Request ID: FOI-0476-2122 Date published: 24 June 2021
You asked
I note the rates for recovery are not included within the contract for sub-£10,000 repairs.
1. What does the contract state about the pricing of sub-£10,00 threshold claims? Please provide me with the relevant extract.
Kier refer to their attendance and make-good prices as the KSoR (Kier Schedule of Rates) and a copy of these can be found here: https://www.englandhighways.co.uk/dcp-claims-and-the-kier-schedule-of-rates/
2. I ask to be provided the ‘term contract rates’ for the DCP items within the schedule (linked above). Such rates, those for repairs, are not commercially sensitive
In the event s43 is believed to be engaged
3. please explain the application and
4. advise whether ‘The term contract rates’ are the same as the KSoR, those at the above link, more or less
It appears drivers, fleets, hauliers, or their insurers are charged a higher set of rates than TfL which would be odd. If so, please:
5. Explain why this is permitted, considered reasonable, appropriate and
6. What auditing or monitoring TfL undertakes of Kier and
7. Provide a copy of the last audit insofar as damage repair is concerned.
Please also:
8. Explain the permitted adjustments Kier may make to their sub-threshold rates over the years and
9. Advise what action you undertake to ensure Third Parties using the city’s roads are not subject to higher, excessive and /or profiteering rates.
We answered
Our Ref: FOI-0476-2122
Thank you for your request received on 8 June 2021 asking for information about Kier’s Schedule of Rates.
Your request has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act and our information access policy. I can confirm we hold some of the information you require. You asked:
1. What does the contract state about the pricing of sub-£10,00 threshold claims? Please provide me with the relevant extract.
We have assumed that you mean sub £10,000 and are referring to the LoHAC.
As explained to you previously in our responses to FOI-2065-2021 and FOI-2660-2021, where damage is caused to 'street furniture' all costs up to a repair value of £10k are included in the annual lump sum price. The contractor can seek reimbursement from a third party, the rates for recovery are not included within the contract.
Further, a copy of this contract has also been previously provided to you which contains the information you have requested. That document remains publicly accessible here:
However, for clarity, please see the relevant extract below that confirms the answers you have previously been given:
Clause 2.24.3 states In the above circumstances, the Contractor will be expected to supplement payment through the lump sum by recovering costs from the relevant 3rd party for his own benefit.
The specific extract you have requested here was also previously provided to you in response to FOI-1706-2021.
Kier refer to their attendance and make-good prices as the KSoR (Kier Schedule of Rates) and a copy of these can be found here: https://www.englandhighways.co.uk/dcp-claims-and-the-kier-schedule-of-rates/
2. I ask to be provided the ‘term contract rates’ for the DCP items within the schedule (linked above). Such rates, those for repairs, are not commercially sensitive 3. please explain the application and 4. advise whether ‘The term contract rates’ are the same as the KSoR, those at the above link, more or less
The information you refer to in items 2, 3 and 4 relate to a Highways England contract not a TfL contract, we therefore have no details relevant to this. You should contact Highways England if you wish to know more information about their contract with Kier.
As you are aware, TfL have responded extensively to multiple requests and appeals from you on the subject of the schedule of rates relevant to Transport for London’s contract and there have been several decision notices issued from the Information Commissioner upholding our application of s43(2) in relation to these, as well as a decision from the Information Tribunal also upholding the use of this exemption. We once again refer you to these refusal notices and decision notices if your question relates to the schedule of rates applicable to TfL’s contract.
It appears drivers, fleets, hauliers, or their insurers are charged a higher set of rates than TfL which would be odd. If so, please:
5. Explain why this is permitted, considered reasonable, appropriate and
TfL will not comment on the above assumption. We do not hold this information and we do not have to answer it if it requires creating new information or giving an opinion or judgment that is not already recorded.
6. What auditing or monitoring TfL undertakes of Kier and
TfL undertakes monitoring of the contractor’s performance in relation to Highway Maintenance activities.
7. Provide a copy of the last audit insofar as damage repair is concerned.
As you are aware, TfL does not monitor third party damage repairs under £10k.
8. Explain the permitted adjustments Kier may make to their sub-threshold rates over the years and
As stated in the ICO Decision Notice referenced here: https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/2018/2173211/fs50688840.pdf and explained in other FOI replies to you (including FOI-1706-2021), TfL does not hold information on the prices charged to third parties or the process Kier follow when collecting these charges as the contract does not provide a provision for this 9. Advise what action you undertake to ensure Third Parties using the city’s roads are not subject to higher, excessive and /or profiteering rates.
As also explained to you in our response to FOI-1706-2021 but repeated here, the LoHAC Best Value clause is shown below:
17. Quality and Best Value
17.1 The contractor acknowledges that each employer is a best value authority for the purposes of the Local Government Act 1999 and as such an employer may be required to make arrangements to secure continuous improvement in the way it exercises its functions, having regard to a combination of economy, efficiency and effectiveness. The contractor assists each employer (where applicable) to discharge each employer’s duty where possible and, in doing so, inter alia carries out any review reasonably requested by the employer.
Separately, it is noted that your recent FOI requests to us over the past few months have contained a significant amount of repetition and overlap, particularly on the subject of Kier’s schedule of rates, but also on other matters surrounding the LoHAC. A growing number of these requests are asking for information that has already been provided to you or that have been addressed extensively through the full appeals process many times. Please be aware that if we consider that future requests continue this pattern of requesting information that has already been previously provided or a subject matter that has already been extensively addressed we may choose to rely on section 14 to refuse any such request. We encourage you to consider the ICO’s guidance on making the best use of the FOI Act here, in particular the ‘Dos and Don’ts’ listed towards the bottom of the page here: https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/official-information/.
If this is not the information you are looking for please feel free to contact me.
Please see the attached information sheet for details of your right to appeal.
Yours sincerely
Gemma Jacob Senior FOI Case Officer FOI Case Management Team General Counsel Transport for London
