So now we know.
http://www.hartlepooolpost.co.uk (http://www.hartlepooolpost.co.uk)
What an appalling state of affairs ... somehow I can't imagine certain elements wriggling out of this one unscathed ...
I'm a bit staggered by the complacency of all this. How long have Manor Res being going? Their management is a joke (is that the right word?) yet this sounds as if HBC is simply telling them that they have 2 months to put their house in order - it ain't going to happen.
What they should be doing is telephoning the fraud office.
It seems obvious that all public money going into MR should now stop and bank accounts frozen or at least be taken completely out of the control of the present management. It also needs a new set of Trustees to be appointed as the present lot seem to be next to useless.
Funny, as soon as I wrote that I was immediately reminded of that report into the Phoenix Centre someone linked to on here - I think we've been here before. I think Wilcox and her clan need to be chased out and someone parachuted in to give us all a true picture of what has been going on. Only then will anyone have any real idea if it's now a totally dead duck. Certainly any thought of that new contract going to Wilcox's Who Cares should be kicked well into touch - out of the ground preferably.
A while ago I asked the Question in a Full Council Meeting....
Are organisations that are funded by HBC actually Audited by HBC ??? The answer I received was, Yes They Are.
Obviously someone was telling Porkies.
This report highlights several major causes of concern, If Cllr Wilcox as manager of MR was unaware of this (Other) bank account, who was it that actually opened & administered the account ??? Who paid the £40,000 into it ??? & what was the £40,000 used for ???
There are 5 major findings in the report; all of them are classified as being in the High Risk Category, if findings such as these came to light in a company in the Private Sector there would be several conclusions that spring to mind.
1) Those responsible for the running of the organisation are considered to be a bunch of Total Incompetents, & should be removed from their positions immediately (not in 2 months' time) this would include the whole management regime, Management Board, Board of Trustees & Management Team.
2) The police would be called in to investigate the possibility of any financial irregularities that may have taken place.
3) The recruitment & payment of staff should be investigated.
4) No further funding should be allocated to this Organisation by HBC.
I won`t hold my breath on any of these actions taking place, we have evidential facts that lend us all to believe that some members of HBC wouldn`t like a Mag-Lite shined into the Dark Corners of the Voluntary / Charity Sector in Hartlepool...... The Phoenix Centre & Rockhaven spring to mind.
The Peer Groups Review of HBC`s operations has brought this kind of situation to light & hopefully this Particular Audit Report "unexpurgated", will be brought to the attention of Mr Tom Mitchell Barrister at Law who is conducting the Public Inquiry into the Peer Group Report.
Draft internal report etc......Having read the report as posted by HTH..(Well done incidentally) I am horrified. It makes bad reading for all concerned. In the recent past I believe I read on the site a suggestion was made that it would be futile making a formal complaint to the Police/Fraud Sq. on the grounds that the PCC Mr. Coppinger, a Labour man would be able to hold sway over the Chief Constable M's Cheer on a political basis. I regret to have to remind readers of my words in the past when I quoted him prior to his election as PCC when he said "it is vital Labour secure this position" and I asked what was in his mind making a statement like that. Perhaps I now know what others may feel. However the situation is not so difficult to surpass. There is no requirement to make a complaint of a crime/or any malpractice in that particular area and therefore a report to N.Yorks. for instance once made would be forwarded to Cleveland but can not be forgotten or overridden. In the circumstances I feel an outside force should be called in to overcome any allegations/suspicions of political interference.
Obviously evidence must be available to justify an enquiry however questions need answering. Food for thought.
No wonder the comment most heard when discussions about the council & councillors come up is.......... Whats the point, most of them are at it.
Do we really want that opinion of our elected representatives ??? of course we don`t & in truth most councillors do a good job, but by sitting back & doing nothing, by blindly following party doctrine, councillors do a disservice to their positions & to the electorate of Hartlepool.
I agree. Now, right NOW, above all other times in recent years, the situation is crying out for someone from the Labour group who's genuine (assuming such a person exists) to come forward and take on the current main leaders. I'm surprised it hasn't happened already to be honest (Brash aside).
There's a nice big allowance to be had, the 'hero' status (albeit undeserved) for cutting out the potentially rotten core and if a person(s) does step forward, they MIGHT just about save their own seat on the council.
Failure to be brave and come forward and in my mind, you're guilty by association if there is any criminal fallout from any of this.
If you do nothing.... then you're seats fair game as far i'm concerned.
Referring back to the second 'mystery' bank account, as Stephen Allison says, there are certain inescapable protocols involved in opening any new bank account - protocols which aim to deter money laundering. Surely there is no way that any person or persons unknown to MRA could have set this up without Ms Wilcox's express knowledge and approval? After all, she isn't believed to be overly into delegation at the best of times.
Hearing that MR were at a second tribunal yesterday with a couple more yet to come. Same thing, by all accounts and interestingly, heard by the same people. No details of the outcome as yet.
wouldn't it be weird if they had done just that but then he had refused to sign them......and yet they still got the £680,000 contract. God, that would be soooooo weird....... Mind you, it wouldn't be as weird as if the accountant and the guy who decided to give the contract turned out to be the same person ........ that would be just silly......wouldn't it?
There was an audit of a different kind done on MR/Who Cares a few months ago. It was done by some council officer and was mainly concerned with the committments made on service delievery during the awarding of the contract. It essentilly followed the same format and reached similar conclusions. They were failing to deliver on most counts and essential systems and procedures were either lax or missing altogether.
Recomendations followed along similar lines i.e. it was generally sh**e, even though they were approaching the end of the initial two-year contract and the 'action plan' was simply to give MR/Who Cares more time to put things into place that should have been there from the onset. I think that, at the time, Who Cares had only a couple of months left on the initial contract.
A typical, public sector whitewash, in other words.
I think 'Public Scandal' is the right title for this thread. I reckon this is set to become the biggest scandal to hit Hartlepool for a decade.
In my opinion, the sub-heading on the main page' BUT WHY DID IT TAKE SO LONG TO FIND OUT' is a little mis-leading.
Surely the point is that this has all been known about for some time - years actually. Yet nobody at HBC has been prepared to tackle it. In fact, it looks very much like large contracts were awarded to this organisation when it was already well known that their management practices were seriously suspect. Is it not THAT that is the real scandal.
The real question is why such contracts were awarded, to the exclusion of all others, to an organisation with such an appalling record already well established.
What exactly is it going to take before someone DOES something?
I`m waiting for the plethora of excuses from members of "The Mob" who will be desperately scrabbling to dis-associate themselves from the "Very Naughty People" who have let the Labour Party, The Council & The People of Hartlepool down.
How long do HBC think they can sit on this report & why would they want to, by not disclosing the full facts behind this whole scandal the council would actually be bringing disrepute upon themselves, likewise any attempt to sanitize the report would attract the same condemnation.
We have seen from the problems encountered in trying to access the Phoenix Centre report, there are people within HBC who did not want the details of that unsavoury business to see the light of day, there are sitting councillors who have attempted to circumvent the F.O.I act by trying to stiffle information to the public, these individuals are obviously the people who gave cause for concern to the Peer Review Group.
They are also the people who have no place in the governance of Hartlepool & the sooner they are shown the door the better off Hartlepool will be, the "Self Serving" comments by the Peer Group are starting to look more & more like an "Understatement".
The Judge at the previous Tribunal offered the following comments at the end of his summing up.
Judge Buchanan said: "It is outrageous that such an organisation is not fulfilling its legal obligations".
"I'm only aware of this one case. I hope it's an isolated incident, but one is one too many."
If the latest court cases are heard by Judge Buchanan i can well imagine him being more than a little miffed with the MRA organisation & rightly so.
As an aside, i wonder if any members of the "Manor Clan" are likely to be taking the Association to court ???
The scandal of all of this is that, bad as this audit is, all of these things appear to have existed at the time that the £680,000 contract was awarded to the new Wilcox/Cranney company Who Cares and it looks very much as if councillors and council officers were well aware of this at the time.
This audit is also very limited in its scope concentrating exclusively on financial procedures but there are many other areas which are not covered.
We now know that at least a second tribunal is underway. How many more will there be and what efforts are being made to comply with the previous tribunal findings and compensate employees either past or present? Even here, I sense that all effort is being made to avoid make such compensatory payments. It was bad enough to be caught out paying less than the minimum wage; how bad is it to then try and avoid paying compensation as instructed?
Most posters are of the same opinion, it is about time this whole sorry mess of councillors being involved with voluntary / charitable grant funded organisations, is put under the forensic microscope of an Independent Firm of Accountants, & if neccessary the Police.
after having dealings with ms wilcox in the past (1999/2000) i know quite abit about the way she conducts herself and business and my opinion of her is lets say in the gutter where she belongs, so i am not at all suprised that this scandal has come about, Manor Residents Community Group is a ltd company and manor residents is a charitable company and Who Cares (NE) is a cic company, ow can somebody with her past run these type of companies. she was also involved with a charity called CVT (community vocational training) and things didnt go right there either
what people are forgetting is that she also has a conviction for animal cruelty, but as usual it wasnt her fault she blamed her daughter and baby sitter, what a laugh, the poor dog had tin in its stomach and was so thin you could not tell what breed it was, so allowing this women to have control of so much power is irresponsible. also tell me this a company has 6 pcs and then they move to another building and only 3 pcs are moved to the new building but there was no explanation as to what happened to the misplaced pcs.
Quote from: intheloop on June 03, 2013, 04: PM
what people are forgetting is that she also has a conviction for animal cruelty,
Do you have a (rough) date in order to check up on the details? Was she called Wilcox at the time?
If a press report could be found then it would help expose this woman.
Quote from: mk1 on June 03, 2013, 06: PM
Quote from: intheloop on June 03, 2013, 04: PM
what people are forgetting is that she also has a conviction for animal cruelty,
Do you have a (rough) date in order to check up on the details? Was she called Wilcox at the time?
If a press report could be found then it would help expose this woman.
It would be interesting to know the details but let's face it - this woman is already more exposed than Rockall.
i cant rememer the exact date but it would be between 2000 and 2005 and her daughter was 13 at the time and they lived on wynyard road, it made front page headlines of the mail
now if you'd said that they were giving away a free dog's breakfast..... :-\
This is known as being 'behind the wave'.
(http://www.hartlepoolpost.co.uk/images/catalogue%20of%20concerns.JPG)
Hard to believe that most of the council and officers sanctioned this outfit and give them £650,000 :(
Surely we are well passed the time when any 'changes' are credible. The council should have made sure the organisation was being properly run before giving them such a massive contract or they should have dismissed the whole idea and given the contract to someone else.
From what I'm reading, even the council had concerns and put down a load of conditions attached to the contract - none of which seem to have been acted on. Isn't that straight forward negligence on the part of the Council?
Just a thought but does anyone actually believe that CAB hadn't seen the report by the time The Mail asked him for a comment?
Quote from: perseus on June 05, 2013, 10: AM
No they didn't TGD.... the two organisations are "Totally separate".... Councillor Hall said so, so they must be. ::)
Ohhhhhhhhhh yes i remember it well, he also said there were no conflict of Interest..... ROFLMAO at that one.
There should be "No" Lessons learned as far as this organisation is concerned & also the discredited WC(N/E) they should be cut looose from any connection to HBC immediately, no ifs, no buts.
There are 3 sitting councillors connected to Manor Residents, the Manager CllrA Wilcox & 2 trustees, Cllr S Akers Belcher & Cllr P Beck, they are all accountable for allowing this scandal to have developed in the first place, & even more damming is the fact that it has been allowed to continue for a number of years.
A 4th councillor has connections with Manor Residents, Cll Ged Hall actually signed off a set of accounts for this organisation.
There have been grounds for suspicion for a number of years about the financial probiety of MR, yet it has taken the efforts by the HTH team & members of HTH to generate any real action on what has been going on.
Lets see Cab & his Consort talk themselves out of this.
There is a lot more to come I`m sure.... But for now..... Well done HTH
(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BL_UiE7CUAAeWhn.png)
For once I have to agree with Christopher ;D
Taking things back to 'ground level', so to speak and putting to one side all of the questions about Ms Wilcox's personal behaviour, is it not patently obvious that this woman is no manager - of any variety. She has twice, so far, found herself being taken to an Industrial Tribunal for paying less than the minimum wage, not providing contracts of employment etc. The organisation that she 'manages' has been found to have shambolic accounts and financial control, she uses her position to provide favour to her friends and family and refuses to pass on information to board members.
Compare all of this to what would happen in the private sector where she would have been out on her proverbial ar** long before now.
If Manor Residents has any future, then surely it must be without this woman, her cronies and a board of Trustees that could easily and just as effectively be replaced by a collection of Swiss Cheese plants.
;D ;D that's one way of putting it.....the worrying thing is that it's probably true.
There's a good chance that 'the spokesman' is none other than Trustee, Stephen Akers-Belcher. It can't be Wilcox and none of the other Trustees are vocal enough to suggest that they think they have the authority to say anything.
I've just got hold of a copy of The Mail and it's clear that this is being passed off as a routine audit exercise but again this is a lie. This audit is a direct result of a cabinet decision in January/February that an audit should be carried out on Manor Residents and Who Cares(NE) before any move to give Who Cares(NE) the third-year contract. For some reason, the Who Cares(NE) part of the audit seems to have not happened.
There's a clear suggestion here that the 3rd year contract will still be given to Who Cares(NE) on the assumption that the necessary changes will have been implemented.
Given that the conditions imposed when the original contract itself was first awarded were never followed through, HBC has no mandate to proceed on the same flawed basis.
There is absolutely no way that Who Cares(NE) should be given that 3rd year extension.
In fact, I would say that no further monies should be handed over to MR until Wilcox and the current Trustees are out of it and someone is put in who knows how to account for it.
They are two totally and completely separate entities connected only by address, telephone number, accountants, personnel, management, transport and funding.
Hope I've made that clear ::)
Quote from: steveL on June 05, 2013, 12: PM
They are two totally and completely separate entities connected only by address, telephone number, accountants, personnel, management, transport and funding.
Hope I've made that clear ::)
Oh well, everything is fine then ... ;)
I wonder if Tom Mitchell has seen this corrupt document.
There are 2 points in the Mails article about the report that could be easily substantiated if the will to do so was there.
Wilcox states that the "Main Business" account was subjected to External Fraud, it that was the case the police would surely have been called in to investigate the crime if so, the result of any such inquiry should be readily available.
Wilcox also mentions she was unaware of the £40,000 pounds in a second bank account, the Auditors should have no problem in Identifying Who Opened the account & be able to access Statements of the accounts usage.
The management of Manor Residents has obviously been surrounded by Total Incompetency & as a ratepayer I think it would be prudent of HBC to cease any further funding or support for this organisation until a Full & Independent Audit is carried out.
There are 4 councillors who have, or have had connections with Manor Residents, 1 as manager, 2 as Trustees & another as accountant, what does that say about "The Mob" clearly not a lot.
There has been no review of Individual Contracts of employment, why? Surely it would be informative to know the salaries of the senior management, especially as it appears to have been so incompetent.
Some of the business practices are so unprofessional as to be almost unbelievable, why if Manor Residents & WC(N/E) are separate companies why are Manor Residents funding the salaries of WC(N/E) employees ? Why if they are separate companies are Manor Residents paying WC(N/E) petty cash payments & for how much ? Why if they are separate companies are Manor Residents paying Petrol costs for WC(N/E) vehicles?.
There is something deeply unhealthy in the way the Voluntary / Charity Sector is funded in Hartlepool & it is now all too apparent as to why the Peer Groups Report was so critical about how HBC & certain Councillors function.
It is also obvious to the proverbial "Blind Man on a Galloping Horse" that HBC are attempting to play down this report, the question as ratepayers we need to ask is Why?
"Something is Rotten in the State of Denmark"
Quote from: fred c on June 05, 2013, 02: PM
Wilcox states that the "Main Business" account was subjected to External Fraud,
I am suprised they noticed it given the scale of the internal fraud!
More likely creditor action that resulted in the frozen account and Angie had to use her cash-stash to keep MR running until the fa*tty Belchers could bung her another 600k
It was an expensive mistake. It left a paper trail proving she was running a shadow account.
The report does speak of bouncing Direct Debits.
I can't work out how everyone paid the same tax yet some weren't paid at all,some were on less than the minimum wage and Ged only knows what her family members were raking in.
Quote from: pensionater on June 05, 2013, 05: PM
I can't work out how everyone paid the same tax yet some weren't paid at all,some were on less than the minimum wage and Ged only knows what her family members were raking in.
Employees were having money deducted from wages (
if the were lucky enough to be paid) and it was being kept by the Wilcox clan!
I would be surprised if less than 200k was being diverted (via wages) to the family
Quote from: intheloop on June 04, 2013, 06: PM
i cant rememer the exact date but it would be between 2000 and 2005 and her daughter was 13 at the time and they lived on wynyard road, it made front page headlines of the mail
The more details I get the quicker I find it.
Was her daughter 13 or you think she was 13?
How old is the daughter now?
Quote
IT JUST WON'T WASH'Changes Pledged After Damning Report'The credibility of Hartlepool Borough Council is in tatters today as it continues to try to play down the results of its own negligence and complacency. More than two years after it opted out of the normal tendering process to award a £680,000 contract to a company set up by Labour
Councillors Angie Wilcox and
Kevin Cranney, it has produced a damning report into the financial management of that company's parent organisation Manor Residents Association, itself managed by Councillor Wilcox.
reading the above section i have to laugh because if people can remember ms wilcox was involved in another charity (OFCA) for which mr cranney was also involved and he was taken to court on fraud charges and ms wilcox was star witness for the prosecution (she even asked for police protection against mr cranney). at the time she and mr harriman had set up CVT, when it went to court she was laughed out and told she was pathetic by the judge and lucky not to be on perjury charges. her and cranney hated each other since and so it amazes me that he is again involved with ms wilcox in setting up Who Cares (NE), she is just one big joke
I also believe the root of the problem is Wilcox using MR as a vehicle for giving her family & mates highly paid jobs that they simply can not manage. They are way out of their depth and were bound to bring MR to its knees.
Not to worry. The fa*tty Belchers will do all in their power to sweep it under the carpet. The domino effect you see................
she was definatly 13
Quote from: intheloop on June 05, 2013, 05: PM
it amazes me that he is again involved with ms wilcox in setting up Who Cares (NE),
You would be surprised what people will put up with when there is half a million quid going begging.
I bet they could not believe their luck when the fa*tty Belchers decided to take them under their wing.
Thieves, liars, fraudsters and perjurers who torture defenceless animals. What a shower of sh*ite they all are
Quote from: mk1 on June 05, 2013, 03: PM
Quote from: fred c on June 05, 2013, 02: PM
Wilcox states that the "Main Business" account was subjected to External Fraud,
I am suprised they noticed it given the scale of the internal fraud!
More likely creditor action that resulted in the frozen account and Angie had to use her cash-stash to keep MR running until the fa*tty Belchers could bung her another 600k
It was an expensive mistake. It left a paper trail proving she was running a shadow account.
If there was external fraud the Police would have been informed & would almost certainly have investigated it........ Theres the 1st paper trail.
The Mystery account, who opened it, who accessed the funds in it & what for...... Theres the 2nd paper trail.
HBC cannot afford to let this slide it brings the whole structure of Hartlepool Borough Council into possible disrepute.
Someone in authority needs to involve the police in this, the data protection act probably denies the normal Auditing process being carried out, but a police enquiry wouldn`t be hampered by that.
Quote from: intheloop on June 05, 2013, 06: PM
she is not a nice women.........
Gotcha. Copied your post with a screengrab because have a feeling its not going to be up too long.....................
Its no surprise given the brown stuff flying about over Kilmarnock Rd at the moment, but the Manor Residents website consists of a Front Page.
Are they under a DDOS attack ;) ;) ;)
The HBC draft report states that A.W. was unaware of the second account.
It does not read that "A.W. said that she was unaware of the second account."
Two different things.
So HBC presumably have evidence for the first statement.
Do we then assume that HBC do know, or suspect who set up the second account.
They do not wish to make public everything they have in such a report.
See where you're coming from Rabbit, but I suspect that the semantics don't carry any deep significance.
Quote from: brassed off monkey on June 05, 2013, 08: PM
Its no surprise given the brown stuff flying about over Kilmarnock Rd at the moment, but the Manor Residents website consists of a Front Page.
Are they under a DDOS attack ;) ;) ;)
Yeah and the fact wilcox daughter is on 2000+ salary a month and dosnt even put the man hours in, must be on a lot per hour. Its not about what ya know its who you know within mra
Good to see some other new posters like myself.. i agree with Fred somebody from the Labour group needs to come out and call for an inquiry into this whole sorry mess
Quote from: ARC86 on June 06, 2013, 06: PM
Good to see some other new posters like myself.. i agree with Fred somebody from the Labour group needs to come out and call for an inquiry into this whole sorry mess
It's great to have new voices on board, so 'welcome' to all those who have recently joined us.
Agree - an inquiry into this appalling situation is long overdue; unfortunately, I doubt that this will be instigated by those currently 'in charge' at a local level (they seem to be preoccupied in maintaining an air of 'who me?'). Surely the national Labour Party must be getting a whiff of the foul smells emanating from within the Council Chamber? It's rapidly becoming a stench which must provoke a response, even if it is just a plain old damage limitation exercise!
They definetly have Lucy lass-tick i sent an email two weeks ago to our MP stating my reasons for no longer supporting Labour in town. I'm still awaiting a response. Unfortunately i'm not aware of any other channels to make complaints or i would do so.
Only an independent inquiry will suffice now given the gaping hole those concerned have dug themselves into, but the question still lingers who is going to call for one???
Having spoke to a reliable source today he said mrs Gooding hasnt been paid yet I think thats shocking how can Angie Wilcox and her cronnies get away with it. They shouldnt be still running MRA and she should stand down how can they not know about a second bank account its a load of bollox I had to show my passport when I opened an account how can their be any trust in them. CAB or the other one should hang there heads in shame for not sorting Wilcox out earlier. If they are getting public money shouldnt the police be called in?
Anti-money laundering procedures mean that there is no way any account can be opened without permission and identity checks even when you are a bank employee opening an account never mind otherwise.
A bank is not allowed to move money around without express permission from the account holders, the most they would be able to do was suspend the account and they don't normally do that, they cancel cards, void passwords etc. and issue new ones.
Anybody working for a high street bank will tell you that opening a second account to avoid fraud without the account owners knowledge and permission is a load of rubbish.
....have you ever heard of it before when somebody has been a victim of fraud ? ...me neither.
So what can be done to get rid of the scum bags who have robbed the people on the manor for years Hinge and Bracket want to hang there heads in shame and as for Grotbags I don't no how she has the guts to show her face . I want to no is were is the flash hotdog van they have and the black Landrover .WE WANT ANSWERS
http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/local/daming-report-highlights-significant-issues-at-manor-residents-association-1-5735480
I guess they mean Damning, not Daming.
How did A.W. not know about the 40k, but MRA used this second account as the first one had been targeted by fraudsters??
Why had CAB not seen this report?
Are we seriously supposed to believe that the leader of the Council hadn`t been made privy to the contents of such a "damning report".?
Quote from: rabbit on June 07, 2013, 06: PM
http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/local/daming-report-highlights-significant-issues-at-manor-residents-association-1-5735480
I guess they mean Damning, not Daming.
How did A.W. not know about the 40k, but MRA used this second account as the first one had been targeted by fraudsters??
Why had CAB not seen this report?
Are we seriously supposed to believe that the leader of the Council hadn`t been made privy to the contents of such a "damning report".?
The report has been out for 7 weeks now although not available to the general populace, but if "Our Dear Leader" really expects us to believe he has only just seen it...... he needs to give his head a shake.
The big question that needs to be answered by HBC is why, when an audit into the management & administration system of Manor Residents which Cllr Wilcox mangages was thought neccessary.
Was a Grant of £680,000 pounds given to Who Care (N/E) which has Cllrs Wilcox & Cranney as the 2 Directors ?
I also believe that Cllr C Akers Belcher was, until a few weeks ago a Board Member of Who Cares (N/E) ?
Even more worrying is the fact that given the information that has come to light about the shambolic state of the Accounting procedures at MR under cllr Wilcox, why are HBC considering giving another £340,000 pounds to Who Cares (N/E) ?
Incidentally anyone can make a complaint to the police if they believe something of an illegal nature is taking place, the more people that complain as individuals, the more likely it is the police will look into the goings on at MR
But if you consider the misplacing of 50 gallons of Whitewash & Half a Dozen 6"Brushes illegal..... it isn`t.... its just the norm in dealings with HBC
It was actually Stuart drummond who ordered the audit enquiry into MRA and look wat happened to him he didn't last long nd they votes him out, it just goes to show which councillors have the power in this town
Someone I know telephoned Cleveland Police yesterday asking if they intended to make any charge against those implicated in this whole sorry mess.
After 'eventually' speaking to an officer in charge the said officer hung the phone up on him.
The general view was no one at M.R.A. have committed an offence so Cleveland Police will do nothing.
The law is there to protect some and it would seem others. Silly me I thought it was ALL.
"That states a "person commits an offence if, without reasonable excuse, that person fails to comply with an obligation imposed on them in respect of the disclosure of pecuniary interests on taking office ".
Bit of a loophole there, I think - deliberate or otherwise.
The council are not considering giving WCNE £340,000!
The council have given WCNE £170,000 and have put the other £170,000 (final 6 months of the project) out to formal tended.
There won't be enough time for anyone new to do anything meaningful so the favourites must be the current incumbents and the councillors will be able to deflect any suggestions of corruption onto officers tasked by them to get value for money.
Does anyone actually know someone (without ties to the Labour Group, or jumbled Wilcox, Harriman, Cranney crowd) who has had their lives improved by this million pound service?
Jeezzz it is getting to the stage when anything is believeable about what is going on in HBC, how far up the tree does this lot go, no wonder they want to keep things under wraps :-X :-X :-X
£1,000,0000 for what exactly ::) just who is it that benefits from the Who Cares organisation ::) how much as directors do Cranney & Wilcox make per year out of it :( :( :( :(
There`s an awful lot of questions, unfortunately no one wants to give us the answers :-X well true ones ;) ;)
I had a google on the Localism Act website, and the language does cover the regulations if a councillor (after entering office) does have a pecuniary interest in a subject. In this event he/she must declare that interest etc etc.
The final get out of gaol card seems to be covered in section 33 (Dispensations) which to me, suggests that they can do what they like!
Localism Bill:
30 Disclosure of pecuniary interests on taking office
1) A member or co-opted member of a relevant authority must, before the end of 28 days beginning with the day on which the person becomes a member or co-opted member of the authority, notify the authority's monitoring officer of any disclosable pecuniary interests which the person has at the time when the notification is given
31Pecuniary interests in matters considered at meetings or by a single member
(1)Subsections (2) to (4) apply if a member or co-opted member of a relevant authority—
(a)is present at a meeting of the authority or of any committee, sub-committee, joint committee or joint sub-committee of the authority,
(b)has a disclosable pecuniary interest in any matter to be considered, or being considered, at the meeting, and
(c)is aware that the condition in paragraph (b) is met.
(2)If the interest is not entered in the authority's register, the member or co-opted member must disclose the interest to the meeting, but this is subject to section 32(3).
(3)If the interest is not entered in the authority's register and is not the subject of a pending notification, the member or co-opted member must notify the authority's monitoring officer of the interest before the end of 28 days beginning with the date of the disclosure.
(4)The member or co-opted member may not—
(a)participate, or participate further, in any discussion of the matter at the meeting, or
(b)participate in any vote, or further vote, taken on the matter at the meeting,
but this is subject to section 33.
(7)If the interest is not entered in the authority's register and is not the subject of a pending notification, the member must notify the authority's monitoring officer of the interest before the end of 28 days beginning with the date when the member becomes aware that the condition in subsection (6)(b) is met in relation to the matter.
(1)A person commits an offence if, without reasonable excuse, the person—
(a)fails to comply with an obligation imposed on the person by section 30(1) or 31(2), (3) or (7),
(b)participates in any discussion or vote in contravention of section 31(4), or
(c)takes any steps in contravention of section 31(8).
33Dispensations from section 31(4)
(n.b. I have put some of the text into bold format)
(1).A relevant authority may, on a written request made to the proper officer of the authority by a member or co-opted member of the authority, grant a dispensation relieving the member or co-opted member from either or both of the restrictions in section 31(4) in cases described in the dispensation.
(2)A relevant authority may grant a dispensation under this section only if, after having had regard to all relevant circumstances, the authority—
(a)considers that without the dispensation the number of persons prohibited by section 31(4) from participating in any particular business would be so great a proportion of the body transacting the business as to impede the transaction of the business,
(b)considers that without the dispensation the representation of different political groups on the body transacting any particular business would be so upset as to alter the likely outcome of any vote relating to the business,
(c)considers that granting the dispensation is in the interests of persons living in the authority's area,
(d)if it is an authority to which Part 1A of the Local Government Act 2000 applies and is operating executive arrangements, considers that without the dispensation each member of the authority's executive would be prohibited by section 31(4) from participating in any particular business to be transacted by the authority's executive, or
(e)considers that it is otherwise appropriate to grant a dispensation.
(3)A dispensation under this section must specify the period for which it has effect, and the period specified may not exceed four years.
(4)Section 31(4) does not apply in relation to anything done for the purpose of deciding whether to grant a dispensation under this section.
It`s a strange world when a local councillor can have a quiet word in the ear of a local bobby & he then makes it his business to knock on the door of a member of the public.
Yet when a member of the public requests senior members of the council to ask the police to investigate the decidedly suspicious goings on at MR, they don`t want to know.
Tell me after a lot of digging and hard work from a lot of people on this site.
is out going to happen to this bent lot?
or are you all wasting your time,hope not.
QUOTE: "The council are not considering giving WCNE £340,000!
The council have given WCNE £170,000 and have put the other £170,000 (final 6 months of the project) out to formal tended.
There won't be enough time for anyone new to do anything meaningful so the favourites must be the current incumbents and the councillors will be able to deflect any suggestions of corruption onto officers tasked by them to get value for money.
It's a good point really because, to a large degree, the horse has already bolted on this one. The Connected Care contract only has a further six months to run till next March and it's unlikely that any other organisation is going to be interested in taking up the reins for just six months. The Cabinet may have decided to put the 3rd year out to tender but HBC has been so dragged its feet in enacting this that the first six month's funding for that 3rd year seems to have already been passed over to MR/Who Cares(NE) making something of a nonsense of that Cabinet decision.
So HBC is faced with either continuing to fund an organisation which it already knows is devoid of even the most basic of financial management or of closing the Connected Care programme six months early.
It clearly believes that the customary spin of 'procedures have already been put in place to prevent this sort of thing ever happening again' will do the trick but how absurd is this, if it even happens at all, when applied to the last six months of a 3 year contract when 21/2 years have already gone by.
It may seem to some that the Audit has come towards the end of the contract when the damage has already been done but the real scandal is that many of the 'serious concerns' about the financial management of MR were already known about when the contract was first awarded to Who Cares(NE). So much so that a raft of conditions were imposed on the contract, most of which were never followed through.
Whatever the results of the recent audit, the real question is all about the circumstances by which MR/Who Cares(NE) were ever given the contract in the first place.
We've been told that Ged Hall himself refused to sign the infamous Year 2 accounts for MR yet he still went ahead and recommended that the contract should go to Who Cares(NE) to the exclusion of all others. That in itself requires some explanation.
The fact that few of the conditions applied to the contract were actually followed through also requires some serious explanation.
Add on to this the fact that HBC has been here before with the Phoenix Centre and I would say that HBC itself is now in deep s**t with a referral to the LGA now the least of what is about to happen.
It may be frustrating for people who, after reading about all of this, are left wondering why no one appears to be interested in holding people to account but it will happen. This genie isn't going to go back into the bottle.
One last point. The draft audit was published on 16th April this year. The records on the Companies House website show that Cllr Christopher Akers-Belcher, Leader of Hartlepool Borough Council, resigned as a Director of Who Cares (NE) on the 25 April 2013 - just 9 days later.
Last week, he claimed in The Mail that he hadn't seen the report.
Lies flow freely these days.
well it appears wilcox of MR will not learn she must be stupid to think ppl will put up with her bull crap, yet another employee has stood up against her and others to come , allegedly 1 of her employees was physically attacked !!!!!!!!!
One of the comments at the foot of the Mail's 'Daming Report' article mentions the Serious Fraud Office
http://www.sfo.gov.uk/fraud/taxonomy-of-fraud.aspx - the link at the bottom of the page is well worth reading.
Any thoughts?
Wilcox to be in paper again tomorrow for her actions towards previous employees. When will this stop so innocent hard working people are not treated in such an appalling way. They are made to think they are nothing and put under huge stress after speaking up. Well to all those who are feeling the wrath of manor residents. Keep your head held high and fight till the end until justice is served. :) :) :) :)
The police fraud department should be called into MRA, Customs & excise should also be called in to MRA ppl are paying over odds taxcontributions yet none has been paid to Inland Revenue , makes u wonder when Wilcox daughter is walking around with a £4.000.00 rolex watch on her wrist what mammy bought for her birthday!!!!!!
Haven't they heard of recorded delivery?
http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/local/community/under-fire-manor-residents-association-faces-three-new-legal-battles-against-former-employees-1-5755144
In a nutshell:
"There is something suspect and deeply offensive about a Labour Leader continuiing to defend a fellow labour councillor who has been happily paying her own staff less than the minimum wage while family members have been flaunting their Rolex watches on Hartlepool's poorest estate."
http://www.hartlepoolpost.co.uk (http://www.hartlepoolpost.co.uk)
I think Wilcox is one of those stupid mugs who takes advantage of the situation she is in by sucking the system dry whilst she can but in my mind she has and is being tutored and manipulated by that master - Cranny.
He has shown over and over again how to milk the flood of ratepayers money pouring out of HBC into charities / CIC's
Teflon Cranny is the one this site should be after
Quote from: Vincent on June 12, 2013, 12: PM
I think Wilcox is one of those stupid mugs who takes advantage of the situation she is in by sucking the system dry whilst she can but in my mind she has and is being tutored and manipulated by that master - Cranny.
He has shown over and over again how to milk the flood of ratepayers money pouring out of HBC into charities / CIC's
Teflon Cranny is the one this site should be after
Without a doubt.
He is the puppet master.
I suggest that as well as the protest about MRA a standard letter is needed to be wrote up allowing space for people to put there names and address on. If the letters are placed in public places such as shops ect then you are likely to generate more interest than only a protest . Also the council can not ignore the volume of letters all requesting the same answers . This would be fantastic media coverage as it is the public who request answers .
Jonno
The bigger story is that something needs to change with the way public funding is handled in Hartlepool. For years, Governments of both colours have tried to create the impression that they are addressing deep-rooted unemployment and deprivation by inventing all kinds of schemes to channel money into local economies.None of them have proved to be particularly successful in regenerating local economies and personally, I see them mostly as PR exercises which allow Governments to claim that they are 'doing something' for deprived areas.In practice, what has happened is that a sub-industry has developed around these funding streams and the more cynical types have attached themselves to these funding streams like leeches for personal gain.We have more than our fair share of such leeches in Hartlepool and they fall into various categories.
- Those 'Walter Mitty' characters who have latched onto the Community Interest Company phenomenon believing themselves to be the new Peter Jones.
- Those who manage community groups and CICs.
- Those who use the existence of Community Groups and CICs to provide secondary services to them.Funnily enough, a lot of them have turned out to be Councillors.
If you go to a bank with a business idea then you'll find it to be no easy task. You'll need to provide a viable business plan, demonstrate solid market research and provide a projected cash flow forecast.
None of this seems to apply to a local councillor with 'a bright idea'. Public money seems to be made available to such people on a wing and a prayer. It's no surprise than to find that so many 'bright ideas' from councillors result in short-lived companies that achieve little more than providing those councillors with a nice income for a short period of time. The company folds and the councillor moves on to his next idea without blinking.
Likewise, managers in this area do not appear to have to prove they possess the relevant previous experience or knowledge and, when things go pear shaped, all that is needed is a talent for producing promises and committments.
The more subtle hide their financial gain through a paper chase of companies or by not declaring their interests in companies.
Check out the number of councillors who earn a good living from the funding streams thrown at local economies by central Government. Sometimes the money comes in directly but mostly it bounces around the 3rd sector for a while before finally settling in some councillor's bank account.
I doubt if Hartlepool is the only culprit but the town does seem to have developed the art of the funding leech to its highest level.
yes you are right, I was very surprised to find out that Hartlepool Children Services staff are provided with a card account for Cafe 177. Why just at the cafe and not use other cafes ?
I was in Cafe177 recently and was quite impressed. I'm not quite sure what you mean by a card account, but I assume it means free Lattes for Children's Services Staff which seems to be against the spirit of the place. It's important that such places are self-supporting as far as possible and freebies for council staff would seem to be an unnecessary perk.
Marky is right about the public funding of various bodies by HBC, if there is nothing else that comes out of the Manor Residents debacle it should be that HBC have a "Root & Branch Reform" of the public funding system in Hartlepool.
There needs to be an accountable system that funded organisations have to follow, & there needs to be properly Audited Accounts by a certified Accountant,(& not a councillor doing them) at the end of every year........... No Audited Accounts......... No Further Funding.
Most of us would have though that process should actually be in place now....... Obviously Not.
Oh, the irony ... :o
http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/local/under-fire-councillor-backs-motion-1-5761007
The worrying fact is that despite the allegations and the proven discrepancies the accounts are still open.Surely these should be frozen till an investigation is carried out.In most instances 2 signatures are needed before any money is released,so what were the signatures of the people who opened the second account which Wilcox reckons she knows nothing about .
"Manor Residents' Association has never paid below the national minimum wage and that will come out at the review hearing next month."
Well she's done it now - if the hearing goes against her that will make her a liar - officially
Word is that the plan is to make out that Lynda Gooding's contract was to work fewer hours thereby upping the hourly rate to the minium wage. As I said previously, lies flow freely these days.
Interesting that the council motion talked not only of Managers but of Trustees which would include Stephen Akers-Belcher. Interesting too that CAB tried to hijack the motion and switch the attention to the 'living wage'. He has promised the rest of the labour crew that their own allowances will be tied to an increase to a 'living wage'.
Quote from: steveL on June 13, 2013, 12: PM
"Manor Residents' Association has never paid below the national minimum wage and that will come out at the review hearing next month."
Well she's done it now - if the hearing goes against her that will make her a liar - officially
Word is that the plan is to make out that Lynda Gooding's contract was to work fewer hours thereby upping the hourly rate to the minium wage. As I said previously, lies flow freely these days.
Sounds like a good idea..... Mrs Gooding works X number of hours & gets paid the National Minimum Wage for doing so............. Then works Z numbers of Hours for nothing.
Caring Sharing Voluntary Sector.......... My A**e
Interesting that the council motion talked not only of Managers but of Trustees which would include Stephen Akers-Belcher. Interesting too that CAB tried to hijack the motion and switch the attention to the 'living wage'. He has promised the rest of the labour crew that their own allowances will be tied to an increase to a 'living wage'.
"she was awarded £3,395.92 in compensation, £3,196.16 for loss of earnings and £916.12 for not having been given a written statement of employment by the charity.She was also awarded £687.09 for not being paid the minimum wage after it emerged during the hearing that she was being paid less than the legal low of £6.19 an hour.
Gooding said she was paid £200 for 37 hours work a week by the charity, equating to £5.40 an hour. "Until the hearing I wasn't aware that I had been getting less than the minimum wage," she said.
Gooding was also awarded £259.74 for unnotified deductions, because the charity had been deducting national insurance even though she was not paid the minimum wage, and £350 for the loss of her statutory rights."
And are we also to believe that the unnotified deductions, the absence of payslips, the delays in payment, the lack of a written statement of employment etc were all also untrue?
Manor Resident's submission to the Tribunal arrived late yet we are told we must now believe that the submission to last week's second Tribunal was sent by 2nd class post and 'went missing'.
Now think on this. If your submission to the first Tribunal had arrived late, would you not make doubly sure that any submission to a second Tribunal arrived in good time even to the point of hand delivering it yourself?
Secondly, if the case is being handled by solicitors then the solicitors would be the ones handling the delivery of any submissions. Would they use 2nd class post and leave it to chance?
This woman is a liability and everytime she opens her mouth the credibility of the local labour group sinks further down the pan.
When this is all over and the involved parties have got their come-comeuppance, someone should write a book about how easy it is to obtain millions of pounds, in times of so-called austerity, with no questions asked (or at least, no answers given!). :o
This debacle has laid bare the myth that Labour is the party for the working class;
A party that understands the conditions for the low paid and acts on their behalf...NOT.
It is plain for all to see the reason why, after 50+ years of Labour in this town and many, many years of Labour governments, Hartlepool is still classed as a backwater.
Despite our so-called MP shouting the odds at the Tory govt. and telling them what they should be doing for Hartlepool and the economy, WHY didn't HE and his government do something for Hartlepool, when in power? ???
Because the modus operandi of them all is when in power, FILL YER BOOTS!!
Toss 'em some soundbites now and then and scream how the Tories are doing nothing for the poor North-east...that'll keep the voters happy.
Don't forget those hoary old chestnuts the loss of the shipyards, the mines, the steelworks etc. That'll get the blood up of the Labour voters.
Well Mr MP, by your tacit support of various people under suspicion in Owton Manor;
By your lack of support in keeping a viable A & E in Hartlepool;
By your total lack of initiative in turning around Hartlepool and fighting its corner, I will never again vote Labour and 75% of the people I speak to feel the same way about you and Labour in this town.
The goons now running HBC council act as though it's a pantomime. :(
As I've said before on here, we need a change, both in the running of this town and the country.
And the answer ISN'T more of the same Labour/Tory bullsh*t.
I really do despair.
It must of been hard for Mrs Gooding to go through her tribunal case alone without having Wilcox appeal against her case. Now Wilcox stands up against people been paid under the minimum wage.... This i find hypocritiical when she herself pays people what she wants when she wants and by what means. Giving employees cheques for their wages well after there due date then to find that no where in the town will cash the cheques as they have had problems with Manor residents in the past and then submitting your cheque to the bank to realise its bounced twice. Its appaling behaviour and no one should be subjected to.
the lot of them are openly taking the p**s,and it looks as if we can't
do a thing about it.
she could always take a mckenzie friend into court , they help with documents keeping you calm and support so that she will not be intimidated .
So it is Ian Wright running the show ,I thought it was ANGIE AND THE MOB ,they get more publicity than Ian ,and have more power
I thought I'd copy in this post from The Mail's comments section from 'Little John' which I thought summed things up very well:
"Manor Residents is an island of order in a sea of incompetence.
Their accounts are late and unsigned - it was the Charity Commission's fault
They pay less than the minimum wage - it's the worker's fault.
There's an unregistered account with £40K in it - it's the Bank's fault
legal documents missing - it's the Royal Mail's fault.
Council auditors slam them - No, everything's fine, just a quick tweak needed.
We should invite Cllr Angie Wilcox to run the Royal Mail, Council Revenues, Charity Commission and the Law Courts - she's the only faultless one around! Apart from the Councillors on the management committee that is."
The draft audit report leaked to HTH and picked up later by The Mail concerns Manor Residents and is only one of two audit reports. There is a separate audit report into Who Cares (NE), the CIC company founded by Wilcox and Kevin Cranney. Both reports in their final form are due to be presented to the Audit and Governance committee on June 27th.
This is a public meeting and I would urge anyone who is able to attend the meeting. The agenda for the meeting, complete with the final audit reports, should appear on the council website next Wednesday.
If I remember rightly, the members of the Audit and Governance Committee are:
Councillors Ainslie, S Akers-Belcher(Vice-Chair), Brash, Fisher (Chair), Loynes, Robinson and Shields.
I get the impression that the Trustees of Manor Residents have never read this document. If so, then they need to stop what they are doing and read it NOW.
http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/media/94159/cc3text.pdf
Just got my free mag Hartbeat in door and who is on the front cover THE MOB AND THERE BREED TALK ABOUT TAKING THE P--- .I FELT SICK
Ah, but look more closely ... Ms. Wilcox has a sheaf of papers in her hand ... could it be, perchance, the missing tribunal paperwork ... ? ;)
She is now accusing members of staff stealing laptops what she sold on fb a few weeks ago , and also pulling fake contracts out of the woodwork !!!!!
no don't be daft its her speech for when she gets put out
Surely the police should be investigating the theft of the computers?
Did Wilcox inform the police...she's had plenty of opportunity, the times she's been in the police station!
If they were advertised on FB it would be easy to trace the account holder.
Come on, boys in blue, what are you waiting for?
I have it on good authority that the serious fraud office have been informed about the whole carry on........the fb account is yet another piece of paper in the Wilcox trail....
How quickly things change. Not long back she was a supporter of Angie.....
(http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/2947/n5n4.jpg) (http://img195.imageshack.us/i/n5n4.jpg/)
I wonder if anyone can insert family links on this so we can see exactly who is related to who
http://tinyurl.com/nxlghvk
All taken from:
http://tinyurl.com/nxlghvk
Carl has spoken:
"It must be emphasised that it was councillors who instigated the inquiry in an attempt to draw a line under the accusations and innuendo made by a very small minority of local individuals.
"The e-petition is clearly another attempt by the same individuals to try and undermine the new governance arrangements in Hartlepool which are working extremely well."
As I have said, lies are flowing freely these days.
The original call for an inquiry at a meeting of the full council mysteriously became a choice of four options by the time it made it onto paper until someone pointed out that this was not what had been agreed. The additional, alternative options then themselves mysteriously disappeared.
Carl and his clique resisted the inquiry as much as possible until finally throwing in the towel after realising that it couldn't be stopped without attracting more criticism of their increasingly megalomanic party.
It won't be long before the number of signatures on the petition will exceed the current total membership of the local Labour Party, if it hasn't already done so and more damning still, is that I suspect that many labour party supporters themselves will have added their own signatures.
I would guess that the 'new Governance arrangements' coupled with the re-hash of the rules governing standards in public life, which was on the agenda of the last council meeting, are preparing the ground for a stock response to the inquiry results when they finally come out.
Expect something along the lines of 'changes have already been made which will address the issues raised' - the bog standard response in situations like this.
The inquiry may well have been instigated by councillors - but none of them were Labour.
I don't think Wilcox is the type to go down without taking the rest with her.That's what they are all worried about.Be interesting to see who's the first to jump ship.
Pretty damning stuff. A whitewash by any definition.
http://www.hartlepoolpost.co.uk/ (http://www.hartlepoolpost.co.uk/)
See that the Mail has also picked up on the WCNE audit.
http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/local/concern-over-care-service-1-5786191
I notice The Mail aren't allowing comments on their write up.
QuoteCoun Cranney said: "I have always known there has never been an issue regarding misappropriation of funds and the finances are always checked and double checked.
"This shows that there is nothing to hide, but there were issues around payslips which was sloppy and new and better systems are in place."
"Never an issue regarding misappropriation of funds"... Aside of course from the iniital awarding of a £680,000 untendered contract to a company started by two serving Labour Councillors, awarded by OTHER serving Labour Councillors.
Aside from that.... evrythings fine. ::)
Oh and the
Quote"issues around payslips which was sloppy"
, the main 'issue' of course being that largely the payslips didn't exist.
Coun Cranney said: "I have always known there has never been an issue regarding misappropriation of funds and the finances are always checked and double checked.
Is Cranny an independent auditor or somebody that could have benefitted from misappropriation of funds ?
In my eyes he is not qualified to make that statement impartially.
Lack of impartiality, never heard that before !
How much weight should be given to the opinions of someone once labelled as 'incompetent' by a Newcastle judge, previously banned from being a Director of any company for five years and WHO has since defaulted on a £100,000+ loan from an organisation set up to provide funding to social enterprises.
Not a lot, I would suggest.
Incidentally, a service level agreement (SLA) covering Payroll is a contract between two organisations whereby one pays the another to provide a payroll service according to agreed criteria. In this case, Cranney claims Who Cares (NE) had a SLA with Manor Residents and presumably, before entering into the agreement, Who Cares(NE) would have checked that MR was capable of delivering such a service to its satisfaction.
We all know what the payroll function was like at MR, so who in their right minds would come to an agreement with MR?
No one. Unless, that is, there were other reasons for doing so, such as it producing a convenient means of transferring money from one to the other.
I think we have reached the point when these clowns are insulting the intelligence of the public and haven't, as yet, cottoned on to the fact that ABSOLUTELY NO ONE IS BUYING IT.
". . . and the finances are always checked and double checked." ;D ;D ;D
Not by a human being; that's for sure - at least no human that hasn't already spent several hours enjoying the décor of a Police interview room.
I'm beginning to wonder if there is any real point to all of this. Almost daily, we hear of new episodes in this long-running saga. Nothing surprises anyone anymore; we have long since passed that stage.
Now that we have seen the result of Mr Riddle's complaint, is there really anything more to be said? We are observing and commenting on a local authority that is no longer fit for purpose - it really is that simple.
There is now no point is expending yet more energy only to highlight still more sorry instances of false accounting, employment law transgressions and cover-ups. Been there, done that, got the T-Shirt.
What we now need is to find out how to ask the Government to step in and put Hartlepool Borough Council under special measures.
Must seem like Christmas for the Labour Group. Millions in grants to dish out to fellow councillors or pet Radio Stations that do your bidding and you get your very own tame accountant to do the paperwork for all the bent firms!
The Mafia could learn a thing or two from our lot.
Wilcox is so stupid. Despite being guaranteed a substantial income for her and her family for life and a nod to salt away a nest egg for her retirement she still can not resist bumping the catalogues. With judgement like that it was bound to end in tears.