Advertisement
Council to fight Miller case costs
Reporter: Richard Hooton
Date online: 25 February 2010
OLDHAM Council is to appeal a judge’s decision to order the authority to pay the costs of the bungled Vance Miller fraud trial.
Judge Jonathan Foster QC threw the case out of court saying it was “misconceived from the start” and the prosecution was “an abuse of the process of the court.”
He later ruled that it was a “matter of general principle’’ that the council and not central government should pay the massive costs bill, estimated at around £5 million, because of the way the case against the businessman was handled.
He rejected pleas from council lawyers to not be “unduly punitive” on the people of Oldham.
The defence teams for all defendants in the case have been granted extra time to produce their costs application with the case adjourned until April.
But council chief executive Charlie Parker said: “We don’t believe that the local council taxpayer should foot the bill.
“We are extremely disappointed by the judge’s ruling and will be putting forward a very robust appeal through Jeremy Morgan QC, an eminent lawyer in the field of costs appeals.
“There has been a lot of idle speculation and rumour about costs. Residents should be reassured that Oldham Council has insurance cover and will in any case defend itself rigorously against any claim for costs, compensation or damages.
“I do not believe that the constant press speculation around these matters is either accurate or correct, and it is important that residents understand that there is no likelihood of such claims resulting in an increase in Oldham’s council tax.”
The trial was due to last six months and was hailed as the largest, most expensive fraud case ever brought by a Trading Standards authority in the UK, but it collapsed in its 17th week.
Mr Miller (44), from Ramsbottom, was cleared along with co-defendants Nichola Brodie (33), from Ramsbottom, Sadiya Hussain (29), from Milnrow, and Alan Ford (45), from Ashton.
The kitchens boss, whose base is at Hathershaw’s Maple Mill, has stated he will sue the council for damaging his business and reputation.
Head of Oldham Trading Standards, Tony Allen, has been suspended ahead of a review of the case, being conducted by Stewart Dobson, a lawyer and former acting chief executive of Birmingham City Council.
According to Chambers, the UK’s leading legal authority, Mr Morgan is the top-rated lawyer in his field.
Comments
£5 million now, and when the council has finished with the fighting the "cost", how much will we have to pay then?
If they have insurance to cover the costs why are they bothering to appeal its just throwing good money after bad! They are so incompetent at the council they will probably muck up the appeal as well. They should have thought about the council tax payers before the trial started then we wouldnt be in this sorry mess.
It seemed a very carefully worded statement from the Chief Executive. I would have expected to see the word "adequate" before ...insurance cover ..., at least. Mr Parker may not believe that the local tax payer should foot the bill, but as sure as eggs are eggs we will - whether as general tax payers or council tax payers - probably both.
These council execs are very quick to reach for the lawyers when they're dipping their hands into our pockets, perhaps it would be a good idea to make them liable for 10% of the costs when & if they lose. That would concentrate their minds before being so cavalier with our money.
Why shouldn't the local council foot the bill?
If the council had won, it would have accepted payment of its cost.
-Accept the ruling, make an insurance claim, and do not waste any more of our money on an appeal-for which you will have no insurance claim.
Then go to the job centre with your mates
Strong leadership from the Parker-Sykes-Alcock combo should have said that an appeal was a possibility in the first place. I'll accept they would not have been wise to say immediately that they definitely would appeal without first getting legal opinion but there was no statement that they were even considering it.
What we have here a distinct case of "Opps! We'd better because the public have noticed."
Taxi for Parker!! Shut the door on your way out & dont come back.
would it not havebeen prudent of charlie parker to waitfor the outcome of the enquiry before comitting morecouncil tax payers money to this folly?
Charlie Parker?
Prudent?
Now that's comedy!
No it's not it's irony.
Funny how if the council had of won the case we wouldn't of seen a reduction in council tax...One man and his business VS Oldham Council, Trading Standards + Mr Morgan.
Are we ever gonna hear the end of this case? Jus leave the guy alone...you've already caused enough damage.
Just one last comment.What has this charlie everdone for oldham.Does anyone know of anythng?
Vance Miller sells kitchens, employs people, pays taxes, and improves the local economy. Oldham council should be encouraging him and not trying to drive him and his business out of town. If Vance Miller left Oldham unemployment would only get worse.
Oldham council needs to take a hard look at reality and come out of there ivory towers.
mr miller and his co defendants should recive there damage costs they will have lost alot of money of the time of this trial threw not being able to be at work sorting everything out for 17 weeks all the bad press the stress , depression of the case. im suprised the buisness is still standing with not having the boss there for such a very long time . whats fair is fair anyone else would get it and charlie parker,howard sykes and toni alen need to acept responseabilty for the shambles!!!!!!!!!!!
typical trading standards its not our money total waste of tax payers money
Have Your Say
More cash for the lawyers then. Time for Charlie Parker and Howard Sykes to take responsibility for this fiasco. If Parker won't go he should be sacked.
By goneaway @ 25/02/2010 12:16:43