Sheridan Westlake OBE
Allegation that Councillor Westlake breached the terms of Guildford Borough Council Code of Conduct
The allegation made against Councillor Westlake is that he fraudulently altered his handwritten contemporaneous version of the minutes of the Taxi Advisory Group (TAG) meeting of 29th September 2010, and thereby breached the Council's code of conduct. His actions corrupted the TAG Committee's process and were dishonest. He has, I believe committed an act of fraud within the meaning of the Fraud Act 2006 in that he falsified the record knowing it would enable increased taxi numbers due to cheapness of the Peugeot Partner as a wheelchair accessible vehicle, and the inevitable reduction in taxi drivers earnings..
I believe that before the September 2010 meeting commenced, Councillor Westlake referred to his (since destroyed) minutes of the August meeting and transferred the action points in “fair hand” or tidy handwriting, from the August meeting minute to the start of the September meeting minute. The writing is tidier because he was copying the action points from the August meeting minutes.
The attached document “Westlake minute September TAG.pdf”, shows the heading “Action Points last time”, (last time refers to the previous TAG meeting of 11th August 2010).
It appears that he has written “officers report- EU” in tidy writing, then an illegible word that word that has later been crossed out together with the word “report”, and the words “+rear loading full type approval” have been added later in a more hurried and slightly smaller script. The words “+ rear loading full type approval” were added sometime after the September meeting commenced, and possibly after the meeting had ended. That is why the handwriting of the addition appears scribbled and of a slightly different size. I believe it may have also been written using a different pen, and have asked Mr Lingard to obtain the original from Councillor Westlake to prevent its destruction.
By doing this, Councillor Westlake altered the last surviving handwritten minute of the two meetings, the Council Officers have also destroyed their handwritten minutes.
Councillor Westlake did that to disguise the fact that no proper consultation had taken place, or decision been reached on the use or approval or desirability or suitability or need for rear loading wheel chair accessible vehicles as taxis at the August meeting. At the August TAG meeting rear loading wheelchair accessible vehicles were not even on the Agenda.
From the August TAG meeting minutes type written up after the event by Council officers:
1) Age of vehicles
§ Discussion about current rules and possible changes in the draft policy. BM said nothing was cast in stone and we would wait for the final comments to the policy
§ MR asked about rear loading WAV’s and their acceptance. The trade had requested the policy be changed to allow rear loading which had been accepted. Comment was made that there was only one vehicle which had European Whole Type Approval, which was restrictive. SW asked officers to look at a broader range of this type of vehicle, without moving too far from our requirements.
MR in the typewritten minutes refers to me, but I never ever asked about “rear loading Wheelchair Accessible Vehicles” those words never passed my lips. To record that I did was in my view a fraudulent act. Council officers and Councillor Westlake have destroyed their original handwritten minutes to conceal the fact that the contemporaneous minutes don't say anything of the sort. I did support John Tester who asked that a wider range of vehicles like his which is a much different larger 7 seater Peugeot side loading wheelchair accessible vehicle, be approved.
The following are excerpts from emails sent to Bob Mattock:
Dave Williams-Wynn's email of 13th September:
“Subject our recent phone conversation, with regards the V W Caddy. It is important we discuss this fully at the next GTA meeting.”
My email of 16th September 2010 prior to the September TAG meeting makes it clear:
“Just to follow on from Dave Wynn's telecon and email with you re the
Volkswagen Caddy type vehicle.
We are very concerned to hear that a driver has ordered a Peugeot
Partner vehicle for use as a rear loading, rear facing wheelchair
accessible vehicle. He claims the dealer has checked that this has
been approved by you.
There are serious concerns about customer acceptance for this kind of
rear facing vehicle.
Also this class of vehicle are basically light commercial vans, with a
rigid rear axle not the modern independent suspension. The rigid axle
leads to excessive passenger discomfort, which is why modern cars have
independent rear suspension. This class of van all have rigid rear
axles to accommodate the loading of a EuroPallet.
Additionally the Licensing Committee appears to have been bounced into
accepting smaller under 1600cc engines on the grounds that they had
adequate HorsePower. HorsePower provides a measure of the capacity to
reach a maximum speed. The correct measure for engine capacity is its
Torque, which determines the acceleration a vehicle can achieve.
Acceleration is important from a safety point of view when entering
fast moving traffic flows. It is unlikely that an engine of below
1600cc will have sufficient torque.
This class of small engined light commercial vehicles are also
unlikely to be of sufficient internal width etc. to carry 4 full sized
adult passengers in comfort.
There has not been adequate consultation on this class of vehicle, and
acceptance of them will lead to the entire fleet of GBC Taxis being
small, underpowered, uncomfortable vans; surely not what the Council
intends.
Please confirm that nothing will be done to accept these vehicles till
after the next TAG meeting.”
John Tester on 21st September 2010 says:
“What I remember was that....At the next TAG meeting Bob Mattock is supposed to have inquired about all the other type approval. You need a tape recorder when ever he speaks. His mouth operates before his brain and his short term memory.”
Further in my email of 22nd September.
“I do think this should be discussed fully. Before an unsafe policy is adopted. Type approval was discussed at the last meeting because John Tester said that his Peugeot vehicle had better seats than the European Type Approved Peugeot E7. It was so that type of vehicle would be approved, not a completely different clac of vehicle like the VW Caddy”
Again on the 23rd September:
“Further, I believe you told a driver 3 months ago in writing that the VWCaddy was not suitable to be a hackney carriage, and there have been no substantive discussions of this vehicle by the TAG since then. The Caddy is one foot narrower than the current generation of Passat/Mondeo type family saloons designed to take 4 full sized adults.
We would have to go for an immediate injunction to prevent the issue of a hackney licence to a VW Caddy type vehicle, and judicial review on this matter, costs for GBC account.”
Councillor Westlake's actual true action point from this item on the August agenda was for Council Officers to look into whether the range of vehicles that could be approved for licensing could be expanded.
From the September TAG typed after the event meeting minutes produced by Council officers:
§ David Williams Wynn(DWW) commenting on the increase in numbers, asked about smaller vehicles, both saloon and WAV. Mark Rostron (MR) asked about the dimensions of the smaller vehicles, did they fit our conditions. DWW asked did we need converted vans as taxis? He did not remember any requests for more rear loading WAV’s, a ppoint agreed with by MR. Nick Edwards (NE)said that this was not correct and that there had been discussion at the previous meeting about broadening the range of rear loading WAV’s to give greater choice
Nick Edwards was either accidentally or deliberately mistaken.
Councillor Westlake's forged fraudulent minute has had serious adverse consequences for taxi drivers, the taxi using public, and the disabled users of taxis. Disabled wheelchair users have stated they believe rear loading wheelchair accessible vehicles to be dangerous.
I could discuss at length the motives of the other participants in this alleged fraud, but I have been asked to be concise.
Yours truly
Mark Rostron
Vice Chairman and Secretary-Guildford Hackney Association
19th February 2011
