A member of the public has received the following response from The Charities Commission after expressing concern about the sale of the restrictive covenant to George Irvin by Barham Park Trustees. I understand that this is not the first complaint made to the ommission about the conduct of the trustees.
The covenant sale and Baham Park operational matters are the subject of a Scrutiny Call-in by opposition councillors on Thursday.
A petition to Brent Council on these matters had reached 510 signatures at the time of publication of this article. PETITION
Thanks to Rucksack Traveller for this video taken a year ago LINK
The Barham Parks Trustees Committee meets again tomorrow (10am Brent Civic Centre) as a result of the Trusts's accounts being pulled from the last agenda because of a considerable number of errors.
Francis Henry requested to speak at tomorrow's meeting but the request was refused by Muhammed Butt, Leader of Brent Council and Chair of Trustees.
It is normal practice that representations can be made to local council committees on items that are on the Agenda of a particulat meeting. At the previous meeting Muhammed Butt refused representations (and indeed stopped Francis Henry from making them) on the plans for the future of the parks that were on the agenda. This time Butt refused despite the fact that the only item on the agenda is the accounts and Henry's submission deals with serious shortcomings regarding them.
Surely it is time for the Charity Commission to look into compliance issues around the Trust. LINK
Henry wrote to the Council to express his diasppointment:
It is disappointing that once again Councillor Butt is refusing to
listen to a local representative of local people who uses and cares about
Barham Park.
It is clear that he wants to hide and not acknowledge that Barham Park
is being neglected and mismanaged and faces ruin under his stewardship.
We will not allow this to happen.
I enclose a summary of the issues I want you to present to the Trustees and
to be reproduced as a submission (in full )as part of the minutes of the
meeting.
Regards
Francis Henry
Dear Councillor Butt and other Trustees
I am writing in my capacity as Chair of a recently formed Friends of
Barham Park (FoBP). The President of FoBP is Allan Barham who is the great
grandson of one of Titus Barham's cousins. His grandfather worked for Arthur
Barham (brother of Titus Barham ) who was the Managing Director of United
Dairies (later Unigate). in the late 1800s and early 1900s both Titus and
Arthur lived in the buildings currently occupied by Friends of Barham Library
and the other tenants. He is concerned about what his going on with the Titus
Barham bequest and wishes that the memory of Titus and his contribution was
better looked after.
In the short time since its creation FoBP has signed up 150 supporters.
The number is growing every day. We also have the support of numerous local
groups operating in the Sudbury and Wembley area.
I originally came to speak to the Barham Park Trust Meeting on 5
September following an invitation from the Council. That invitation did not
give any restrictions on what issues I could speak on.
It has always been the practice for invited representatives of existing
tenants to speak on any issue of concern on the Agenda. The minutes of previous
meeting (Page 1 of the Agenda that was before you) make this absolutely clear.
I came to speak on behalf of Friends of Barham Library (FOBL) - an
active community organisation providing invaluable services to local people
from our premises in Barham Park.
Despite of this you both interrupted my contribution and them prevented
me from speaking. I came to raise concerns about the recommendations before you
that will deprive Barham Community Library, run by FOBL, of our hard won space
in Barham Park.
FOBL, and the tenants were neither informed or consulted about the
proposals before the Meeting on 5 September. What are now described as
"hypothetical" proposals require all tenants to be removed with no
guarantee of return.
Officers failed to advise you that the proposals could not be
implemented in the foreseeable future because has ACAVA has 6 years remaining
on their Lease and FOBL has 8 years to go. There are no break clauses in favour
of the Trusts and the tenants have the right of "quiet enjoyment" -
i.e. no noisy or disruptive building work permitted. The £20,000 + cost of this
consultancy work (apparently charged to the Trust) has been wasted. While the
recommendations may be "hypothetical" the large sum of money spent is
real and could have been used on much needed repairs instead.
There have been earlier consultancy "vision" exercises and
condition surveys in the past 10 years. These also recommended pie in the sky
ideas - a large pond with a viewing platform for example. This was never
implemented for obvious reasons - it was a mad idea.
Recommendations to carry out essential repairs and maintenance to the
plaster work and wooden features of the buildings and repair and upgrading
of the crumbling paths and walls have never been carried. Instead of
undertaking essential works the Trust under your stewardship has wasted around
£40,000 on these type of pointless consultancy exercises.
Barham Park is neglected and faces ruin. Yet the bronze option which was
meant to develop a repair and maintenance plan has been inexplicably dropped.
The excuse for this is the claim that the Trust is not generating enough
income. This is partly because it is YOU who decided to implement a policy of
rents based on social value and because officers have failed for years to
collect the correct income that is due to the Trust. ACAVA was allowed to build
up rent arrears equal to much more than their annual rent due. They were not
charged interest on these arrears. Their rent review due in 2019 was overlooked
- losing the Trust in excess of £5,000 in rent each year since then. (£20,000
lost income in the 4 years since). Who made the decision to forget or ignore
the terms of their lease?
There are many more examples where correct income has not been charged
or recoverable expenses have not been recovered. Officers do not bother to tell
you and none of the Trustees bother to find out the truth.
Local people love Barham Park and are angry at the way Brent Council as
Trustee and Managers of the Park allow it be neglected and run down.
Those local people, with much greater local knowledge than either you or
the other Trustees, are ignored or not allowed to speak at the Trust meetings.
The Accounts presented to the Trustees are misleading and fundamentally
wrong. They had to be pulled at the last moment on 5 September. The revised
Accounts are still wrong as they do not reflect the reality and are completely
misleading.
Where for example in those accounts or those for previous years does it
show the Income (grants) received to undertake the work on the Barham Park Pond
or the ongoing work on the QE II Silver Jubilee Garden and where is the
expenditure shown and included. The total sums involved exceed £100,000 and yet
the accounts do not show any of this financial activity. In both cases the Accounts
should show 'restricted' income and the ongoing expenditure that the income is
being used for.
As Paul Lorber has already pointed out to officers the 2022/23 revised
Accounts being presented are wrong and misleading. The Trustees should NOT
approve them and ask for an accountant with knowledge of Charity accounting
& reporting to review the financial affairs of the Barham Park Trust and
assist in the preparation of accounts that reflect the true position of the
Income & Expenditure of the Trust for the year to 31 March 2023 and the
Trusts financial position as at 31 March 2023.
There is a long list of failures to highlight in the way Barham Park has
been mismanaged and money wasted. The Trustees are not being told the truth and
you and the others are failing to ask the right questions.
If you either want to know the truth and have a genuine commitment to
improve Barham Park and its building and recreation of local people as Titus
Barham intended, then you have to start listening and engaging with people who
know a great deal about Barham Park and whole heartedly care for its future.
Regards
Francis Henry
for Friends of Barham Park
representing the views of local people
Readers having been present at the last meeting or seen the video or media reports may be interested in how the Minutes record what happened.
