Hartlepool Post Forum

Politics => Local Issues and Matters => Topic started by: steveL on October 01, 2017, 09: PM

Title: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: steveL on October 01, 2017, 09: PM
It's been a while since we broke this story so, by way of an epilogue, I'll just add-in what we have learnt since.

* The full cost to the taxpayer of this episode is now known to have been in the region of £80,000.

* The layout of the building, its furnishings and carpets had all been designed by a consultancy firm who specialise in the design of buildings for people with disabilities including those with Autism and those who are Visually Impaired. This involved, for example, specifically selected coloured carpets and creating high-contrast, colour interfaces between floor coverings and furniture.

* The carpets were changed purely and solely on the objection of Christopher Akers-Belcher who insisted on the use of 'corporate' colours. The specialised design features of the building and the furnishings were explained to CAB at the time but his response had been that he 'didn't care' This is in stark contrast to the official excuse given that it was the inappropriateness of the furnishings for disabled people that had led to the change.

* After The Post first ran the story, all people involved in the project were forced to sign a gagging order preventing them from discussing with anyone the events which had led to the change of carpeting. The implied alternative was to say goodbye to their job

* Gagging orders are illegal under Government Whistleblowing legislation..

Rotten to the Core doesn't even come close to covering it.   
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: fred c on October 02, 2017, 03: AM
The email i sent to CEO at the time.....


 
Dear Ms Alexander

 I have a genuine understanding of how  cuts by central government can & do impact on the services of HBC & it's staff, I understand that constraints on council spending is inevitable.

 If I didn't actually realise those facts by making myself aware of them by reading a selection of quality newspapers, I/We council tax payers are regaled on a regular basis of Central Government cuts by Clr C Akers Belchers statements in the Hartlepool Mail.

With those constraints on the councils ability to fund various services in mind & the recent article in the Mail regarding the removal of carpets from the newly opened CIL in Burbank Street, could you as CEO give me a full & detailed explanation as to the reasoning behind the decision to remove the carpets from the CIL.?

 Who was responsible for the decision, why was the decision made, were you consulted about the decision, what is the full & total cost of the removal & replacement of the carpets to the council ?

 If there were, for instance design faults by the architect's or interior designers I would presume that the removal & renewal would be at a cost to them, not the council.

 What I find most disturbing, even more so than the cost of the decision to remove & replace carpets are the reasons quoted in the Hartlepool Mail for the decision, that the carpet would present difficulties for suffers of Autism & Dementia, I did some basic online research on those facts & according to several websites that specialise in Autism & Dementia, colours to be avoided are bright or multi coloured/patterned carpets, colours that are recommended are neutral /soft colours.

 I understand that the carpets in the CIL were actually Beige, which apparently was an ideal choice, I have to say, 'If' that is correct, I find the reasons/excuses given in the Mails article to be absolutely disgraceful, for anyone to use those descriptions as a reason to get rid of carpets for vanity or personal choice is nothing short of obscene, I would even go so far as to use the word 'sick'

 This issue as reported by the Mail is a serious cause for concern for HBC, I sincerely hope that you can provide answers to the questions I have put to you, whoever was responsible for the decision to remove & replace those carpets has placed the council in an invidious position & should suffer the consequences of their action.

 From a personal point of view, I am well aware of the views of various people within the council regarding my criticisms over many issues, I readily admit to being a vocal critic of aspects of council business, what I will also admit to, is the fact I believe that Hartlepool Council has a majority of staff who are fully commited to improving the town, hard working conscientious people who are as proud of Hartlepool as I am, unfortunately, I do not have same respect for the ruling coalition group of councillors.

 Regards

Ms Alexanders answer

Dear Mr

 I would like to thank you for your correspondence in relation to the Hartlepool Centre for Independent Living.

 I can confirm, as detailed in the Council’s media statement, that the cost of removing and replacing the carpets and floor coverings is £13,500.  This is the net additional cost of replacing carpets and floor coverings of £45,000, less the value of the carpets which will be reused of £31,500.  The net cost of £13,500 arises from the decision taken by senior officers of the Council, including myself, in consultation with the relevant Policy Committee Chairs to replace carpets and floor coverings. 

 The centre was designed to meet the needs of a wide range of users, including people with dementia and autism.

 As indicated in our media statement some of the carpets and floor coverings in the new building were unsuitable – including for the dementia and autism friendly environment that we were looking to create.  This was not the only reason for replacing carpets and floor coverings and some of the carpets were replaced because they were unsuitable in terms of the overall professional look we want to achieve for this building. 

 It is regrettable that some carpets and floor coverings had to be replaced and this decision was not taken lightly.  I can also assure you that new procedures have been put in place to prevent a situation like this happening again. I think it’s also important to point out that despite the additional spending on carpets and floor coverings of £13,500, this £4 million project to benefit the people of Hartlepool has been delivered under budget.

 Regards

 Gill Alexander | Chief Executive

Hartlepool Borough Council
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: steveL on October 02, 2017, 06: AM
Quote
I can also assure you that new procedures have been put in place to prevent a situation like this happening again.
That phrase takes on a whole new meaning now aka "We've put gagging orders on everyone to stop stuff like this leaking out again"

As I said at the time of Dave Stubbs tenure, the wrongdoing was always less important than the chances that knowledge of it might leak out.
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: craig finton on October 02, 2017, 07: AM
No hope for these people. Deceipt is built into the culture
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: Inspector Knacker on October 03, 2017, 06: AM


Ms Alexanders answer

Dear Mr

 I would like to thank you for your correspondence in relation to the Hartlepool Centre for Independent Living.

 I can confirm, as detailed in the Council’s media statement, that the cost of removing and replacing the carpets and floor coverings is £13,500.  This is the net additional cost of replacing carpets and floor coverings of £45,000, less the value of the carpets which will be reused of £31,500.  The net cost of £13,500 arises from the decision taken by senior officers of the Council, including myself, in consultation with the relevant Policy Committee Chairs to replace carpets and floor coverings. 
[/Who raised the question of carpets, councillors or officers? I would from previous experience imagine those actually doing the work would have settled on a suitable spec earlier into the project.]
 The centre was designed to meet the needs of a wide range of users, including people with dementia and autism.
Obviously not designed to accomodate those prone to egotistic hissy fits
 As indicated in our media statement some of the carpets and floor coverings in the new building were unsuitable – including for the dementia and autism friendly environment that we were looking to create.  What environment were you trying to create exactly?This was not the only reason for replacing carpets and floor coverings and some of the carpets were replaced because they were unsuitable in terms of the overall professional look we want to achieve for this building. 
That being the case, surely the bill would have been picked up by the contractor, or was the so called 'professional look' a whim?

 It is regrettable that some carpets and floor coverings had to be replaced and this decision was not taken lightly.  It would appear it was, considering the cost involvedI can also assure you that new procedures have been put in place to prevent a situation like this happening again. Doing it when councillors are on holiday perhaps?I think it’s also important to point out that despite the additional spending on carpets and floor coverings of £13,500, this £4 million project to benefit the people of Hartlepool has been delivered under budget.I too think it's important to equally point out that being under budget is irrelevant in the context that this does note negate the expenditure of  £13,500. It's £13,500 that could have been spent somewhere else.

 Regards

 Gill Alexander | Chief Executive

Hartlepool Borough Council
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: DRiddle on November 06, 2018, 12: PM
Interestingly, i'm dredging up another old thread today. This one. More to follow.
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: fred c on November 06, 2018, 04: PM
When you look back at situations such as this it beggars belief, you have to ask 2 simple questions to understand the appalling waste of public money.

1) Who decided to replace the carpets and why ?

2) Who was responsible for covering up the details of that decision and why ?

I think we all know the 2 people responsible......th e sooner they are both show the door to the civic the better.
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: Inspector Knacker on November 09, 2018, 06: AM
I never thought of them as style consultants, in fact I try not o think of them at all.
However, when that decision to change was made, I assume experts in the field would have decided on the colour's.
Do the hissy fitters have greater knowledge on the subject and quality of the work or do  they just strut around deigning to impose their gaudy 'tastes' on everything.
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: DRiddle on November 09, 2018, 06: AM
Sources from within HBC have confirmed that carpets recently replaced in the Rifty was new carpet and NOT the ‘salvaged’ carpet HBC claim is usable and in storage after the hissy fit in the CIL.

Remember, HBC stated very clearly that the carpets ripped up from the CIL shortly after being laid would be re-used in council buildings. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/anger-as-13-500-blunder-sees-new-carpets-ripped-out-of-4million-centre-1-8418399/amp

This of course begs the question . . . Why not? Has the carpet already been re-purposed? If so where at? Does the ‘stored Carpet’ actually even exist?

I was told by a source that the bulk of what was ripped up was totally unusable due to the glue used to lay it. Remember, employees on the job were reportedly subjected to gagging orders.

The whole explanation surrounding what happened at the CIL sounded like b0ll0cks at the time. It’s even more suspicious now.

Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: UnknownUser on November 09, 2018, 08: AM
I would be of a predisposition to believe they are carpet tiles rather than actual carpet. Please correct me if I'm wrong!

Carpet tiles are hard backed and are deceivingly heavy when you have a handful of them, they have to be; they also have to be glued down with some pretty strong industrial strength adhesive, you can't just lay them with Pritt Stick (other brands are available).

I have seen carpet tiles ripped up granted only a couple at a time chewing gum etc & general wear & tear this is in a prestige corporate environment so please understand that there may be a huge difference in quality used, however upon removal the hard backs split/tear leaving the back of the tile what you may call patchy i.e uneven and fragmented; the same can also be said of the floor and any residue has to be scraped up to ensure a smooth even surface before any new tiles/s can be glued down in place.

This of course begs the question . . . Why not? Has the carpet already been re-purposed? If so where at? Does the ‘stored Carpet’ actually even exist?
   

I would be 99% certain any alleged "stored carpet" does not exist if tiles were used.

Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: fred c on November 09, 2018, 09: AM
An accurate description of removing carpet tiles by UnknowUser......and a an even more accurate explanation of the of the result of ripping the tiles up.

Like lots of questions that could be put to HBC the difficulty is getting an answer to any of them, there's a definite air of a 'mushroom policy' within the whole council........at the time of carpetgate there were 22 labtor mob councillors and it's 100% certain that most of those know the circumstances ie. the Who, the Why and the How do we keep it quiet.

Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: DRiddle on November 11, 2018, 03: PM
I was just re-reading over the correspondence sent to Fred by which states very clearly the CLAIM by the council that £31,500 worth of carpet was placed into storage. This of course came AFTER CAB was alleged to have over ruled professional experts because HE didn’t like the colour.

What then followed was a series of reasons as to why the carpets were ripped up/removed which were suspicious reasons at the time.

I remember thinking at the time “ok let’s give them the benefit of the doubt and wait for the next council owned building of significant size to require carpeting and see if they re-use them”

I’ll bet a good few quid that’s what’s happened is somebody connected with the Rifty will have contacted the council after the flooding.

So the question remains. Did the council utilise some or all of the £31,500 worth of carpet it claims to have stored from the farce at the CIL? Or, more likely, were NEW carpets ordered for the Rifty costing the tax payer god knows how much?

I know which my money is on.

Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: fred c on November 11, 2018, 04: PM
An email to the chief exec requesting a tour of the Read Street Depot could well bear fruit, I hear it's a bit of an Aladdin's Cave.
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: DRiddle on November 12, 2018, 08: AM
I always wondered if carpet gate would come back to bite them again. There’s more to come on this.

As Human Resources staff and unions have to tip toe through the latest round of redundancies, seemingly the profligate spending looks like its continuing as normal.

Labour sources themselves (not HBC staff) are working hard to try to clarify whether, as £31,500 worth of carpets sat gathering dust in storage, the Akers-Bekchers casually browsed through their options choosing brand new ones for the Rifty.

And some people wander how we end up with an unanticipated additional deficit.

Crazy times.
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: Inspector Knacker on November 12, 2018, 08: AM
the Akers-Bekchers casually browsed through their options choosing brand new ones for the Rifty.

And some people wander how we end up with an unanticipated additional deficit.

Crazy times.
How can they choose? They should have no say in the matter as in my opinion the choice should be the sole decision of the council officers, it's council property.
Are they carpet consultants for all council properties, is there a carpet consultation allowance and expenses?
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: DRiddle on November 12, 2018, 12: PM
There are a lot of rumours flying around HBC at the moment.

Let's deal with what we know to be facts. The council has already gone public voicing the likelihood of redundancies, particularly from children services. We know that to be a fact.

We also know that HBC purported to have £31,500 of carpets stored following the decision 'by experts we were told' to change the carpets. We know that, or at least we were told, that is also a fact.

What we don't know for certain... yet, is whether thousands of pounds were spent on new carpets for the Rifty after a flood. We do not know YET whether new carpets were bought DESPITE there still be a significant proportion of the £31,500 worth of carpets still in storage.

If that has happened, and that remains uncertain at the moment, then people are in danger of losing the jobs while wasteful spending potentially continues from within HBC.

If i was one of the the people facing redundancy, and the rumour about money being spent on new carpets for the rifty was true, i'd be fuming.

So the questions, currently, remains; did a senior officer sanction the spending of what is likely to be thousands of pounds of new carpets, despite the council having £31,500 worth of carpet in storage?

Presumably if this DID happen, WHY did it happen? Who signed off the decision? Who requested the new carpets? Were they offered the ones which are allegedly in storage? If those carpets were rejected/not utilised, then why not?

All interesting questions.

No facts though.

Yet.



Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: Stig of the Seaton Dump on November 12, 2018, 01: PM
A fully functional, accountable, open and transparent council would answer questions about such matters in an instant.

Why is it so difficult with HBC.

Who is it that is blocking a quick response to questions, it can't be councillors can it as they don't have that responsibility do they ?
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: grim reaper on November 12, 2018, 04: PM
Stig, Stig, Stig. I'm afraid you, and many others in this town, believe that the salaried council officers are paid (quite well) to formulate ideas, initiatives and mtce. of our town and the councillors (overpaid) are there to monitor, discuss and, if for the good of the town, pass the recommendations.
That is how it was in the days of Mr Waggott et al. Councillors and officers worked together to ensure best outcome for the town and council tax payers.

Then Councillors with more bark than brains started to appear.
Senior officer posts were advertised and sparsely educated councillors sat on the panels that chose the highly paid officers.
Secondary school (or less) educated councillors, were now appraising Grammar/university educated officers. Once 'appraised' and chosen, the officers were under the yoke of the 'committee men'.

Then slowly, inexorably, those with the communist/socialist bent realised the town was there for the taking and take it they did.
Payment for time, payment for committees, special allowances, expenses etc.
Then came the day of really weak senior officers and Pandora's box was flung open. ANYTHING was possible.
 CIC's opened up the council's bank account to those with a criminal bent.

Meanwhile, senior officers in various departments had had enough of the shenanigans and resigned. Replacements were of a 'variable' quality.
Now we are where we are. The inmates running the show.

However, thanks to the likes of The Hartlepool Post, social media and that perennial thorn in the side of HBC (Mr Riddle, well done sir), the edifice is crumbling.
People are now piling in with information of what has gone on within the walls of OUR Civic Centre.
I look forward to the last page of the story.   8)
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: fred c on November 12, 2018, 05: PM
A nigh on spot on assessment of how things have been and are in Hartlepool....

"Then slowly, inexorably, those with the communist/socialist bent realised the town was there for the taking and take it they did"

I can only make 1 suggestion to reinforce your perceptive argument.
vent
Then slowly, inexorably, those with the communist/socialist & flagrantly dishonest bent realised the town was there for the taking and take it they did.
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: DRiddle on November 12, 2018, 08: PM
Whatever the situation, the fact remains, questions have been raised from WITHIN HBC. Good people working within HBC may well lose their jobs in the near future. 90,000 people will, most likely, have around 4% added to their already extortionate council tax bill next year.

Yet while 'Rome burns', Nero is twiddling his thumbs pointing the finger at the Tory government.

The cold hard reality is we have a council which, seemingly, bought gold medals for it's ceremonial Mayors while bleating about Tory austerity. We have a Councillors (some of whom) literally whooped, cheered and shook their bingo wings (yes you did Marjorie, it's on camera) as a contract was awarded to an organisation started by Kevin Cranney and Angie Wilcox (FACT not conjecture). A contract that ended up being worth North of one million pounds.

We have a council which allowed it's leader to vote to ban the public from meaningfully questioning them in the form of supplementary questions.

We have a council which is essentially broken.


Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: Hartlepudlion on November 12, 2018, 08: PM
Is it tru that the Forces Champion aka Ceremonial Mayor, entertained yesterday to the tune of several thousands of pounds of taxpayers CT?

Spend, spend, spend.
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: DRiddle on November 14, 2018, 10: AM
My understanding is the carpets in storage from the CIL were definitely NOT used at the Rifty. So it appears NEW ones were bought despite £31,500 worth of carpets sitting gathering dust.

Make no mistake, Hartlepool Council is in serious trouble. I'd imagine a section 114 notice is on the horizon in the not too distant future. In fact, i'd put money on it.

More information about what a section 114 notice involves here https://www.lgcplus.com/politics/finance/northamptonshire-on-precipice-of-section-114-notice/7001803.article

So seemingly, although i accept its not formally confirmed, a council on the brink of the most serious financial situation a council can possibly be in, may have just spent thousands on carpets, despite tens of thousands of pounds worth of carpets already in the councils possession.

I'm on record many times saying that Christopher Akers-Belcher's leadership may ultimately bankrupt the council. We are getting nearer to that situation step by step every single day he is in charge. The blame will be placed at the door of the Tory government. I accept they are playing a significant part, but so is the leaders attitude to council spending.
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: Stig of the Seaton Dump on November 14, 2018, 12: PM
Lets not forget behind the unqualified councillors getting away with sinking HBC there is a raft of highly paid professionals letting this happen.
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: diSme on November 14, 2018, 01: PM
Lets not forget behind the unqualified councillors getting away with sinking HBC there is a raft of highly paid professionals letting this happen.

Perhaps if those professionals weren't so well renumerated their approach to their jobs may be a little more ethical...
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: jawsbbc on November 16, 2018, 03: PM
My understanding is the carpets in storage from the CIL were definitely NOT used at the Rifty. So it appears NEW ones were bought despite £31,500 worth of carpets sitting gathering dust.

Make no mistake, Hartlepool Council is in serious trouble. I'd imagine a section 114 notice is on the horizon in the not too distant future. In fact, i'd put money on it.

More information about what a section 114 notice involves here https://www.lgcplus.com/politics/finance/northamptonshire-on-precipice-of-section-114-notice/7001803.article

So seemingly, although i accept its not formally confirmed, a council on the brink of the most serious financial situation a council can possibly be in, may have just spent thousands on carpets, despite tens of thousands of pounds worth of carpets already in the councils possession.

I'm on record many times saying that Christopher Akers-Belcher's leadership may ultimately bankrupt the council. We are getting nearer to that situation step by step every single day he is in charge. The blame will be placed at the door of the Tory government. I accept they are playing a significant part, but so is the leaders attitude to council spending.
wonder why cranney and co did not use them at jutland road community centre OFCA ?? the carpets  resembles the claggy mats and the toilets would  put the devons to shame
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: DRiddle on November 20, 2018, 11: AM
I'm told this situation hasn't gone away. There will be some tough conversations to be had over the coming weeks concerning redundancies.

https://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/hartlepool-children-s-centre-shake-up-and-redundancies-expected-as-part-of-510-000-cuts-1-9444475 (https://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/hartlepool-children-s-centre-shake-up-and-redundancies-expected-as-part-of-510-000-cuts-1-9444475)

I appreciate different money is allocated in different way within HBC, but the fact is some people will lose their jobs in the same time frame as a senior officer sanctioned thousands to be spent on new carpets in the Rifty.

30 odd thousand pounds worth of carpets sit gathering dust and somebody signed off a decision to buy more.
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: fred c on November 20, 2018, 11: AM
The famous political adage " The Buck Stops Here" obviously doesn't apply to HBCs boss...whoever it happens to be.
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: DRiddle on November 26, 2018, 10: AM
Interesting developments again on this.

Firstly, it's worth remembering HBC has a history of certain 'explanations' being put forward AFTER the Hartlepool Post has raised concerns of issues on a particular matter. 

For example, the carpets in the CIL. First there was the claim the carpets were changed on the advice of experts, when in fact we later learnt that carpets were CHOSEN (initially) BY the very experts the council blamed for the change.

Secondly, the 'was there or wasn't there' ever an intention to buy a gold medal for Paul Beck. First came the denial, then came the claim they found one in a drawer, later came from WITHIN HBC (not from me) what for all the world looked like a purchase order of the very thing that was denied in the first place.

There are many, many examples of the council reacting to cover its ar$e after something has been raised on the post.

The word is the same thing will happen regarding a recent saga. The saga will play out as follows.

(1) A HBC owned building floods.
(2) Somebody approaches the council asking about new flooring for the building due to the flood.
(3) A senior officer allegedly authorises the acquisition of new flooring for the building.
(4) A few weeks go by.
(5) The issue of NEW carpets/flooring reportedly being bought for the building is raised on the post. It is pointed out this was NOT the flooring in the CIL.
(6) Staff get angry, there's murmurs of a strike.
(7) Senior officer panics and sets about showing the rumour leaked from within HBC (not by me) is not true.
(8) Moves are made to ensure a community group opperating from within the HBC owned building can produce its OWN receipts for the flooring.
(9) The talk on the post about money being wasted on flooring in the community building when HBC had carpets they may have used will be 'proven' to be fake news.

It's all so predictable.

Still, at least if this DOES happen HBC will be able to put the rumours to rest and appease their staff.

Unless of course someone produces another screen shot of a purchase order . . .
 
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: jawsbbc on November 26, 2018, 11: AM
Is it tru that the Forces Champion aka Ceremonial Mayor, entertained yesterday to the tune of several thousands of pounds of taxpayers CT?

Spend, spend, spend.
it is true   https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10156996836116004&set=pcb.10156996836246004&type=3&theater

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10156996836176004&set=pcb.10156996836246004&type=3&theater 
 
  Fantastic night at Mayor's do
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: jawsbbc on November 26, 2018, 11: AM
Interesting developments again on this.

Firstly, it's worth remembering HBC has a history of certain 'explanations' being put forward AFTER the Hartlepool Post has raised concerns of issues on a particular matter. 

For example, the carpets in the CIL. First there was the claim the carpets were changed on the advice of experts, when in fact we later learnt that carpets were CHOSEN (initially) BY the very experts the council blamed for the change.

Secondly, the 'was there or wasn't there' ever an intention to buy a gold medal for Paul Beck. First came the denial, then came the claim they found one in a drawer, later came from WITHIN HBC (not from me) what for all the world looked like a purchase order of the very thing that was denied in the first place.

There are many, many examples of the council reacting to cover its ar$e after something has been raised on the post.

The word is the same thing will happen regarding a recent saga. The saga will play out as follows.

(1) A HBC owned building floods.
(2) Somebody approaches the council asking about new flooring for the building due to the flood.
(3) A senior officer allegedly authorises the acquisition of new flooring for the building.
(4) A few weeks go by.
(5) The issue of NEW carpets/flooring reportedly being bought for the building is raised on the post. It is pointed out this was NOT the flooring in the CIL.
(6) Staff get angry, there's murmurs of a strike.
(7) Senior officer panics and sets about showing the rumour leaked from within HBC (not by me) is not true.
(8) Moves are made to ensure a community group opperating from within the HBC owned building can produce its OWN receipts for the flooring.
(9) The talk on the post about money being wasted on flooring in the community building when HBC had carpets they may have used will be 'proven' to be fake news.

It's all so predictable.

Still, at least if this DOES happen HBC will be able to put the rumours to rest and appease their staff.

Unless of course someone produces another screen shot of a purchase order . . .
lets see david, fake news. fake news. fake news. is that all hbc can come up with if the rifty can produce a   receipt for £30,000 were have the rifty got that kind of  money ???
Title: Re: Carpetgate Revisited
Post by: Inspector Knacker on November 26, 2018, 07: PM
If they didn't like em in the centre, they wouldn't like en in the cafe.