Council official evicted elderly tenants from bungalows...

#1
Council official evicted elderly tenants from bungalows... then moved in herself

"As a council official with responsibility for helping the homeless, Kristine Reeves knows how much people value their homes.
Which makes it difficult to explain how she came to play a key role in evicting frail and elderly tenants from their bungalows - then moved into one with her partner. "

LINKY

The above says it all. More proof that ZANU Labour have their snouts in the trough at all levels.
 
#2
Some 25 old people were moved out under plans to replace their homes with 100 high-density flats and houses.

Rather than hire security to prevent squatters moving in to the empty bungalows, officials decided to rent them to employees, without consulting elected councillors.
So where does Zanu doo dah come into it? :?
 
#3
Miss Reeves, 38, has now been suspended on full pay by Labour-run Norwich City Council, which admits conflict of interest rules were flouted.
Dare say that she'll be sat at home tossing off on £52k for quite a while.

They should give her a fricking Poncho and a pack of Hexi and drop her off a Dixi's Corner for a month or two. Cnut.
 
#4
If this corrupt b*tch wasn't breaking the law,then the laws of the land need tightning and she needs to be arrested.

New Labour,new corruption.
 
#5
Le_addeur_noir said:
If this corrupt b*tch wasn't breaking the law,then the laws of the land need tightning and she needs to be arrested.

New Labour,new corruption.
How do you know that she votes Labour?
 
#6
Sven said:
Le_addeur_noir said:
If this corrupt b*tch wasn't breaking the law,then the laws of the land need tightning and she needs to be arrested.

New Labour,new corruption.
How do you know that she votes Labour?
At what point in my post did I say she voted Labour?.The fact that she was in the employ of a Labour council says it all.

For the record,she probably would,though,as virtually all the public sector are likely to.For a public sector employee not to vote Labour would be like a turkey voting for Christmas.

She should be suspended on no pay.Still it's only the taxpayer being screwed,so to Labour that's all right.
 
#7
Le_addeur_noir said:
Sven said:
Le_addeur_noir said:
If this corrupt b*tch wasn't breaking the law,then the laws of the land need tightning and she needs to be arrested.

New Labour,new corruption.
How do you know that she votes Labour?
At what point in my post did I say she voted Labour?.The fact that she was in the employ of a Labour council says it all.

For the record,she probably would,though,as virtually all the public sector are likely to.For a public sector employee not to vote Labour would be like a turkey voting for Christmas.

She should be suspended on no pay.Still it's only the taxpayer being screwed,so to Labour that's all right.
"Public Sector" as in Police, Armed Forces, Prison Officers, MI5/6/7/8/9, Immigration Service, JTAC, SOCA etc. Yes, all well known bastions of Zionazinulanzimwank etc.

And of course she should be suspended on no pay. She's been accused. It's only fair. Get accused, lose yer pay. Go on the dole. That would go down well in the Police, Armed Forces, Prison Officers, MI5/6/7/8/9, Immigration Service, JTAC, SOCA etc.
 
#8
I noted that although her scheme had evicted the previous elderly tenants, and they moved council employees into them at smaller rents than the original tenants because it "saved" paying a security company to stop squatters moving in.....

But they have to leave now at 1 months notice. I would have bulldozed the houses with the new tenants still in situ on a sunday morning. This is an outrage, and for the elected council members to claim they didnt know is a total insult to the electorate!
 
#9
I could have guessed Ashie would have come out in support of someone who ripped off elderly tenants in a Labour council. The woman is earning over £50K per year (hardly fits with the traditional salary of the "public sector") working for a Labour council, and managed manufacture a scheme by which she got cut rate accomodation having evicted the elderly residents that these houses were intended for, Of course there is a sudden attack of amnesia around the elected representatives on this council.
The woman has abused her position, yes by all means suspend her on pay while she is investigated, but for heavens sake complete the investigation as soon as possible, and get her fired.

But I digress - under labour all men are equal, but Labour leaders and council employees are more equal than everybody else. Councils are supposed to work for the Council Taxpayers, not sponge accomodation from us.
 

mercurydancer

LE
Book Reviewer
#10
I'm with you on that one Bob

The eviction of elderly residents cannot have been something that the councillors would have known nothing about. Even the dimmest councillor would have said " Well what happens to the property before it gets developed? "

Also, how did the council employees get to find out about the reduced rent porperties? That woudl provide an interesting line of enquiry. Each and every one of them should know that a conflict of interest is present and should have declined. Each of the employees should be suspended and disciplinary action taken.

As for being suspended on full pay, yes thats fair enough, but then the disciplinary hearing should take place without delay. I strongly suspect that Miss Reeves will wait as long as she can on full pay and try to get paid off on redundancy or sick leave or any of the other tricks that council officials have used.
 
#11
bobthedog said:
I could have guessed Ashie would have come out in support of someone who ripped off elderly tenants in a Labour council. The woman is earning over £50K per year (hardly fits with the traditional salary of the "public sector") working for a Labour council, and managed manufacture a scheme by which she got cut rate accomodation having evicted the elderly residents that these houses were intended for, Of course there is a sudden attack of amnesia around the elected representatives on this council.
The woman has abused her position, yes by all means suspend her on pay while she is investigated, but for heavens sake complete the investigation as soon as possible, and get her fired.

But I digress - under labour all men are equal, but Labour leaders and council employees are more equal than everybody else. Councils are supposed to work for the Council Taxpayers, not sponge accomodation from us.
Liabour.... need one say more and ashie the voice of liabour of course wont see a thing wrong with the abuse of position
 
#12
bobthedog said:
I could have guessed Ashie would have come out in support of someone who ripped off elderly tenants in a Labour council. The woman is earning over £50K per year (hardly fits with the traditional salary of the "public sector") working for a Labour council, and managed manufacture a scheme by which she got cut rate accomodation having evicted the elderly residents that these houses were intended for, Of course there is a sudden attack of amnesia around the elected representatives on this council.
The woman has abused her position, yes by all means suspend her on pay while she is investigated, but for heavens sake complete the investigation as soon as possible, and get her fired.

But I digress - under labour all men are equal, but Labour leaders and council employees are more equal than everybody else. Councils are supposed to work for the Council Taxpayers, not sponge accomodation from us.
I would have guessed that my completely fair and neutral position would be characterised as "support of someone who ripped off elderly tenants".

Hanging's too good for 'em! After all, you want to: "complete the investigation as soon as possible, and get her fired". Whether guilty or not, presumably.
 
#13
Ashie, although I am extremely familiar with employment law and the disciplinary process, she has been suspended on suspicion of abusing her position to gain benefit for herself (and others). While I have used the new processes to dismiss employees in the past few months, mostly for alcohol abuse during working hours, the process of "investigation" is a waste of time. It also gives some employees the comfort of knowing that the process will be long - (Particularly in Politically Correct Council offices) and they will be earning Taxpayers money while this is conducted.

It is through this delay, caused by the need to investigate what is in most part the blindingly obvious, that an element of comfort is felt by some public employees.
 
#14
ashie said:
I would have guessed that my completely fair and neutral position would be characterised as "support of someone who ripped off elderly tenants".

Hanging's too good for 'em! After all, you want to: "complete the investigation as soon as possible, and get her fired". Whether guilty or not, presumably.
ashie, you're a girl aren't you.
 
#15
halo_jones said:
bobthedog said:
I could have guessed Ashie would have come out in support of someone who ripped off elderly tenants in a Labour council. The woman is earning over £50K per year (hardly fits with the traditional salary of the "public sector") working for a Labour council, and managed manufacture a scheme by which she got cut rate accomodation having evicted the elderly residents that these houses were intended for, Of course there is a sudden attack of amnesia around the elected representatives on this council.
The woman has abused her position, yes by all means suspend her on pay while she is investigated, but for heavens sake complete the investigation as soon as possible, and get her fired.

But I digress - under labour all men are equal, but Labour leaders and council employees are more equal than everybody else. Councils are supposed to work for the Council Taxpayers, not sponge accomodation from us.
Liabour.... need one say more and ashie the voice of liabour of course wont see a thing wrong with the abuse of position
Au contraire. I see everything wrong with abuse of position. When such abuse is proven. Not before.
 
#16
Utter scum. There can be NO excuse for activity such as this....from either employed scum or elected.
 
#17
Of course Ashie, you could do her for gross misdemeanour ie breach of trust, and have done with it, instant dismissal!

You forget that while the investigation (which to my own knowledge has taken almost 4 weeks) she remains on full pay, at Council Taxpayers expense. In private companies we are encouraged to complete the investigation within 2 or 3 days, as we cannot afford to be wasting cash. If there is a clear case of abuse what is there to further investigate.

In the case of my employees, I caught them in a pub having been informed by the police that they were there (they had been involved in a fight) and were supposed to be operating a major electrical installation, which they had abandoned for 4 hours on a Friday night. They had no case to answer no excuses, but I still had to go through the bullshit of an investigation and allow them to have their say, before firing them. All in all a total waste of time, and money.
 
#18
Le_addeur_noir said:
Sven said:
Le_addeur_noir said:
If this corrupt b*tch wasn't breaking the law,then the laws of the land need tightning and she needs to be arrested.

New Labour,new corruption.
How do you know that she votes Labour?
At what point in my post did I say she voted Labour?.The fact that she was in the employ of a Labour council says it all.

For the record,she probably would,though,as virtually all the public sector are likely to.For a public sector employee not to vote Labour would be like a turkey voting for Christmas.

She should be suspended on no pay.Still it's only the taxpayer being screwed,so to Labour that's all right.
See my first post - especially the bit in bold :roll:
 
#19
In fairness, I have a lot of sympathy for the coucil staff, and the course of action they took could have been entirely reasonable, but for the small oversight of getting approval, which makes it look as though they were trying to hide something.

Once the decision had been made to develop the houses, a contractor will almost certainly demand a start date with cast-iron guarantees. The council then work as quick as they can to make sure all the old dears are out of the accommodation with plenty of time to spare: all it would take is one particularly stubborn occupant to refuse to move and keep appealing the process in the courts and the council would be facing a massive compensation claim from the developer (who would in turn have to pay compensation for all the builders, contractors and sub-contractors).

The houses, cleared ahead of schedule were under threat of being occupied by squatters. If so occupied it may have taken years to clear them out (sadly a petrol bomb through the window is no longer considered acceptable by the fuzz). Thus a real risk of a large bill to the council.

So they moved in council employees. Smart move if all open and above board. Was there a start date for the redevelopment? If not, how long were the council employees going to occupy the accommodation? Were there proper contracts in place?

The real error was not being open and honest (or allowing there to be the impression that all was not well).

As for the comment of 50k a year not being very public sector... where have you been???? Thanks to Gordon average public sector salaries have outstripped private sector for many years now (even more so when the pensions are taken into account). And yes, Sven and Ashie, I do know that there are a lot of public sector workers on very low salaries. So what? There are plenty of burger flippers and charity workers earning bügger all as well, but I am confused as to how a council "chief executive" can earn more money than the Prime Minister!
 
#20
I've only previously come across the expression "high density" in Zimbabwe, where it refers to the housing which the poorest in that society might be able to afford, as it's closely built, badly built and designed to accommodate the maximum number at the lowest cost; not a recommendation, really.

So the townships of Africa are finally a reality in the United Kingdom. A triumph for 'diversity'.
 

Latest Threads

Top