Weaknesses in council's financial records
Auditors for Spelthorne Borough Council said they could not fully assess its financial statements, finding record keeping to be "inadequate".
In its report for the year ending 31 March 2024, the auditors, Grant Thornton, also said it understood "extremely poor" relationships between some opposing councillors impacted decision making and scrutiny.
A council spokesperson said it would create an action plan to tackle the report's recommendations and had introduced a "robust training programme" since the election of 22 new councillors in 2023.
The auditors expressed concerns about accounts around the purchase of three properties – Charter Building, Thames Tower and the Porter Building – worth £351 million.
They said Spelthorne Council only paid £297.9 million and "grossed up" the value of the properties for the remaining £53.7 million, with the debt added to its balance sheet.
The auditor's report says the council "is having to live with the fact that its current investment portfolio is in a net debt position" of £300 million.
The council's external borrowing hit £1.1 billion in March 2024.
The report also noted a peer review undertaken by the Local Government Association in 2022 which said "poor behaviour" by some councillors towards each other and staff was "widely recognised as damaging the council's reputation".
Multiple recommendations were made to improve Spelthorne Council's financial stability and governance, including better record keeping and workshops to address the "apparent 'toxic' culture across the member group".
A council spokesperson said officers had agreed draft responses to the report and would create an action plan.
A "comprehensive review" will also be undertaken into the work of its finance team, they said.
Spelthorne Borough Council's audit committee meets to discuss the report at 19:00 GMT on Tuesday.
Follow BBC Surrey on Facebook, on X. Send your story ideas to southeasttoday@bbc.co.uk or WhatsApp us on 08081 002250.
Spelthorne Borough Council auditor's report
Spelthorne Borough Council
Rising costs threaten council housebuilding plans
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
3 hours ago
- New York Post
LI franchisees of Dickey's Barbecue Pit roast chain for money woes in scathing lawsuit: ‘Worst financial decision I ever made'
This place turned out to be a money pit. A national barbecue chain is being taken to court by numerous franchisees for allegedly misleading them with claims of sweet profits that turned out to be all smoke and mirrors — and several New York based investors say they are among those who got their nest eggs roasted. 'It was the worst financial decision I ever made,' said Scott Raifer, of his decision to buy a Dickey's Barbecue Pit franchise and open it in Freeport, Long Island. 3 National barbecue chain Dickey's Barbecue Pit is being taken to court by franchisees over misleading claims. Facebook/Dickey's Barbecue Pit – Freeport Raifer said he is now $500,000 in debt and facing foreclosure on his home after taking out a Small Business Administration loan to open the eatery in December 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. It closed in June 2022 — less than two years later. 'I was under the incorrect assumption that we were in business together — if I did well, they did well,' said Raifer, 58, of Plainview. 'I learned that if they did well, it was at the franchisee's expense.' Raifer said he felt pressured by the company to get the location 'up and running' quickly. An estimate from a Dickey's-preferred construction vendor, he said, was 'triple the price' of what he ultimately paid after hiring his own contractors. 'I spent half a million dollars building the place,' said Raifer, who is not part of the lawsuit and has not brought legal action against the company citing lack of resources. Raifer said the $16,000 smoker he bought from a Dickey's-approved vendor repeatedly malfunctioned. When he emailed the company for guidance in January 2021, he said he was reprimanded for including senior executives on the message. 'When I told them that I wanted to sell, they said most of their stores sell for $25,000,' Raifer said. 3 Long Island franchisee Scott Raifer sent an email about the $16,000 smoker he bought from a Dickey's-approved vendor repeatedly malfunctioning, and was reprimanded for including senior executives on the message. Facebook/Dickey's Barbecue Pit – Freeport He said he reached a breaking point when Dickey's headquarters took over his online menu and kept items listed after he had run out, creating confusion for delivery drivers and online customers — a claim the company denies. 'I ended up closing and walking away,' Raifer said. 'Now I owe all this money and I'm losing my house.' Jerry Stephan, another former franchisee, opened a 2,150-square-foot Dickey's location in Centereach, Long Island, in September 2020. A 2018 article on Dickey's corporate website announced that Stephan planned to 'bring 21 locations to New York state.' After paying approximately $20,000 to buy into the franchise, Stephan, a construction contractor, said Dickey's later backed out of the store development deal without explanation. 'They got amnesia and said they weren't allowed to set up the agreement we had legally, so they circumvented that,' Stephan said. 'I was going to build and get a piece of all the other stores. I was planning on that for retirement.' Stephan, who previously owned Long Island's first Quiznos sandwich shop, said the requirement to buy from Dickey's approved vendors and pay marketing fees — which he said yielded little actual promotion — cut into his bottom line. 'I bought stuff through their distributor that was much cheaper elsewhere,' he said. 'Their franchise agreement is ironclad. They've got you by the horns.' Every morning, the NY POSTcast offers a deep dive into the headlines with the Post's signature mix of politics, business, pop culture, true crime and everything in between. Subscribe here! Stephan considered legal action but instead sold his location for 'half' of what he believed it was worth. 'If franchisees budget $500,000 and it costs $800,000 to open, they rack up credit card debt, take second mortgages, and are destined to fail by the time they open,' said Keith Miller, a franchise advocacy consultant. Dozens of Dickey's franchisee's nationwide have filed lawsuits and complaints to the Federal Trade Commission stating the company made false or misleading statements or omitted facts in a prospectus and franchise registration application materials. Some 'pit owners' say they fell so far into debt they closed their shops in less than a year and others owe creditors as much as $1,000,000, according to the New York Times. 3 Dickey's CEO Laura Rea Dickey said Stephan was released from his development deal after failing to meet 'benchmarks' at his store that would have moved him 'beyond being an owner-operator of his own locations.' Instagram/@lauradickeyceo On July 24, the Securities Commissioner within the Maryland Attorney General's office ruled that Dickey's made an improper disclosure by not including contact information for past franchisees on Financial Disclosure Documents in 80 cases. The ruling was separate from the suit. Former franchisees said they were required to pay monthly royalties of 5% and marketing fees of 4% — amounts experts say are on the high end of industry standards. Dickey's said they charge a 'standard 6 percent for royalties and 3% for marketing.' 'Royalties and marketing fees take a nice chunk of your profit,' said Jason Kaplan, CEO of JK Consulting, which advises restaurant owners worldwide. 'The issue becomes making the numbers work without that money.' Raifer, Stephan, and other former operators said they hope speaking out will bring more transparency to the franchise industry. Dickey's CEO Laura Rea Dickey said Stephan was released from his development deal after failing to meet 'benchmarks' at his store that would have allowed him to 'move beyond being an owner-operator of his own locations.' She also mentioned that Raifer's store had received poor online customer feedback and low scores in company audits. Dickey's said it does not collect commissions from the sale of equipment or goods to franchisees. Not all franchisees are unhappy. Gary Mulligan, who owns a Dickey's location in Whiting, New Jersey, said he invested $700,000 in his store and is satisfied with the partnership. 'Dickey's is very responsive to me,' Mulligan said. 'I feel like they're family.'
Time Business News
5 hours ago
- Time Business News
The American Click: How Facebook Likes Influence Shop-Based Content in the USA
You'd be forgiven for thinking likes on Facebook are dead. Public counters are mostly hidden. Comments and shares steal the spotlight. But when it comes to Facebook's Shop-integrated content—especially in the U.S.—likes still matter. A lot. In a space where algorithmic trust and consumer psychology overlap, likes act as subtle validators. They hint at popularity, legitimacy, and relevance. And when your Shop post appears in a scroller's feed beside sponsored competitors, those tiny thumbs-up can be the difference between a bounce and a click. So, why do Facebook likes still hold influence in the USA's evolving social commerce landscape? And where does the practice of buying likes (yes, including the USA Facebook likes ) fit into this ecosystem of credibility and conversion? American consumers have grown suspicious of overly-polished digital storefronts. But they also crave social proof. On Facebook, where familiarity fuels decisions, likes still work as frictionless validators. Especially in Shop-linked content, likes create what marketers call perceived traction . It's a psychological nudge: 'If others liked it, maybe I should care too.' This matters even more when you're introducing a product to a new audience—likes can offset skepticism by suggesting community approval. For small brands trying to gain visibility in a saturated feed, even 100 likes from the real US-based user accounts can be enough to make a product post feel 'seen.' That's why many emerging sellers quietly purchase US likes for Facebook—to simulate momentum while their organic base builds slowly. The Facebook Shop ecosystem is built to reduce steps between discovery and purchase. But the system still leans heavily on engagement metrics—likes included—for algorithmic placement. That means more likes can translate into higher visibility, especially among local and demographically-targeted audiences. In the U.S., where mobile-driven shopping and community-focused buying trends dominate, these micro signals feed the machine. A product with zero engagement looks risky. But one with 45 USA likes on Facebook, even passively earned (or purchased), feels more viable. It's not just about visibility. It's about inertia. If the post looks active, users are more likely to tap. Let's be clear—buying likes is controversial. But it's also widely practiced. And when executed carefully (read: not in bulk, not with bots, not overnight), it can function as reputation scaffolding. Not manipulation, but social proof buffering. The phrase buy USA Facebook likes trends for a reason. U.S.-based likes carry more algorithmic and psychological weight for American shoppers. A buyer in Austin is more likely to trust likes from a familiar geographic sphere than random names with no visible relevance. It signals proximity, which implies legitimacy. Of course, the danger lies in misuse: overdoing it, mixing in low-quality engagement, or using services that don't match the intended audience. Authenticity still matters. But buying likes isn't inherently inauthentic—it depends on the execution and the intent. Facebook's current content-ranking model blends user interest, post engagement, and post type. While video and carousel posts generally get priority, Shop-integrated content that garners early interaction—including likes—gets nudged further. For new or mid-tier sellers, that nudge can make or break reach. Especially when the budget for boosting posts is limited. Buying a small batch of Facebook likes from the USA users can kickstart an algorithmic feedback loop: higher engagement = higher ranking = more organic reach. This matters most during time-sensitive promotions or product drops, where a stall in the first hour can mean invisibility for the rest of the campaign. Not all likes are created equal. Facebook knows this. And increasingly, so do consumers. That's why many growth-focused marketers now avoid generic like-buying packages that deliver irrelevant or foreign accounts. If your brand is U.S.-centric, choosing likes from the US-based users isn't just preferable—it is necessary. They align your visible metrics with your actual audience, which makes retargeting and lookalike ad strategies more effective. It also helps avoid red flags. A Facebook post about handmade jewelry in Kansas getting 700 likes from Southeast Asia? That's a trust-breaker. Buying USA Facebook likes—in moderation—avoids this pitfall. One site that consistently stands out in this space is . Operating since the early 2010s, fbskip has built a reputation as a reliable source of real Facebook and Instagram likes, with specific options for USA-based engagement. Their services are designed for authenticity—not inflated numbers—and offer a spectrum of targeted packages to suit small sellers and established brands alike. Whether you're aiming to grow gradually or just need a small boost for a new campaign, their user-friendly platform makes it easy to explore ethical, real-user interaction. The short answer: yes, but indirectly. Likes influence perception. Perception influences click-through. Click-through influences Facebook's ranking of your content. And higher-ranked posts get more Shop traffic. For small businesses without a dedicated content team or ad strategist, likes become the cheapest form of engagement signaling. They don't guarantee conversion. But they improve the context in which a decision is made. Boutique beauty brands use likes to add weight to skincare routine videos. Local fashion resellers tag U.S. likes to make their story highlights more trustworthy. Indie bookstores post seasonal product shots and seed them with 30–50 USA likes to increase story impressions. Subscription coffee startups rely on steady Facebook likes from the USA users to boost organic reach for their bundle promotions. In each case, likes act not as clout, but as contextual validators. They reassure, without needing to impress. Buying US Facebook likes can improve trust and geo-relevance. Organic reach often favors posts with early engagement—including likes. Shop-integrated content performs better when supported by visible validation. Avoid bulk packages from unrelated regions—they risk undermining credibility. USA likes on Facebook posts help build retargeting audiences within the U.S. market. Use likes to frame perception, not fake popularity. The keyword buy Facebook likes USA on Google and the offers you find there should be viewed as a tactic, not a strategy. In the U.S. retail content space, where Facebook still drives discovery and trust, likes are not dead currency. They're shorthand. A sign that others noticed. A sign that maybe, just maybe, this post is worth clicking through. That doesn't mean every brand should buy Facebook likes. But dismissing them outright? That's ignoring one of the few metrics Facebook still lets users see and interpret. For Shop-based content, especially among U.S. audiences, likes remain part of the buying funnel—quietly, invisibly, but decisively. Because in the era of scrolling commerce, the American click doesn't come from nowhere. It follows a signal. And sometimes, that signal looks like a thumb. TIME BUSINESS NEWS
Business Insider
15 hours ago
- Business Insider
David Sacks says the doomsday scenario of AI wiping out jobs is 'overhyped'
David Sacks, the White House AI and crypto czar, is throwing cold water on the AGI hype train. AI companies are racing to achieve AGI, or artificial general intelligence, commonly considered a form of AI that can reach human levels of reasoning. The continued advancement of AI has led some to believe that the technology will lead to a large-scale wipeout of jobs or even worse outcomes, like human extinction. Sacks, a tech investor who has supported major companies such as Airbnb, Facebook, and Uber, wrote in an X post on Saturday that AI hasn't progressed as quickly as many have predicted — specifically, the idea that AI will "self-improve" and rapidly achieve "godlike superintelligence" has been blown out of proportion. "None of this is to gainsay the progress. We are seeing strong improvement in quality, usability, and price/performance across the top model companies. This is the stuff of great engineering and should be celebrated," Sacks wrote in his post. "It's just not the stuff of apocalyptic pronouncements. Oppenheimer has left the building." One of the doomsday scenarios Sacks rejected in his post is the fear that AI will lead to massive job losses. The investor said that's yet to pan out since AI relies on a lot of human input for prompts and for verification. "This means that apocalyptic predictions of job loss are as overhyped as AGI itself," he said. "Instead, the truism that 'you're not going to lose your job to AI but to someone who uses AI better than you' is holding up well." Sacks isn't the only AGI naysayer. Google Brain's cofounder Andrew Ng said at a June Y Combinator talk that "AGI has been overhyped" and that "there'll be a lot of things that humans can do that AI cannot." Google CEO Sundar Pichai said in a Lex Fridman podcast that he likes to use the term AJI, or "artificial jagged intelligence," to describe the current phase of AI — one that is remarkably intelligent but can still make basic mistakes.
