next to Corbiere and that he was a member of the Caldy Society and spoke with their full support. He asked why they would agree to demolish part of Caldy’s heritage that fitted perfectly in the conservation area? The petitioner said that the current building could be economically restored. Mr. James said that the footprint of the new building would be greater than the footprint of the original house and that it looked like a “huge office block” and would be a “carbuncle”.

The applicant handed out handouts to the Planning Committee and introduced himself as Stuart Wilson, of 10 The Willow, Lea Park, Meols Drive, Hoylake, Wirral. He said that they had spent eight months discussing the application with planning officers and that Conservation Area officers past and present had said they had worked within the guidelines.

The property was an unoccupied family home, which they had bought in a dilapidated state, it was dangerous in certain parts due to a bodged extension. He felt that its character had been lost beyond economic redemption. Part of the building would be underground which increased the cost and he disputed claims about loss of privacy due to the balcony. The balcony he explained was a service balcony and the windows referred to would be made of opaque glass.

Cllr Watt was next to address the Planning Committee. He said that in the press that Thorsway was one of the highest priced roads in Merseyside and one of the highest points in the Caldy Conservation Area. Although much of the application would be hidden behind screening, he asked the Planning Committee to ask to see the artist’s impression of the new building. Cllr Watt referred to the concerns of the petitioners and asked the Planning Committee to find reasons to refuse the application.

Cllr Elderton asked if they needed permission in a conservation area to demolish and how much influence the Conservation Area officer had had on the application? Cllr Moutney asked for the plans to be displayed.

Matthew Davies replied that there was a conservation area consent application for demolition of the existing building, but it wouldn’t be granted unless there was an acceptable scheme for a replacement dwelling. Therefore it wouldn’t be decided until the application was decided. If the application was approved, then consent for demolition would be granted.

In terms of the input that Conservation Area officers had had, it had been subject to considerable pre-application advice and advice from the urban design officer.

Cllr Elderton said he’d like to see the elevations and artist’s impressions to compare with the previous design. Matthew Davies showed the footprints of the existing building as well as replacement. He also showed the elevations and artists impressions.

Cllr Elderton described it as a out of character for the conservation area and a “1930s office block”. He thought it was unsuitable and wanted to move refusal. Cllr Hayes asked why the conditions only required the trees to stay in place for one year and whether it could be extended?

Matthew Davies replied that they were trying to retain the existing vegetation, but that condition 18 required a full landscaping scheme to be submitted which would detail any replacement trees. Condition 17 sought to retain the existing vegetation while new vegetation was planted.

Cllr Elderton moved refusal of the application on the basis that it was contrary to policy CH11. This was seconded by Cllr Eddie Boult.

The following councillors voted for refusal, Cllr Stuart Kelly, Cllr Les Rowlands, Cllr Simon Moutney, Cllr Paul Hayes, Cllr Eddie Boult, Cllr David Elderton and Cllr Irene Williams (7)
Labour councillors (apart from Cllr Irene Williams) voted against (6)

The application was therefore refused.

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) 22nd August 2013 refuses plan for Tesco in Wallasey Village

A report on what happened at the Planning Committee meeting of Wirral Council on the 22nd August 2013 involving a planning application for a Tesco in Wallasey Village.

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

This blog post continues from the previous one entitled Planning Committee refuses plan for Tesco in Wallasey Village. The video for this part of the Planning Committee can be viewed above.

Cllr Paul Hayes asked questions about the percentage for parking in the report and why there was no transport statement. An officer answered that the reason there was no transport statement was because the applicant had included details of parking and servicing. In his opinion its location on a primary route would not generate a significant volume of traffic as people in vehicles already using the road would nip in to do some shopping.

Cllr Kelly said that he had looked at the Unitary Development Plan map and that the proposal was on the edge of the commercial area where a finger came out to take in the development on the shop. One two sides it was residential properties as well as a school and a public house. One the site visit he had noticed sheltered housing to the rear. The servicing arrangements were next to the houses, in his opinion there would be deliveries first thing in the morning at 7am and throughout the day. The distance between the site and these houses was only five metres.

He also had concerns about waste disposal and storage. There had been an extra condition around plans for waste disposal on the late list but in his opinion this should’ve been included with the application. Cllr Kelly was not happy with the lack of clarity about waste disposal. Looking at the plans for how lorries would enter and leave the delivery area, he felt that cars parked would have to be moved in order for this to be done safely. It would be difficult to find the shoppers who owned the cars, therefore in his view it was unsatisfactory. The effect on the residential area was also unsatisfactory.

Cllr Pat Glasman said that it was on an extremely busy road and due to the school parents parked in silly places. In her view there would be a detrimental effect on traffic. In her view the orientation of the building should be changed to reduce the effect on residential properties.

Cllr Hayes asked how the applicant had demonstrated there would be no overspill parking? He said on the day of the site visit, there were only fifteen there but the school had not been open due to the holidays. The officer said that in his view they would struggle to defend a refusal on highway safety grounds.

Cllr Leech asked if the delivery times could be restricted by a condition. An officer said they could.

Cllr Kelly referred to policy SPD4. Cllr Paul Hayes moved refusal on the grounds that it would be detrimental to the amenities that residents of nearby residential properties could reasonably expect to enjoy, that is was contrary to policy SPD6 and that the parking standards in SPD4 hadn’t been met.

Matthew Davies said that the reason could be sustained at appeal, but they would have to word it carefully.

Cllr Kelly said he would second it, with a reference to the National Planning Policy Framework. Matthew Davies suggested a form of words for refusal on the second reason. Cllr Kelly asked if it was SH4 or SH6 it was contrary to? The Chair answered SH6. It was put to the vote.

In favour of refusal: (11) Cllr Bernie Mooney, Cllr David Elderton, Cllr Stuart Kelly, Cllr Philip Brightmore, Cllr Anita Leech, Cllr Irene Williams, Cllr Eddie Boult, Cllr Paul Hayes, Cllr Simon Mountney, Cllr Patricia Glasman and Cllr Les Rowlands
Against refusal: Cllr Joe Walsh and Cllr Denise Realey (2)

The application was therefore refused.

Continues at Planning Committee (Wirral Council) 22nd August 2013 APP/13/00842: Corbiere, Thorsway, Caldy, CH48 2JJ – Demolition of existing house and erection of new dwelling within a similar footprint.