Investigations & Enforcement Services

Professional investigation, fair enforcement

Meeting: / IES Directors Meeting / Held on: / 19/3/2012
Venue: / LG10 - 21 Bloomsbury Street / Time: / 10.30 – 15.00
Attendees: / xxxx / Apologies:

Actions arising from meeting

Agenda Item / Action Points / Action Officer / Due Date
NEW APs from meeting 19th March
AP 1 / xxxxto come up with a set of questions with regards to integration and s447s that we will need legal advice on. / Xxxx / By mid April
AP 2 / xxxx to revisit the PID from the Integration & Case Strategy Project written in June 2010 and update as well as review what it will achieve if we have different decisions. / xxxx / By mid April
AP 3 / xxxxto draft a notice to all staff for xxxxto send regarding the training needs analysis across IES. / xxxx / By 16th April
AP 4 / All to design a questionnaire for management and investigation and other specific work areas. / All / By 16th April
AP 5 / Consult the union with regards to the training strategy to advise them what we are doing. / xxxx / Asap
AP 6 / Agree what we will do with the information obtained from the training needs analysis. SPF to do the analysis. / All / By 16th April
AP 7 / xxxxto send a note to staff to advise that any technical information should be sent to IETT for publication in the Informer. / xxxx / Asap
AP 8 / xxxxto provide an article on JR succeeded for Snapshot by end April. / xxxx / By end April
AP 9 / Risk register review to be added to the agenda for 16th April meeting. / xxxx / Agenda for 16th April
AP 10 / All to read and provide feedback via email to xxxxregarding rate avoidance scheme paper prior to next meeting. / All / By next meeting 2nd April
ONGOING APs
Date / Action Point / Action Officer / Update
AP 4 from 6/2/12 / All to provide questions on appropriate subject matter to create a questionnaire that can sent out at the year end. / All / Ongoing – by 16th April
AP 2 from 9/1/12 / xxxxto draft a business case to tighten up the explanations regarding 447’s and outsourcing. / xxxx / Ongoing – waiting for a response from Phil Drye
AP 9 from 17/11/11 / xxxxto contact OAG (Office of the Advocate General) regarding evidence in Scottish cases and its destruction after scanning. / xxxx / Ongoing – official advice being sought and chasing for information
AP 5 from 16/9/11 / Discussion regarding possible extra resource as reluctant to change from decision made previously for central co-ordination of FOI & DPA as this will keep timeliness in check / xxxx / Ongoing – Nothing to be changed now as Technical Section are conducting a review of guidance & procedures after the IOC audit
AP 9 from 23/5/11 / xxxxto write a brief regarding communication and name changes for external contacts re CIB / xxxx / Ongoing – externally there appears to be recognition but internally not. Needs to be addressed

Agenda item 1: APs from previous meetings

AP 2 from 20/2/12: The extension was agreed and the procurement will take place in a years time by CWS. To be discussed with the business nearer the time.

AP 4 from 20/2/12: Looking to recruit 1 x C1 possibly 2 if appropriate.

AP 6 from 20/2/12: after some investigation it would appear that files are being destroyed by solicitors as Howes have just destroyed files after the 7 year period. xxxxwill be doing an outsourced risk register and highlighting this as a risk and will monitor the destruction that does take place.

AP 5 from 6/2/12: xxxxhas looked into this and established there was nothing meaningful case-wise pre Oct 2012 and anything allocated to PIU recently will not have anything on them. PIU don’t update ISCIS so it is difficult to get updates and it would take a lot more work if we wanted anything more meaningful than a snapshot. If we are serious about revisiting the protocol we need to be up front with xxxx. We will look at reviewing the snapshot aspect in a few months time.

Agenda items 2: Updates from meetings

Directing Board – xxxxupdated on DB meetings attended

Accommodation Strategy Board –xxxxupdated on the current situation with regards to the accommodation strategy.

Stephen Speedattended briefly to discuss the time recording issue.

Agenda item 3: Finance Report

xxxx

Agenda item 4: Activity Report

  • Still on 19 months target.
  • Vetting is over 90% on a monthly basis now and staff are up to speed.
  • Insolvent investigations have suffered due to many empty seats over a long period of time. This has impacted in figures

Agenda item 5: Integration

There was a lengthy discussion regarding integration what it is and looks like, where we are at and how we can improve. The following points were made:

  • CI South have already started some integration work.
  • What are we trying to achieve from integration?
  • xxxxhas spoken about flexing at the margins and it is agreed that not everyone can do everything as its not feasible.
  • There has to be a separation of function due to the work involved and we need to recognise that there are staff who have experience in some areas due to previous roles and we should utilise them to take best advantage of that experience.
  • Is it in the public interest that we do as many DQs as we can against the expense of less in Live?
  • We would need to deal with the impact of a group of people who are doing DQs and then needed to be moved to live cases. What would happen to their current work and what impact would it have on cases?
  • xxxxhas been trying team working and has two people working on cases so that if the need to pass a case totally to another this can happen easily.
  • xxxxwants a project plan of how we are going to deliver the “end state” integration.
  • xxxxhas ring fenced the C1s and has them working on live and insolvent cases which seems to be working. She plans to role out to some L3s as well.
  • D2s are getting themselves up to speed with the different aspects of live and insolvent cases as well.
  • Where does outsourcing fit in? It may make it easier to push cases out but is dependent on the budget.
  • What are the cases that we actually have to do? Needs to be discussed at the ESG in May.
  • How do we define what cases don’t have to be done?
  • It may be useful to look at cases that come out of the pool at lower scores and review what happens to them and show what we thought about and what we could not do as an end result?
  • xxxxsuggested what if we did all cases under s447? In theory we could use the compulsory powers?
  • There may be training issues for staff but those who have come from the OR side will have had intensive training.
  • We would need legal advice on this so ascertain the risk
  • We would need to look at the impact of training issues
  • We could perhaps do a pilot to use s447 on disquals.
  • We would need to review the solicitors agreement to ensure it is covered if we moved to a new way of working.
  • There are a lot of risks and issues to be looked at in respect of the long term suggestion of using s 447s for disquals.

AP 1: xxxxto come up with a set of questions with regards to integration and s447s that we will need legal advice on.

AP 2: xxxxto revisit the PID from the Integration & Case Strategy Project written in June 2010 and update as well as review what it will achieve if we have different decisions.

Agenda item 6: Training Needs Analysis

  • xxxxhas produced a management training needs analysis questionnaire and an individual one as well.
  • The plan is to send the management one to D2 managers only and ask them to comment on their observations and provide an overview of management in their areas.
  • The individual one will be sent to all managers.
  • An analysis tool will be used to assist in analysing the results.

DECISION: Agreed to use the above two questionnaires

  • It was then discussed that an individual questionnaire for all staff would be required that would have generic questions to cover off systems, policies.
  • There did also need to be technical questions for those staff who work on cases related to their roles needing to be specific for specific roles.
  • An observation was made that the training budget was being under spent by a lot andthat we need to establish the reason for this and manage what we are spending.
  • We need to advise the unions of what we are doing with regards to the training needs analysis across IES.
  • We need to put the questionnaires out between the end of year appraisal and objective setting as it is a mechanism to establish group training in particular.
  • We will need to write a staff notice to explain what we are doing, why we are doing it and what we will do with the information.
  • We will then need to drill down to identify what training needs there are.
  • We should have an ongoing IES Strategy which changes yearly and shows what we are focussing on for group training for that year.
  • Other training needs especially individual would be captured in the end of year and mid year reviews.
  • We also need to ensure that staff are aware that these training needs should be identified are “needs” and not “likes”.

AP 3: xxxxto write a notice for xxxxto send to all staff regarding the training needs analysis across IES

AP 4: All to design a questionnaire for management and investigation and other specific work areas

AP 5: Consult the union with regards to the training strategy to advise them what we are doing

AP 6: Agree what we will do with the information obtained from the training needs analysis. SPF to do the analysis.

Agenda item 7: C2 Knowledge Sharing

In terms of liaison there are lots of D2 and D3 meetings. Some staff have mentioned that they are interested in having cross-IES information sharing meetings to share technical knowledge at C2 level as they would like a more formal dialogue rather than on a case by case basis.

The C2’s would be allowed to drive this forward and it is suggested that there would be a representative from each area which could then cascade the information to their fellow C2’s. It does need to be planned and needs to be effective as will add to T&S costs.

xxxxwill advise her staff to take it forward.

Agenda item 8: Snapshot

For end April the following has been agreed

-Introduction – xxxx

-Solicitors conference - xxxx

-Performance year end/year forward – xxxx

-Move to Abbey Orchard Street

-CRE Report

-Communications team visit – xxxx

-Leavers & Joiners

-Year on from JESP Project – xxxx

-JR succeeded in – xxxx

-60 second interview?

The Informer is produced by IETT and if nothing is submitted to them then it wont be published

AP 7: xxxxto send a note to staff to advise that any technical information should be sent to IETT for publication in the Informer.

AP 8:xxxxto provide an article on JR succeeded for Snapshot by end April.

Agenda item 9: Risk Register Review

Risks 4, 3, 8 and 2were reviewed.

  • Risk 4 – To be closed if new reporting targets are confirmed
  • Risk 3 – risk to be reviewed to change wording of risk as the risk is different now.
  • Risk 8 – slight word change
  • Risk 2 – no change

It was agreed that the whole risk register needs reviewing in April for the year ahead 2012 - 2013.

AP 9: Risk register review to be added to the agenda for 16th April meeting.

Agenda item 9: AOB

  • Request from Consultants: there has been a request from consultants to get a feel for what % of time is involved in the main areas of work (cases, support function). There will be a request sent out to D3s to establish a sample size across all locations and grades of approximately 20%. This is not linked to time recording.
  • xxxxattending meetings:xxxxwants to attend a couple of these meetings and dates given are 2nd and 30th April. He will not stay for the whole meeting.
  • Procurement: Legal A currently have a list of firms that they use and when there is expenditure over £10K they get 3 quotes and make a decision by a panel. This may be affected by the new procurement rules of any expenditure over £10 K having to go through the full tender process. This will need to be reviewed.
  • Agenda items for next meeting: IES Conference discussion, D2 meeting, Outsourced management, rate avoidance schemes

AP 10: All to read and provide feedback via email to xxxxregarding rate avoidance scheme paper prior to next meeting.

Dates of next Meetings

2nd April – LG10

16th April – LG05

30th April – LG05

For records only not for review

CLOSED APs
AP 1 from 20/2/12 / xxxxto provide an email explaining why DLT making final contact with a director prior to issue date may not be possible because of the volume of cases which are close to limitation / xxxx / Closed
AP 2 /from 20/2/12 / xxxxto contact xxxxin CWS Procurement to advise the rolling over for a 4th year of the LSP Framework. / xxxx / Closed
AP 3 from 20/2/12 / xxxxto draft an agenda and circulate for agreement and establish volunteers to take part in the Solicitors Conference in March. / xxxx / Closed
AP 7 from 20/2/12 / xxxxto advertise Edinburgh & Manchester positions as lateral L3 and once closing dates have passed Directors can discuss the situation again. / xxxx / Closed
AP 8 from 20/2/12 / xxxxto talk to xxxxto see if we can count disclosures in the ways suggested (SARS & sc447s) / xxxx / Closed
AP 9 from 20/2/12 / xxxxto establish from Piyush if any case files from Outsourced are stored in SALA and if the solicitors follow our destruction policies. / xxxx / Closed
AP 10 from 20/2/12 / xxxxto establish if the new contract under the LSP states anything regarding destruction of outsourced case files and xxxxto look at the old SLA / xxxx / Closed
AP 1 from 20/2/12 / Ensure xxxxraises the BRO & DQ database issue at the DB on Wed 22nd February. / xxxx / Closed – agreed to be closed down by DB
AP 5 from 6/2/12 / xxxxwill review old cases for PIU to see where they are at in regard to s8’s and the protocols in place currently. / xxxx / Closed
AP 6 from 6/2/12 / xxxxto write a sanitised version of the AT PIP review removing reference to any specific cases and then publish to the D3’s to cascade and put on the intranet. / xxxx / Closed

1