Recent Press reports, damaging to Lancashire Constabulary, regarding speed enforcement as a result of Nigel Evans asking Ministers embarrassing questions has prompted Lancashire County Council to make the results public under FOI.
The unrevealed contents of the investigation claim to clear Lancashire Constabulary of fraud involvement.
Email to Nigel Evans M.P.
Dear Nigel,
I forward the following to you.
Attachment (cosh 1) is, I am SUPPOSED to assume, the “OFFICIAL” reply from Lancashire Police Authority.
However this carries the heading:
“subject: Correspondence relating to Speed Awareness Courses and Lancashire Road Safety Partnership.
Please note;
this is a reply from The Assistant Director of Finance to LANCASHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL not THE TREASURER to LPA!
It appears that Mr Cosh has a serious difficulty in differentiating between the two posts!
This, to me, casts serious doubts on THE INDEPENDENCE of LPA and on its credibility.
They now appear to be under the direction & control of Lancashire County Council and are totally dependant and reliant on LCC employees for their financial authenticity. (Both Treasurer & their internal auditor are LCC employees & the “treasurer” is the boss of the internal auditor at LCC!)
I expand:
Attachment cosh2 is a copy of an email I previously forwarded to you in relation to enquiries to Lancashire County Council regarding THEIR involvement in speed awareness & LRSP FPNH1 returns to The Department for Transport.
Lancashire Police Authority have no involvement in either and are, I assume, INDEPENDENT from both these. I refer to previous comments on this.
This clearly confirms that ALL the FPNs claimed under the Road Safety Camera Scheme are ABSOLUTELY correct, authenticated by all parties concerned, and therefore these must include the unpaid FPNs sent to the courts.
COSH2
The forwarded email (below) was to LPA in relation to the findings of the Director of Finance Cumbria & Lancashire Courts that indicate the claims made under the FPNH1s of Lancashire Road Safety Partnership, in relation to administration of FPNs claimed to have been sent through the courts, reflect ALL MOTORING OFFENCES and not just Red Light & Speeding Offences.
However if Mr Cosh is replying as TREASURER to LPA , I reproduce the following from his document ( cosh1) and will comment on the same:
“During the audit investigation a number of inconsistencies in the apportionment and accounting for costs relating to speed enforcement have been identified. I have taken steps to adjust the charges to reflect the correct apportionment of costs and put in place new processes to ensure that going forward the correct apportionment and recharges are made”.
It appears that The Head of Internal Audit’s investigation confirms that, to me, irregularities not inconsistencies, have been found in relation to the types of FPNs being claimed under the Road Safety Camera Scheme in relation to methods of accountancy and payments made in relation to the administration of these financial claims from Her Majesty’s Treasury.
In effect it appears that The Head of Internal Audit’s investigation confirms the Director of Finance to Cumbria & Lancashire Courts’ suspicions.
In view of Mr Cosh’s involvement, as internal auditor, confirming officer to the Audit commission to obtain certification for payment, Assistant Director of finance overseeing the audit department, Treasurer to LPA confirming the income from The Road Safety Camera scheme paid to, and claimed by Lancashire Constabulary, I find no credibility in his latest CONFIRMATION that Lancashire Constabulary nor himself have any part to play in:
“During the audit investigation a number of inconsistencies in the apportionment and accounting for costs relating to speed enforcement have been identified”
Accountancy speak for fraud!
Going to court is part of the Enforcement policy! I therefore can only assume this is what he refers to in this statement!
Over 80,000 missing summonses is pretty inconsistent!
However if they are other motoring offences claimed for payment they do fit the description:
” a number of inconsistencies in the apportionment and accounting for costs relating to speed enforcement”
I have even less confidence that:
” I have taken steps to adjust the charges to reflect the correct apportionment of costs and put in place new processes to ensure that going forward the correct apportionment and recharges are made”.
The Auditors are auditing themselves.
I take it that no repayments have been made to the Government or any Minister contacted unless, the repayments have been made direct to Jack Straw.
He wouldn’t know, he’s too busy!!
Maybe that’s how he managed to repay his council tax claims!
25 speeding tickets would cover it exactly!
Who knows when the lunatics take over the asylum, anything is possible ?
As I have been banned from direct contact with any MEMBER or OFFICER of LCC by their Legal Solicitor since Mr. Cosh’s first letter (cosh2), and have therefore no democratic representative to consult (CLLr Driver refuses to answer any correspondence from me or return telephone calls made to his office), I believe that it is time for the LPA & The Chief Constable to be put to strict proof of Mr. Cosh’s claims as, as usual, he provides no evidence, supplies no documentation to support his claims and as indicated above he has a very large self interest that this be swept under the carpet.
I therefore formally request that you act in the public interest, in view of the large amounts of Government money involved, to request some sort of independent enquiry takes place in respect of the Head of internal audits investigatory findings.
Again,
Thank you for your unstinting support
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Members
