Miller’s kitchen trial: the failings

Stewart Dobson

COUNCIL chiefs have been criticised for the handling of the failed fraud trial of controversial kitchen trader Vance Miller which cost £2.1 million.

Senior people failed to hold to account the decision to prosecute Mr Miller following hundreds of complaints about his business at Maple Mill, Hathershaw.

An independent review also found that there were inadequate resources and the risks were not identified and monitored. But it is not certain that the outcome would have been different if the case had been handled better. And the council could not have “reasonably foreseen” that the trial would collapse spectacularly in January after 17 weeks.

Lawyer Stewart Dobson was asked to review of the prosecution of Mr Miller and three associates which was called “misconceived from the start” and an “abuse of court” by the judge.

The council was ordered to pay defence costs of nearly £1 million and trading standards boss Tony Allen was sacked.

Mr Dobson unveiled a summary of his findings to councillors at last night’s cabinet meeting. The full report, which has been paid for by the council, is not expected to be published until Monday for legal reasons.

He estimated that the case cost Oldham taxpayers just over £2.1 million. This does not include costs for “staff time” which the council originally took into account.

He said: “I do not believe my report is going to bring much comfort or consolation to the council. I haven’t been able to think of a very clever way of rewriting history or getting your money back.”

Mr Dobson highlighted positive aspects of the case and said: “If the council prosecution had had no merit the trial certainly would not have lasted as long as it did, if indeed it had ever been allowed to start.”

But he stressed that it was unusual for such a serious prosecution to be taken by Trading Standards rather than the police, and for a local authority prosecution to be found to be an abuse of process.

He stressed it was an “over simplification” to say that the prosecution should never have happened.

The former Birmingham City Council chief executive, recommended that future “special prosecutions” should be scrutinised properly. They should only proceed if there is top-level agreement, costs should be properly estimated and risks identified.

“I am conscious that, in identifying these concerns, I have had the considerable advantage of hindsight, that any court proceeding of this type must always involve a high degree of uncertainty and that I cannot say that if the matter had been dealt with more effectively the outcome would necessarily have been different,” he added

“I am very clear that the council could not have reasonably foreseen the circumstances in which, and more particularly some of the reasons why, the prosecution was eventually found to be an abuse of court.”

The Chronicle understands that Mr Allen tried to block the publication pending an appeal to an employment tribunal.

He is the only person to have lost his job and Mr Dobson would not comment on whether he would be recommending further disciplinary action.

Councillor Jack Hulme said: “The thing that strikes me is the apparent lack of supervision of Trading Standards by senior members of the council, both executive and political leaders.

“I am quite concerned that this prosecution would appear to be largely led and driven by a comparatively junior officer.”