Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Council told to tighten up scrutiny of millions in cash from developers

Chapleton of Elsick - at the centre of a legal battle with regards to developers contributions
Chapleton of Elsick - at the centre of a legal battle with regards to developers contributions

Alison Campsie and David McKay

Aberdeen City Council has been told to tighten-up the way it tracks millions of pounds in developer contributions amid concerns some payments towards roads and schools could be missed.

Auditors have reviewed the way the local authority handles Section 75 agreements, which cover funding for infrastructure improvements to mitigate against the impact of new developments.

The review, carried out by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) found weaknesses in the system which could make it hard for council officers to know when payments are due.

This year, about £2.4million in unpaid contributions have already been factored into the council’s spending plans.

The findings were revealed amid a row over the way the city council and neighbouring Aberdeenshire Council calculate how much developers have to pay to get their projects off the ground.

Backers of the Chapelton of Elsick scheme near Newtonhill are considering legal action to substantially reduce the amount they pay for road improvements linked to the new village, which will ultimately provide 8,000 homes in the north east.

The PwC report found that the receipt of developer funds was “inherently uncertain”, particularly as developers can seek to amend the terms of any planning agreement – such as in the case of Chapelton of Elsick.

The report added that the system records completed housing project by developers, and not by ward.

The report said: “There is a risk that as developers do not pay until requested that payments would be significantly delayed or may not be paid as a result of the inability to identify when payments are due.”

A new IT system could be introduced to improve the way Section 75 payments are tracked.

City finance convener Willie Young said: “It has been difficult for our officers to put in a system to keep track of this.

“We have muddled along in the past but we need to be doing much better, absolutely.

“The worst thing that can happen is that we have to give money back because we have not used it within the designated time frame.”

Opposition Liberal Democrat group leader Ian Yuill added: “Any tightening-up of the Section 75 agreements is to be welcomed.”