WBC to over-spend by £500,000, and they blame it on a"high-profile" legal dispute Options

[Simon Kirby]

The NWN report that WBC are to overspend by £500,000 this year, with the council reportedly blaming the over-spend largely on a "high-profile" legal dispute that's currently going through the courts.

Anyone care to speculate what that "high-profile" legal dispute might be? £500,000 is a large chunk of money to find so I wonder where the cuts will fall next year to rake the money back.

Top-tier councils like WBC are not free to increase their council tax as central government mercifully retain some control, but a loophole is that parish councils can set whatever precept they like, and councils have been taking advantage of this by handing over pointless services to parish councils, like tourist information offices and such. The con is that the primary council doesn't hand over any money to run the service so it simply does less for the same amount of council tax, but because the parish council is free to set whatever precept it likes the parish just raises more tax. The councils are happy - the primary council avoids the pressure of staying commercially efficient, the parish council is happy because it becomes more important, and the only loser is the tax-payer who doesn't immediately notice that their tax bill has gone up because they hear that the primary council has set a minimal increase in council tax, which technically is true, and they don't pay any attention to what their parish council is up to. It would be relatively easy for WBC to raise an extra £500k of tax like this without anyone noticing.

[Andy Capp]

I understand that the council are confident in winning the case and hope to recover costs through the Proceeds of Crime Act, so the mind boggles over what it is over.

[user23]

Top-tier councils like WBC are not free to increase their council tax as central government mercifully retain some control, but a loophole is that parish councils can set whatever precept they

I thought top tier councils could increase Council Tax by up to 2%, with a proposal for anything more needing to be agreed by a local referendum?

[Simon Kirby]

I thought top tier councils could increase Council Tax by up to 2%, with a proposal for anything more needing to be agreed by a local referendum?

Yes, like I said, central government retains some control over the increase. The government sets a cap, and 2% was last year's cap - Pickles wanted to set a 1.5% cap, but the Cleggster wouldn't have it. I don't know that the cap has been set yet for 2015 has it?. In practice councils haven't liked exceeding the cap as they're unlikely to get approval at a referendum so in effect central government cap the council tax - but that cap doesn't apply to the parish precept and parish councils can raise whatever income they like.

[On the edge]

Our local councils seem to have rather a lot riding on the successful outcome of litigation right now. They are both shrouded in secrecy but we are told that the cases are rock solid......yeah, the mind does bogle.

So much for open government!

[user23]

Yes, like I said, central government retains some control over the increase. The government sets a cap, and 2% was last year's cap - Pickles wanted to set a 1.5% cap

Wasn't it 1%, rather than 1.5%?

[On the edge]

Frankly, it doesn't matter if its one percent or ten, when you've lost control. Just an observation but these big, high profile legal cases don't 'just happen'. The possibility of expensive litigation must have been known for a good long time. Surely then, it should have been included in budget provisions and therefore should not have been a surprise or a cause for much comment; unless the budgeting process is seriously flawed. Are there any more accounting surprises waiting in the wings?

[Simon Kirby]

Wasn't it 1%, rather than 1.5%?

You may be right, I don't entirely remember. This source says Clegg veto'd a 1.5% cap, but I can't say if Pickles proposed a lower cap than that.

[user23]

You may be right, I don't entirely remember. This source says Clegg veto'd a 1.5% cap, but I can't say if Pickles proposed a lower cap than that.

This seems to say he proposed 1%.

I wonder what this is in real terms, taking into account inflation?

[spartacus]

£30,000 in additional car parking income.... I guess not everyone farked off to Amazingstoke then, as was so often predicted?

[Simon Kirby]

This seems to say he proposed 1%.

I wonder what this is in real terms, taking into account inflation?

The CPI rate of inflation at December 2013, the most recent figure available when the cap was set, was 2.0%, so the cap set a real-terms limit of zero cost increase. The CPI rate for November 2014 was 1.0% so all things being equal we might hope Pickles to get his 1.0% cap agreed for the 2015 council tax rise for another real-terms zero increase.

[Andy Capp]

£30,000 in additional car parking income.... I guess not everyone farked off to Amazingstoke then, as was so often predicted?

How can you tell from that figure. Is that figure purely increased car parking charge revenue?

[MontyPython]

This seems to say he proposed 1%.

I wonder what this is in real terms, taking into account inflation?

Hopefully a reduction in the useless management layer in Market Street. But no doubt those in "the Club" will protect at least some of them and make the public suffer instead.

[Simon Kirby]

£30,000 in additional car parking income.... I guess not everyone farked off to Amazingstoke then, as was so often predicted?

The NWN says:

AN OVERSPEND in excess of £500,000 is expected at the end of the current financial year, West Berkshire Council has revealed, despite it making more than £30,000 through car parking charges.

That appears to me to be saying that WBC made a total operating profit of £30,000 from its car parks. I'm assuming you're right and it was just poorly reported, but out of interest do you know the net profit from WBC's car parks? I'd be particularly interested to know how much income WBC get from people parking for up to two hours, because I'd really like that to be free and I wonder what that would cost the council in lost parking revenue that it would need to make up in council tax.

[Weavers Walk]

Help me out here guys,

Didn't WBC get stitched up (or didn't read the small print) so that 50% of ALL parking charges now go to S.L.I?

Is this £30,000 taken as a figure before or after SLI stick their share in the bank?