Will Sir Bernard give us the latest on Met's Kensal Rise fraud investigation?

The Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service, Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, is visiting Brent on Wednesday. The visit is advertised as a chance to 'talk to him, listen to his vision for London and share your thoughts and ideas'.

The meeting is from 6.30pm-7.30pm (doors open 6pm) on July 16th at Alperton Community School, Stanley Avenue, Wembley.

In the absence of any other commmunication from the Met perhaps he can tell us how the investigation into the fraudulent emails in support the Kensal Rise Library development is going?

Brent not commenting on Tewari allegations as Wembley Matters refuses to pull Audit Report

I understand that Brent Council is refusing to comment on the Davini allegations LINK as it would 'not be in the public interest'.

At the end of last week Fiona Ledden, head of Brent Legal and Procurement wrote 'requiring' me to take down the leaked documents. This is the correspondence:

Dear Mr Francis

I am most concerned that you have quoted on your website a number of documents that have been redacted and made available to a respondent in litigation, which is yet to be heard before a judicial panel. The documents are confidential and provided to the relevant party solely for an Employment Tribunal. The case has not yet commenced and releasing documents before the tribunal has started to hear the evidence is highly inappropriate.

I am requiring that you take down the documents which you have attached until the close of the proceedings.

I will be taking this matter up with the relevant party’s representative and during the hearing itself, I consider these documents to remain confidential until the tribunal lifts that confidentiality.

Yours sincerely

Fiona Ledden

Director of Legal and Procurement

London Borough Brent

Could you please tell me under what powers you are 'requiring that you take down the documents...'
Thank you
Martin Francis

Dear Mr Francis

My reasoning is that, except in certain circumstances that do not apply here, a party to whom a document has been disclosed in litigation may only use that document for the purposes of the proceedings in which they were disclosed. It is clear that these documents have been leaked from the court bundle, and therefore I request that you remove the attachments that you have placed on the blog.

Regards 

Fiona Ledden

Director of Legal and Procurement

London Borough Brent

It does not appear to me that you have any powers or authority to 'require' me to take down the attachments and I believe that the wider public interest is served by them remaining on Wembley Matters.
Regards,
Martin Francis

Over the weekend I edited the attachments so as to concentrate on the main issue, the Draft Audit Report, and that remains on the blog.

In my opinion this is a case of straightforward 'whistle blowing' backed up by the published document. We, the public, Brent taxpayers and council tax payers, have a right to know:

• How our money is spent
• How effectively the spending is monitored
• Whether employment practices are fair
• Whether all employees are treated equally regardless of their position in the authority
• Whether elected councillors have full knowledge of these matters
• What oversight councillors have over senior officer decisions on employment and disciplinary matters with the Corporate Management Team

Eric Pickles urged to investigate Brent Council over handling of fraud allegations

Ex-union activist Nan Tewari has written to Eric Pickles, Secretary of Stae for Communities and Local Government, raising a number of issues concerning the handling of allegations that Cara Davani, Brent's Director of Human Resources misused her Brent Council Oyster Card.  The letter is written at a time when Brent Council has dismissed 11 workers over alleged serious breaches of financial regulations and the staff code of conduct.LINK

In the long and detailed open letter Nan Tewari states:

Now after more than a year later [after the initial investigation of the Oyster card issue], it appears that there is only a draft internal audit report of the investigation in existence. Why was the report never finalised? Might it be because the treatment of Ms Davani has been unduly lenient in comparison with others and would therefore not stand up to scrutiny? The audit committee minutes of March 13 notes that it was highlighted that 18 cases of internal fraud were found, resulting in five dismissals and 10 resignations before action could be taken. Ms Davani presides over, and advises on these very disciplinary and dismissal cases and it is difficult to see how her position can remain tenable given what she has done. She is at the head of the council's workforce and as such must be an exemplar of the highest standards of behaviour expected of every person employed to work in the council or provide services to it.

The internal audit report, which is available below, was written about a period of considerable turmoil  in the Council and tensions in the relationship between officers and leading Labour politicians. Following Muhammed Butt's election to Labour and Brent Council leadership, in succession to Ann John,  disagreements developed between him and Gareth Daniel LINK , Chief Executive, which eventually led to Daniel leaving his post. Members. The CMT (Corporate Management Team, had written a letter in support of Daniel.  Fiona Ledden, now head of Legal and Procurement stepped in as Interim Chief Executive.

The audit report is heavily redacted but gives a picture of events. CMT is Corporate Management Team. XXXX indicates redaction.

Time for a public debate on Kensal Rise Library issues

At the beginning of this month I carried a 'Guest Blog'  LINK from trustees of the Friends of Kensal Rise Library on why they had reached an agreement with the developer, Andrew Gillick. This has attracted many comments with the debate becoming quite heated at times. I posted an update on the planning application for the redevelopment of the library building on Saturday LINK which has also attracted debate.  The revelation of the option agreemment between All Souls and Andrew Gillick LINK added another dimension to the discussion.

There are three main questions arising from the debate as far as I can see:

1. Is the agreement the best deal possible for the campaign to safeguard a community library space in the building, is it secure and will the Friends be able to raise the necessary funds for the upkeep and running of the space?
2. Should the police investigation into the fraudulent emails supporting Andrew Gillick's first planning application be concluded before the Brent Planning Committee considers this planning application and would a delay put the acquisition of the community space in jeopardy?
3. What are the ramifications of the option agreement and should it be submitted as evidence to the Planning Committee?

Having hosted this debate on Wembly Matters I do recognise that it has reached only a small number of people but concerns a whole local community.

As the issue is clearly controversial with strong opinions voiced on both sides, I wonder of there should be a public meeting where some of these matters can be thrashed out, starting from the assumption that everyone wants to retain a library presence in the building?

The consultation closes on April 28th and there is a possibility that the application will go to the May 14th Planning Committee, a week before the local elections.

What do Brent councillors think about deferral of Kensal Rise planning application?

A lively and at times passionate debate is taking place on these pages over the redevelopment of the Kensal Rise building.

The article has attracted more comments than  almost any other on this blog and I am posting this to invite readers who may have missed it to join in.

In particular I am inviting councillors and council election candidates to respond to what is clearly an important local matter.

One major theme is whether the planning application should be deferred until after police have completed their investigation into the alleged fraudulent emails submitted in support of the developer Andrew Gillick's previous planning application. LINK

Other matters include whether the space offered to the trustees of Friends of Kensal Rise Library for a community library is sufficient, and how robust that agreement is.

The original article by the trustees of the Friends of Kensal Rise Library and subsequent comments can be seen HERE

Since this was written responses have started coming in via Twitter. I will update here:

1. Martin Francis ‏@WembleyMatters 1h

   .@CllrButt What do you think? http://www.wembleymatters.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/what-do-brent-councillors-think-about.html …
2. Cllr. Muhammed Butt ‏@CllrButt 1h

   .@WembleyMatters we have a statutory responsibility to look at application. 1000's apps in Brent. Do we check the person or application

   
   

    Vicky Zentner ‏@vickyzentner 56m

   @WembleyMatters @CllrButt isn't ignoring the suspicion over fraudulent emails at very least morally wrong and at worst, collusion?
3. Meg Howarth ‏@howarthm 47m

   @CllrButt Both person& app.need flagging up.Planning cmtee statutorily independent&can vote to defer hearing>
4. Alex Colas ‏@AlexWG2014 18m
   

   .@WembleyMatters Planning cmtee should defer decision on this application until investigation into fraud allegations are completed.

@WembleyMatters 1/2 Strongly agree planning app should be deferred until outcome of investigation. Result might invalidate, for example. Alison Hopkins  @Hopkins_Alison   @WembleyMatters 2/2 FKRL know if space enough. I want VERY watertight legal guarantees. I've bad experiences with developers (Brent X!

Email Fraud: Will the new broom reach into some murky corners?

Guest blogger Meg Howarth continues to press for answers in 'The Case of the Fraudulent Emails'. It should be straightforward but...

New brooms generally sweep clean, so it's to be hoped that Brent police's freshly appointed borough commander, Chief Superintendent Michael Gallagher, has already put his officers to work on a thorough investigation into this affair (WM 13 March). Brent Council may technically be the 'victim' of this email scam but it's local residents whose addresses were stolen and abused (alongside some out-of-borough suspect comments). It's they who are the real victims. 

It shouldn't be forgotten, either, that it's Brent's incompetence that allowed its IT planning system to be spoofed in this way. While the council may have now got its online act together, some of its constituents are awaiting an answer to the question: who stole their addresses in an apparent attempt to aid developer Andrew Gillick's change-of-use planning application for Kensal Rise Library? Would matters have been cleared up sooner if the council originally passed all of its information to Action Fraud (WM 27 Feb, also 4 & 6 Feb)? Residents, not procedures, must now come first.

Given the on/off, toing and froing over this business - from no inquiry on 31 January to a change of police mind, the involvement of Kensington and Chelsea police, and finally Brent - the sad reality is that it seems as if the sifting of what police have termed the 'complex' evidence of apparent fraud has fallen to the local force. If its investigation can't be completed before Mr Gillick's latest planning application - submitted on 7 March - goes before Brent's planning committee, the developer's application must be put on hold pending the outcome of its inquiry. This is in everyone's interests, including that of the applicant himself. 

To date, the council has argued that under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 it

'has a responsibility and obligation to consider any valid planning application that is put forward from any individual(s). It must consider each on its merits in accordance with its statutory obligations'. 

As a member of Brent's Planning and Regeneration team has admitted, attempting to influence a planning decision (itself a criminal offence) through fake emails is 'not mentioned in the [1990] Act'. Bizarrely, instead of drawing what most would see as the obvious conclusion - putting an application on hold until an active police inquiry is complete - the officer concludes: 

'...consequently the LPA [local planning authority, in this case Brent] could not decide to decline any application that was submitted to it for consideration, providing that it met the validation requirements that apply to all planning application submissions'...!

Why not? Isn't an active police inquiry sufficient reason - just as someone might be suspended from a job while an  investigation into his/her conduct is underway? If Andrew Gillick is exonerated, his planning application can then be considered free from this long shadow. 

Footnote: Michael Gallagher began work as Brent's police boss on 3 March. A one-time member of Scotland Yard's Specialist Crime directorate, his previous posting was in Lewisham. Prior to that he was deployed in Lambeth.

Wall of Shame around Kensal Rise Library as developer annexes community asset

Gillick's Wall of Shame going up around Kensal Rise Library today

The Bursar of All Souls College, Thomas Seaman, has confirmed that the sale of Kensal Rise Library to developer Andrew Gillick has been completed.

All Souls College therefore has no further role having facilitated Gillick's possession of the site by demolishing the pop up library. They appear to have ignored pleas that the sale should not be completed until police investigations had reached a conclusion.

They have washed their hands of the problem but it won't go away as we wait for confirmation that the police are definitely going to investigate the fraudulent emails in Mr Gillick's previous planning application.

Police may look again at email fraud evidence in Kensal Rise development

The Evening Standard LINK  is reporting tonight that the police are set to launch an inquiry into the fraudulent emails that supported developer Andrew Gillick's planning application for the Kensal Rise Library building.

Hannah Bewley, who reports on Brent for the Harrow Observer, however has uploaded a story LINK that states:

A spokesman for Kensington and Chelsea police, which is dealing with the investigation, said: “Police have been informed that there is further evidence to support the allegation of fraud and are awaiting receipt thereof. A decision whether to progress the allegation will be made after all the evidence has been scrutinised.”

Clearly that raises the question of whether all the information was handed over by Brent Council  or perhaps the 'further evidence' is from individuals whose names and addresses were used without their consent. 

Whatever the case news that the police are now taking the issue seriously after their earlier dismissive attitude is welcome.

Butt 'bitterly disappointed' over dropping of police fraud email investigation

Reporter Hannah Bewley of the Wembley and Willesden Observer has been busy following up the Kensal Rise Pop Up library demolition story. Her report LINK contains the following statements from the Council and Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt:

A spokesman for Brent Council said:

The council undertook its own detailed enquiries before referring the matter to the police and provided the police with a summary of the outcome as part of the agreed referral process through the National Fraud Reporting Centre. The council remains very concerned about the way that the planning portal was used on this occasion and has subsequently made changes to forestall future problems arising. The council wants to continue to maintain the highest level of integrity with its planning process, since the authority continues to have statutory responsibilities to consider planning applications that are submitted.

Labour leader of the council Muhammed Butt said:

It is bitterly disappointing that the police have chosen to ignore the evidence found in the council’s own inquiries and drop their investigation. When the future of the building affects hundreds of Brent residents and the entire Kensal Rise community, any issue of alleged fraud must surely be a priority in order to maintain the trust of local people. Whilst I know that this Conservative-Liberal Democrat Government has cut the police force by a fifth in the last three years, I am troubled that this investigation has not been carried out as a matter of urgency. Brent Council will be writing to demand that the police review their original decision and launch an appropriate investigation.

Pressure mounted further following an Evening Standard report  LINK on the demolition and Hannah Bewley hinted on Twitter that the police may change their stance and expects a statement tomorrow morning. Cllr James Denselow tweeted back saying that he had 'seen the emails'  (presumably those between the council and police - not the fake ones) and that he had his fingers crossed.

I understand that  Kirsty Slattery, of Gracelands Yard, whose address was falsely used to support Andrew Gillick's planning application is taking up the issue directly with the police, having had no response to her emails to Brent Council.

Supine Brent Council accept NFA in alleged Kensal Rise fraud

Who would Miss Marple suspect?

Accusations of malpractice in planning application in Brent are not new.  There were suspicions about a last minute surge in support for the Willesden Green development LINK, an independent investigation was carried out over Paul Lorber's email interchange with the bidder for the Barham Park library site LINK and currently we have the issue of fake emails submitted for the Kensal Rise Library development. LINK

At the weekend Cllr Muhammed Butt revealed in a sharp email interchange with a Labour Party member that the fraud police had decided not to take their investigation further. A strange decision when such developments are worth millions of pounds.

One would think that Brent Council, as the guardian of council taxpayers' money and responsible for the fair conduct of planning applications, having had their attention drawn to the fake email by KR campaigners,  and finding enough evidence in their own investigation to pass the matter on to Action Fraud, would have established why the police had decided on no further action.

 I am sure Miss Marple would consider the question, 'Who stands to benefit from this fraud?' and then investigate accordingly.

Does the lack of a police investigation mean Brent Council just goes ahead with hearing the planning application as if nothing has happened. Do the residents who have clearly stated that their addresses were used without their permission, for a cause they did not support, just accept that no further action will be taken?

Instead of any such action Fiona Ledden, Head of Legal and Procurement at Brent Council, copied a complainant into this email, which is a masterpiece in conveying absolutely nothing in four paragraphs.

I am writing to inform you of the outcome of the police investigation into the potential fraudulent use of emails in respect of the planning application for the building of the former library at Kensal Rise.

The Police have now informed the Council that it is not taking further the investigation into potential fraudulent emails in respect of the planning application for the building of the former library at Kensal Rise.

The Council does want to continue to maintain the highest level of integrity with its planning process, since the Council continues to have statutory responsibilities to consider planning applications that are submitted.

I know you will be disappointed by this conclusion but in taking the action, the Council has already demonstrated their continuing concerns with regards to this matter.

If the planning application and committee hearing goes ahead, as if nothing has happened, it will be a strange way of  demonstrating 'continuing concerns' on this matter.

Answers needed urgently on Kensal Rise fake emails

Guest post by Meg Howarth

Muhammed Butt's late-night sneering tweet to Michael Calderbank claiming that Brent Council had 'provided all the evidence and police not pursuing' the fake email business fails to inspire confidence in the council's, let alone the NFIB's, handling of this grubby affair.

An official statement from the council on the matter is needed urgently. Brent was contacted by the police on 21 January. Does it take 10 days - and the shameless destruction of the pop-up at the Kensal Rise Library site - before the release even of this snippet of information - and, then, in this personally antagonistic and entirely unsuitable fashion? Bad news burying even worse news? Michael Calderbank was simply asking about progress of the email investigation. 

Some immediate questions that demand public answers are:

- Why have the police decided not to pursue the matter?

- Has the council probed this decision? If not, why not?

- Was Andrew Gillick interviewed by the NFIB (National Fraud and Investigation Bureau)? If not, why not? 

- Was the NFIB told of the apparent sub-letting of Mr Gillick's St Mary Mansions Paddington flat at the time a comment using that address was posted on the Barham Library planning application site? Two comments using that address appeared a couple of months earlier on the Kensal Library planning site.

- Was any attempt made to try and trace the fake emails, as Margaret Smith asks above? If not, why not? As a computer expert confirms: 'it could be very easy if...no precautions [were taken], and difficult or impossible in other circumstances'. This is surely where the occupancy of Mr Gillick's Mary Mansions flat at the time of the three planning comments could help resolve matters?

The computer expert went on to say: 'It's not very clever of Brent to collect comments via a system that is this easy to spoof. They could easily take a few precautions, [otherwise] this kind of thing will only become more frequent'. Fortunately, it seems that the council has now beefed up its system of online comment in the wake of this nasty affair. But

the the police decision not to pursue the matter hardly clears it up and any new [planning] application will be heard in an atmosphere of suspicion' (Martin Francis). Precisely. 

It seems that a further planning application from Andrew Gillick is expected to be lodged shortly.

The council's lax system enabled the email scam. The very least it must now do is publicise the reasons for the police's decision not to proceed and prosecute. Planning matters around the Kensal Rise Library building can only become even messier without the utmost transparency by the council.

Footnote: 'hippy' references, as posted in comments on this blog. also featured in the online planning comments supporting Mr Gillick's application. It's unclear whether they were found by the council to be amongst the fake emails passed to the police.

Video: Kensal Rise rises up to defend their library

Kensal Rise development fake email action now in police hands

Cllr Roxanne Mashari, Brent Council Executive member and lead for Environment and Neighbourhoods, today confirmed to Kensal Rise Library campaigners that the Council has referred the matter of fake emails to the police for further action.

The fake emails were sent to Brent Planning Officers purporting to support developer Andrew Gillick's planning application for the redevelopment of Kensal Rise Library. Gillick has recently complained to the local press that Brent Council is not talking to him.

Would you choose a school recommended by this man?

The message from Michael Gove above appears on the website of the Kings Science Academy, captured by me today in case it disappears.

The Independent today carries a story that Michael Gove has been accused of covering up allegations of £80,000's worth of financial irregularities at the school.

Michael Gove is a great fan of Katharine Birbalsingh who is presently touting for custom for her Michaela Academy Free School which is due to open in an old College of North West London buiilding next to the railway line at Wembley Park next year.

Rumour has it that she is having difficulty in recruiting pupils.

Help bring Kensal Rise Library fraudsters to justice

A request from the Kensal Rise Library Campaign

We are expecting the council to pursue the origins of the fraudulent submissions of support for the planning submission as reported in The Kilburn Times LINK  and The Evening Standard  LINK last week.

We have been promised an investigation and report as soon as possible.

Help us to keep up the pressure on the council to find out where this dodgy support comes from by writing to the Leader of the Council and your local councillors asking them to make sure the council makes every effort to find out who is guilty of this fraudulent support. We can’t allow local democracy to be undermined  by such abuse of the consultative processes of the council.

Leader of the Council Muhammed Butt cllr.muhammed.butt@brent.gov.uk

You can contact your local councillors by email:
Kensal Green Ward
Bobby Thomas cllr.bobby.thomas@brent.gov.uk  Claudia Hector cllr.claudia.hector@brent.gov.uk
James Powney  cllr.james.powney@brent.gov.uk

Queens Park Ward
James Denselow cllr.jamesdenselow@brent.gov.uk  Simon Green cllr.simon.green@Brent.gov.uk
Michael Adeyeye  cllr.michaeladeyeye@brent.gov.uk

Brondesbury Park Ward
Barry Cheese cllr.barry.cheese@brent.gov.uk   Mark Cummins cllr.mark.cummins@brent.gov.uk
Carol Shaw cllr.carol.shaw@brent.gov.uk

We are expecting the council to pursue the origins of the fraudulent submissions of support for the planning submission as reported in The Kilburn Times and The Evening Standard last week.

http://www.kilburntimes.co.uk/news/brent_council_received_high_proportion_of_fake_emails_supporting_kensal_rise_library_development_plans_1_2675302

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/faked-emails-support-flats-plan-for-library-8829637.html. We have been promised an investigation and report as soon as possible.

Help us to keep up the pressure on the council to find out where this dodgy support comes from by writing to the Leader of the Council and your local councillors asking them to make sure the council makes every effort to find out who is guilty of this fraudulent support. We can’t allow local democracy to be undermined  by such abuse of the consultative processes of the council.

Leader of the Council Muhammed Butt cllr.muhammed.butt@brent.gov.uk

You can contact your local councillors by email:

Kensal Green Ward

Bobby Thomas cllr.bobby.thomas@brent.gov.uk  Claudia Hector cllr.claudia.hector@brent.gov.uk

James Powney  cllr.james.powney@brent.gov.uk

Queens Park Ward

James Denselow cllr.jamesdenselow@brent.gov.uk  Simon Green cllr.simon.green@Brent.gov.uk

Michael Adeyeye  cllr.michaeladeyeye@brent.gov.uk

Brondesbury Park Ward

Barry Cheese cllr.barry.cheese@brent.gov.uk   Mark Cummins cllr.mark.cummins@brent.gov.uk

Carol Shaw cllr.carol.shaw@brent.gov.uk

- See more at: http://www.savekensalriselibrary.org/2013/09/26/art-fraud-and-boards/#sthash.0Zz54yUH.dpuf

Brent Council legal team to investigate fraud allegations over Kensal Rise Library development

The Friends of Kensal Rise Library have sent a preliminary list to Brent Council of what it claims are fraudulent statements of support for the proposal of developer Andrew Gillick of Kensal Properties Ltd to put seven dwellings and a small space for community use into the former Kensal Rise Library.

The campaigners believe that the addresses of residents have been used without their consent and empty buildings and invented addresses have been used in order to influence and mislead the public and the planning committee of Brent Council who will decide if the proposal is to go ahead.

The ‘Friends’ intend to follow up this list later this week with another tranche of, what they believe, are fraudulent statements of support.

A number of residents have already sent complaints to the council.

Faye Bradbury, a local resident commented:

It is an outrage support has been listed in my name. I've always supported the Save Kensal Rise Library campaign.

Brent Council has reacted promptly with the Lead Member for the Environment, Roxanne Mashari sending the list to the head of Brent’s legal department with a request for an investigation and report as soon as possible.

It is understood that the list has also been sent to Boris Johnson the Mayor of London.

Margaret Bailey Chair of the Trustees of the Friends said:

We have taken advice from the Metropolitan Police and they advised in the first instance that we lodge a complaint with the council. We have done this and the council will investigate and produce a report as soon as possible. This is a very serious matter as fraud is illegal under the Fraud Act 2006. Naturally we hope any investigation by Brent Council or potentially the police will show who has lodged these statements of support.

All Souls College, who are still the legal owners of the building and who have entered an agreement with the developer Andrew Gillick of Kensal Properties to sell the property, have been notified of the suspicious statements of support.

Local investigations will continue.

Similar allegations were made in the planning consultation for the Willesden Green Library development as the commenter blow has reminded us LINK