ALLEGATIONS of misconduct and improper behaviour against Councillor Mahboob Hussain are being heard this week despite a last ditch attempt to adjourn the proceedings.

Cllr Hussain’s barrister submitted a letter to the council requesting an adjournment on the count of medical grounds.

However, the misconduct hearing is going ahead in the absence of the Oldbury councillor after standards committee members concluded – after a three-and-a-half hour, behind closed doors discussion – they had “no confidence” in him ever appearing.

Cllr Hussain – who denies any wrongdoing – was initially due to appear before the authority's standards committee in August 2016 and then again in March 2017, but both hearings were cancelled following the councillor’s High Court legal challenges.

But in June, Mr Justice Green said the allegations against Cllr Hussain should now be investigated properly by the council.

It was then arranged for him to face the committee in September to answer a number of alleged code of conduct breaches, yet the hearing was once again postponed, this time due to the “unavailability” of Cllr Hussain.

A three-day enquiry began this afternoon and will continue until Wednesday (January 10).

Serious accusations which were investigated as part of the Wragge report have been levelled at the council’s former deputy leader regarding sales of council-owned toilet blocks and parking tickets handed to family members.

James Goudie QC, prosecuting counsel, outlined the facts of the case, which includes hundreds of pages of evidence and witness statements.

It is claimed that in 2012 Cllr Hussain “pushed the sale through” of three public toilet blocks – which had been independently valued at £130,000 – for £35,000 to an associate.

Cllr Hussain had claimed he barely knew the buyer and was not related to him, despite revelations that the buyer was the uncle of five of Cllr Hussain’s grandchildren.

It is also alleged by Mr Goudie that Cllr Hussain “used his influence” as a councillor to reduce one parking ticket given to one of his sons and cancel two others – one handed to another son and one to his wife – despite council officers having “no reason to do this”.

The hearing continues.