//
you're reading...
Financial Integrity, Football

Questions on Lennoxtown: Delegated powers, Valuations & Planning Approval, Professional Valuers and Why no marketing?

Delegated Powers

The NHS GGC claims in a post called Structure of NHS Greater Glasgow during the period 2002 -2006 that it was the Greater Glasgow Primary Care NHS Trust that had delegated powers from 1st April 1999 – 31st March 2004. And that it had the same delegated powers as the Greater Glasgow NHS Trust.

Question 1: If it had delegated powers then why did the Primary Care NHS Trust ask the Greater Glasgow NHS Trust in the Board Paper 02/71 in October 2002 for permission to allocate the funds to the Lennoxtown Initiative? Why ask permission when you already have the same powers?

Further down the NHS GGC says ‘The formal decision to sell this part of the site to Celtic plc was made by the Capital Planning Group of the Primary Care Division at it’s meeting held on the 17th August 2005‘.

Where then are the minutes of the Capital Planning Group meeting on the 17th August 2005 detailing the members and the decision? It’s a bit suspicious they are missing. Perhaps another FoI is needed.

Yet the contract was not formalised until 29th June 2006, 10 months later. Why was this?

Question 2: If the Capital Planning Group accepted Celtic’s offer on the 17th August 2005 why then did Greater Glasgow NHS Trust CE Tom Divers accept Celtic’s offer again on the 10th May 2006?

Proforma Acceptance

from the Monitoring Proforma

Valuations and Planning Approval

The first valuation was in Inglis letter dated 2nd March 2005 and the second in the Keys letter dated 28th August 2005. The valuation was £480,000. Now both valuations are before East Dunbartonshire Council Planning gave Outline Planning Approval, on 21st December 2005, and Detailed Planning Approval, on 20th April 2006, as we seen in a previous post.

Now wouldn’t outline & detailed planning approval add a substantial amount to the initial valuation? Not in this case it stayed at £480,000 and under the £500,000 that allowed Greater Glasgow Chief Executive to sign the contract rather than the Scottish Ministers. Amazing.

Professional Valuers used

The valuers used are small one or two men companies. The same person in fact who moved to create his own company provided both valuations. Why not use the District Valuer Services (DVS) of the the Valuation Office Agency of the government? Surely they would have more experience in valuing the disposal of NHS land than small valuers? [The VB raised this question]

Why was there no Marketing of Land?

Well it would have pushed the value beyond the £500,000 delegated limit and the decision would have been the Scottish Ministers.

Celtic would in all likelihood have been outbid by a developer. As they were for the Belvidere hospital land previously and they wouldn’t want that. Several advisers below mentioned that developers, even though the land was designated Greenbelt, would have purchased the land and held it until planning permission was given.

Pollock Buchan comment developers

from Pollock & Buchan [Property Advisors] letter

Inglis comment

from Inglis & Partners letter

Even with the advice from the Property Advisor and the Professional Valuer that the property go on the open market it wasn’t. Who made the decision not to widely market and go against advisers advice?

The lack of marketing, to at least have competing bids, shows there was no attempt to maximise the value of Lennoxtown. There was only to be one bidder and the bid kept low. That’s State Aid.

 ©footballtaxhavens.wordpress.com 2014 CC-by icon

Advertisements

Discussion

One thought on “Questions on Lennoxtown: Delegated powers, Valuations & Planning Approval, Professional Valuers and Why no marketing?

  1. I think this paragraph is the most damming one in this entire saga “Now wouldn’t outline & detailed planning approval add a substantial amount to the initial valuation? Not in this case it stayed at £480,000 and under the £500,000 that allowed Greater Glasgow Chief Executive to sign the contract rather than the Scottish Ministers”. ‘We mustn’t let those nosey beggars through in Edinburgh find out what we’re trying to get past them and help the Council team get a better training base’! The men/women responsible for this have to be identified and prosecuted. The sooner this bloody Referendum is over the sooner the Scottish Government can do its job and start investigating these shenanigans.

    Posted by Scott Macboy | April 14, 2014, 9:41 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: