Arfon Jones
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Likewise for Gwersyllt and Summerhill and because WCBC cut subsidies so will TAITH the Regional Transport Forum so whatever cut WCBC will be made worse. A thoroughly badly thought out proposal. A 0.5% increase in council tax will more than cover the cost of subsidising these bus services, a small price to pay for a service that brings such economic benefit to the town centre.
Carrie Harper responds to WCBC Press Release:
‘In law, when a joint tenant gives notice it has the effect of ending the tenancy for both parties’. This may well be the case but the point is you never informed either tenant that this would be the situation for them, a point already acknowledged in meetings with officers.
In terms of looking at ‘individual circumstances’ you are yet to provide Cllr Gregory with ANY detail regarding how you have come to the decision not to allocate him the tenancy. This point was outlined to you in writing last week following the decision. A decision which it should be noted, has taken 15 weeks, rather than the usual 4 weeks. Nor have you followed the lettings protocol specifically set out for dealing with applications from local members, family members and staff.
As regards the information regarding the fact that no tenant in these circumstances has been refused a joint to sole tenancy over the last 2 years, quite a staggering fact in itself, this request for information was from a sitting Cllr who was forced to go through the FOI process to obtain it due to your refusal to answer the question. A breach of the councils constitution in itself as I understand it? Possibly you clarify?
As you refute any any suggestion of discrimination, possibly you can also enlighten us as to how many other tenants across the borough have received a hand delivered letter from the council informing them they are a ‘tolerated trespasser’? Another question that has yet to be answered.
You also fail to note the situation regarding Cllr Gregory’s disabilities and the £7,000 of adaptations to this property to cater for his medical needs, I assume this issue has been considered as part of the decision making process but with no further information from yourselves, this is of course very difficult to establish.
By all means, please feel free to elaborate on any of the above points in response.
This is the FOIA questions and responses:
Wrexham County Borough Council
Response/Digest FOI 3610
Department: Housing & Public Protection
1. In the last 2 yrs how many joint tenancies have been surrendered?
78 joint tenancies have been surrendered and referred for a Management Move. This figure does not include those tenancies which were terminated and both parties sought suitable alternative accommodation.2. And how many of those tenancies were transferred to single tenancy and allowed to remain in their existing homes?
Of these tenancies 78 were transferred to sole occupancy. This figure will include tenancies where one person is left in the property and where one tenant is left in the property with non dependents or dependent children.As you can see, no mention of the three bedroom house transfer etc in the FOIA,
Perhaps you need to question the selectivity of WCBC’s information and their ‘poetic licence’ in responding to FOIA requests.Incidentally I have asked for a review to include a breakdown of the answers in Q2.
There is an FOIA which supports what is said on the blog, likewise the £600,000 spent on EXTERNAL legal fees to administer/challenge equal pay claims over the last 8 years is supported by FOIA evidence. Wrexham CBC cannot say that their FOIA information is wrong as they would then be admitting to a prima facie case under the Act.
When the case goes to court or when the Ombudsman decides! At least we are having a debate about it which is more than what we were having before I posted the blog.
@wxm 10378 wrote:
Surely it cannot be a Code of Conduct issue if you are engaging with a genuine cross section of the community who believe the manner in which business is being transacted is wrong. This is 2013.
You would think so wouldn’t you! I wrote to the Chief Executive regarding what I perceived to be maladministration. Had an email back reporting me under the ‘protocol’ for low level complaints. Likewise we raised concerns in Scrutiny about the quality of workmanship by outside contractors and the fact that a senior officer warned a Councillor not to spread the word.
Scrutiny is fine on paper, but its when your scrutiny is such that you start to unearth things and threaten the comfy life of the bureaucracy is when they start to bite back:mad:
They hide behind the Local Government Act 1972, which provides them with exemptions like commercial sensitivity and labour relations. Section 45 of FOIA provides public authorities with absolute exemptions from disclosure if that disclosure is exempt under another piece of legislation and Section 45 FOIA is not subject to the Public Interest Test. What we have tried to do in our appeal to the Information Commissioner is to argue that Wrexham Council have unnecessarily included information of a sensitive & confidential nature in reports JUST to make them Part 2 and keep them out of the public domain.
Apologies if its confusing but it wasn’t easy to word the appeal either.
As to what can be done, a media campaign would most certainly help raise awareness as to how transparency can be manipulated.
Don’t suppose WCBC will be too impressed with this post so I suppose this will be another code of conduct issue!
