Council flaws led to £1m legal failure
Auditors have criticised Cheltenham council for running up a £1 million legal bill in a failed attempt to sue an ex-chief executive of the Chartered Institute of Housing.
KPMG, which audits Cheltenham Borough Council on behalf of the Audit Commission, has published a report into the legal action the council took against Christine Laird.
It criticises a lack of clarity in the council’s constitution over who should make decisions, and flaws in the decision-making process.
It notes that if decisions had been taken more effectively it is possible the council would still have decided to go to court, but says there were ‘a series of issues that taken together over time created the situation’ and the council ‘did not respond effectively or early enough’.
Ms Laird worked at Cheltenham Borough Council as managing director between 2002 and 2005, when the council terminated her contract. It took legal action against her in May 2007, after coming to the conclusion there were flaws in her application.
The auditors state the action, which failed in June 2009, has cost the council more than £1 million to date, and that the total cost of the council’s dispute with Ms Laird is £2.1 million.
Cheltenham council chief executive Andrew North the report is ‘helpful’.
‘Of course there are lessons that we have learnt from this case and in recent years, as KPMG have recognised, we have made considerable improvements to the way we do things,’ he said.
‘This has been reflected in a recent Audit Commission review of our management of resources and performance, when we were one of the few councils to score as high as three out of four, which is a very good result.’
The council will hold a meeting on 22 March to consider the report and determine what actions it will take in response.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment





Readers' comments (1)
Max | 05/03/2010 7:11 pm
I am sure that the decision was not taken lightly by the Council but I cannot help but wonder the Auditors would have criticised the Council if they had not pursued Chris Laird.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment