| Topic: | Re:Re:Confident. | |
| Posted by: | John Cameron | |
| Date/Time: | 22/04/18 13:32:00 |
| @ Adam The WPCC's finances are in a state, however this is entirely self inflicted. For years the trustees, (partly under pressure from Wandsworth, I have seen the letters) didn't bother to collect the full levy to which they were entitled. At the same time they starved the assets of investment and built up a cash pile far beyond what was needed. There was little focus on finance, reporting was limited to how much there was in various bank accounts (of banks you have never heard of). When large windfalls were available they were ignored, for example the undersale of Mill House or the access at Putney Hospital. When the Spencer Benches first arrived no advice was taken in terms of rent and when it was eventually taken (when I was a trustee) the surveyors chosen by Lee were incompetent, their advice worthless. The auditors were equally incompetent, and eventually sacked, but not before they threatened me when I openly questioned their judgement. They were defended by Lee and Whyte at the time, the WPCC needed tame auditors to keep the lid on the soft deals under scrutiny. I calculated that some £6m, but probably much more, was left on the table due to a deliberate and very casual attitude to financial rigour. Champagne fuelled parties at Christmas were (and continue to be) held at the golf club, paid for by resident's taxes. Resdents don't attend, but get to pay the bar bill. To answer your question - firstly it is important to understand that the Act is law, and must be followed to the letter. There is no wriggle room in this, to not do so is unlawful and misconduct by the trustees. In the past the trustees chose to do so, and then had to lie about it when challenged. They also ignore the Charities Act, and use their mates at law firms to cover up for them. To repair the finances I would certainly go after the losses of £1.6m from the undersale of land, and also look at other cosy transactions in the past few years. Lee should be sacked, for no other reason than his gross misconduct in lying to residents and the Charity Commission. He is on a package of c£150,000, so that's a hefty saving, as there is no need to replace him, or compensate him. Lee recruited a deputy on more than the previous CEO earned and it doesn't need two highly paid managers to run the commons. Lee demanded a deputy to allow him the time to 'be strategic' but the reality was he simply did less, he is not a stranger to a long weekend and a fish supper. Lee is also financially dyslexic, his much promised business plan never materialised, as didn't know where to begin it. There are also pretty big savings to be made by dropping some of the historic baggage that the WPCC hold so dear. Everyone who asks for something gets a soft deal, so long as you don't rock the boat, or are pals with a trustee. If the books cannot be balanced on a steady state basis, the fix is simple - a 'one off' increase of the levy by a modest amount, and then RPI thereafter. The levy is spread across the council rate bands so hits homes reasonably proportionally. I believe the levy has become 'detached' from the reality of the WPCC overheads. The WPCC overhead is fixed so figuring out what is needed is pretty straightforward. If say the average levy went up by £10, (none for the lowest bands up to say £25 for the highest), the WPCC would be home and dry. This would raise around £500k to the current c£1m. I suggested it repeatedly before Lee and Whtye threw me out for whistleblowing. Andrew Bignold who ran as a trustee suggested it sensibly in his 'manifesto', he came last, one behind me. When a trustee I suggested that the WPCC should correct the maps which are grossly inaccurate, they were stretched on Lee's instructions to ensure that no refunds could be claimed. There are homes in Richmond which pay no levy at all, others that pay that shouldn't. Lee and his team then lied when it was raised at a board meeting, to ensure that there would be no review, as it exposes his previous deceit. MP's Greening and Hammond lobbied the Charity Commission to close down the Statutory Inquiry - keen to protect Lee and former trustees. They called the Charity Commission's investigation vexatious, claiming there was no case to answer. Knowing what the Charity Commission have in terms of evidence I cannot see how Lee can survive the investigation. |