With aphorisms, the Municipal Authority of Patras attacks the two revealing reports of thebest.gr about the intervention in the Court of Audit in favor of the most expensive contractor for a city project, (it is aggravated by a document included in the report) and for the incredible alalum with a victim of an employee who is being asked back several months’ wages due to an obvious confusion of the Municipality’s services (we also presented a specific document for the granting of a permit, signed by the Mayor).
Regarding the first issue, there was a formal complaint to thebest.gr by the contractor Mr. Peter Manda, and for the second, also a named complaint by the lawyer of the employee Ms. George Kasokerakis with the presentation of specific documents that reveal, without doubt, the truth of the complaints. After the reports, there were also interventions by municipal groups.
See here the two reports and the specific ones named complaints.
When the Municipality of Patras intervenes in favor of a contractor by choosing an offer more expensive by 250,000 euros – THE DOCUMENT
Patras: An incredible case with a recipient working mother in the Municipality – They are asking her for retroactive wages of 10,544 euros!
Responding without responding, the Municipal Authority of Patras speaks once again about dark centers that are fighting it, giving with its announcement arguments that are anything but responding to the branded complaints made to thebest.gr and hosted by other media, in apparent confusion as to what constitutes reporting and what does not, in an effort to cancel the complaints concerning her which are very very seriousjoining them in a supposed network of dark centers.
The Municipal Authority of Patras specifically mentions:
“In the last few days, municipal factions, specifically media and journalists, who act as “parrots”, attack the competitive Municipal Authority of Patras, in a provocative manner. As the elections approach, they employ every dirty means, shameless lies and slander. They throw mud for the alleged intervention of the services of the Municipality and the Municipal Authority, in favor of the contractor, while they know that with the recommendation of the Municipal Authority and the Technical Services, it was decided by the Financial Committee of the Municipality, to assign a specific project to the tenderer company. Following successive objections and appeals by interested contractors to the competent bodies, the Audit Court finally ruled, contrary to the decision of the Economic Commission.
They are trying in a despicable way to involve the Municipal Authority in relation to a fixed-term Private Law contract holder, who was inadvertently hired entirely by the Municipality for the entire period of her absence due to sick leave and pregnancy leave and not by her insurance provider. The return of the money is mandatory, as provided by the anti-labor legislation, voted by the ND, SYRIZA and PASOK.
The payroll of the specific contractor, as well as of all those employed by the specific program which is financed by NSRF, is controlled by a competent management authority, which, after checking the relevant payment orders, pointed out that the payroll expense during the period of absence is not borne the Municipality of Patreon and by extension the program, but its insurance company. It is clear that they are disturbed by the great acceptance of the Municipal Authority by the people and the youth of Patras. For her consistent stance and struggles in favor of workers and the popular strata. For its pro-people orientation, its interventions and initiatives, as well as the projects, which give a real breath to the people of Patrina. They are resorting to dirty methods, as they did during the pre-election period in 2019. But the people of Patraikos know us all very well and will give their own answer. Their mud is not going to stain the Municipal Authority. And that’s because “bad rust doesn’t get on these marbles”.
For any citizen who will read the two complaints it is obvious that the only thing that has not been given is answers.
As for the contract holder, there is talk of a lease by default (really, who is responsible for the default if not the Municipality itself, which paid it when it should not, according to its words, and even with a relevant document signed by the Mayor, to now ask her for the money back retroactively?) and for the contractor’s bonus (as you demonstrate with a specific document from the Court of Auditors, there is no question of an answer but of throwing the ball out of the court. He answers absolutely nothing.
Here is the official court document that we made public and with absolute clarity it shows that in the critical discussion at the Audit Court, the Municipality of Patras intervened in favor of the more expensive offer.