Haringey Council awaits FoI court ruling over property deals

Clive Carter told a tribunal he has been fighting for years to uncover documents which might explain why “millions and millions of pounds were wasted”.

Judges must now decide whether there is a significant public interest in compelling the council to publish the secret documents.

• MOST READ: Look inside this elegant mock Tudor home with 'country charm' on the market for £4m

Mr Carter told them his battle had been inspired by an award-winning Ham&High investigation.

We reported in 2021 that the council had spent almost £23 million to acquire Wood Green office block Alexandra House, which was then valued at £10 million.

“This is really an astonishing waste of public money," Mr Carter told the court.

The council has refused to publish unredacted records from “secret property boards”, in part by claiming they are “commercially sensitive”.

But Mr Carter said that was “ridiculous” as the most important figures – the purchase price and subsequent, lower valuation – had already been made public by the council.

“[It was] commercial information at a particular time in history,” he said. “This is all ancient history now.

“What this is all about, Judge, is protecting the reputation of this council… There were a series of remarkable property wheelings and dealings and they got so controversial that eventually the council was obligated to have an independent external investigation.”

Haringey Council paid £23m for Alexandra House in Wood Green. The sum included £6m paid to a property tycoon, who acquired first refusal on the block after Haringey initially rejected the option to buy it (Image: Google Streetview)

Alexandra House

In 2021, we revealed Haringey was given first refusal on Alexandra House but turned it down, after which a property tycoon set up a shell company and acquired first refusal.

When the council decided months later that it wanted the block after all, that company was able to charge what an auditor called a “ransom”.

Taxpayers forked out £6 million to the company, plus more than £15.5 million on top for the building. In the end, the acquisition cost Haringey Council £22.6m.

An auditor then valued it at £10 million.

Haringey blamed its initial failure to buy Alexandra House on a unilateral decision by a since-departed council officer.

But Mr Carter told judges that as a former councillor, he didn't believe an officer would take such a decision "without political cover".

He is fighting to uncover records of "secret" meetings between councillors and officers prior to that and other "bizarre" property decisions.

The Others

In 2021, we revealed Haringey had handed a business park to a rapper called Smurfie Syco at zero rent, despite others offering to pay for it.

A subsequent investigation found no records of who made that decision or why.

The council also paid £2.15 million for an £850,000 house in Muswell Hill, to facilitate building works it then cancelled.

An investigation commissioned by the council in the wake of our reporting found its property service had been in disarray.

There was evidence of confidential information being leaked to a developer.

Clive Carter told the judges that the loss to taxpayers on the purchase of Alexandra House, seen behind him, was over £10m. He said there was overwhelming public interest in residents being allowed to know how it happened and who was responsible (Image: Bob Hare / Clive Carter)

The Tribunal

Details Mr Carter is fighting for include valuations of Alexandra House given to councillors before they decided to buy it for £23 million.

Haringey claims that forcing disclosure of “early stage” discussions about property deals would inhibit participants in future meetings, who would be wary of minutes later being released.

But Mr Carter told judges that one of the boards whose records he wanted included “half the cabinet”, who were publicly accountable elected members and were the “final decision-makers”.

He initially took his case to the official watchdog, the Information Commissioner, but it sided with Haringey.

Judges must now decide whether to overturn the commissioner's decision and force the council to release the documents.

Even if they accept the council’s arguments, they can still order disclosure if they feel there is significant public interest.

“I think the Information Commissioner has got the balance of the public interest wrong,” Mr Carter told them.

“I think they got it badly wrong when they didn’t give overwhelming emphasis or weight to the sheer millions of pounds that have been wasted. To me, that should have been the overriding public interest test here.”

The court indicated that a decision could take around six weeks.

Neither the Information Commissioner nor Haringey Council appeared at the hearing to make any arguments.