Windsor and Maidenhead's Auditor Just Gave Its Accounts the Worst Grade There Is. The Council Says That Grade Is Wrong.
Estimated reading time: 6 minutes
In short. A report put to the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead's Audit and Governance Committee on 7 September 2026 records that external auditor Grant Thornton has provisionally assessed the council's accounts as category D on a government four-point scale running A to D, the category reserved for "major systemic problems" where the conditions for a compliant audit "do not exist... in the foreseeable future" [1]. Council officers, in the same report, say the evidence points instead to category C [1]. The council's accounts have been disclaimed by auditors for four years running, 2021/22 to 2024/25 [1], the council recorded negative reserves of 31 million pounds at the end of 2023/24, and an overspend of 20 million pounds against its planned 2024/25 budget [2]. The government has agreed almost 49 million pounds of exceptional financial support in principle for the council for 2026/27 alone [3].
A council's accounts are supposed to settle an argument, not start one. Grant Thornton's capacity assessment of the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead does both at once: it tells the government how likely the council is to ever produce an auditable set of books, and the council has used the same document to publicly tell the government the auditor has got that call wrong.
A scale built for a national backlog
The category runs from A, audits expected to be "relatively straightforward", down to D, where "there are pervasive weaknesses in systems of financial reporting and internal control such that the auditor judges the conditions do not exist for an ISA-compliant audit to be completed in the foreseeable future" [1]. The scale was commissioned jointly by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and the Public Sector Audit Appointments body to work out which councils, across the whole of England's local audit backlog, are unlikely to reach a compliant audit by the end of 2027/28 and why [1].
What the scale says. Category C covers an authority with "adequate systems to provide the necessary evidence in principle, but practical constraints mean that ISA-compliant build-back is unlikely by the end of 2027/28." Category D covers "major systemic problems with financial management, governance or accounting systems" where those conditions "do not exist... for the foreseeable future" [1].
Grant Thornton put Windsor and Maidenhead in D. Its stated reasons: the council's last fully audited year was 2020/21, which itself carried a "limitation of scope" relating to business rates and collection fund balances that has still not been resolved; the 2021/22 and 2022/23 accounts were only closed off under the national backstop arrangement, by Grant Thornton's predecessor firm, on 13 December 2024; and the 2023/24 accounts were not published until 10 January 2025, too late to meet the statutory deadline for an opinion, so they too were disclaimed [2]. Auditors expect the 2025/26 accounts, when finished, to be modified again, with sign off targeted for 30 November 2026 and a full return to an unmodified opinion not expected before 2029/30 [1].
The council's case for a better grade
Officers do not dispute that the council has a problem. They dispute the word used to describe it. Their report to the same committee argues that Windsor and Maidenhead's position "is more closely aligned to a 'C' assessment", and takes direct issue with the description attached to D, namely that the council is "not capable of achieving an ISA-compliant approach by 2027/28 due to major systemic problems" [1]. As evidence, they point to the full draft 2025/26 accounts being published by the end of June, ahead of the statutory deadline, a fully staffed accounts team, and a core financial ledger they describe as "fundamentally robust" [1].
At the committee meeting itself, on 7 September, the dispute was put to both sides directly. Grant Thornton's Julie Masci told councillors the firm's view came down to how long recovery would realistically take: "a normal recovery cycle" for an audit backlog is three years, and Windsor and Maidenhead's was not that, she said, adding that the council's position was complicated by "the number of audit years that have not had assurance" [4]. Rachel Howard, the council's executive director of resources and section 151 officer, told the same meeting: "We recognise as a council that there have been issues historically with our financial management and our processes and errors in the accounts that we've had to subsequently correct" [4]. On the letter grade itself, she was more pointed: "The ultimate impact of whether we're a C or D is kind of moot. The work still has to be done to build back that assurance over the time period that the auditors have set out" [4].
One detail cuts against treating this as simply auditors being harsh across the board. The same joint assessment covers the Royal County of Berkshire Pension Fund, which the council also administers, and that audit is on track to regain assurance within the normal 2025/26 cycle, placing it in category A [1]. Whatever is wrong at Windsor and Maidenhead, it is specific to how the council itself manages its accounts, not to Grant Thornton's general posture toward public bodies it audits.
What the unaudited years cost
The category letter is an assessment of process. The council's own figures, set out in the same auditor's annual report, show what four years without a clean audit opinion has coincided with. The council recorded negative reserves of 31 million pounds at the end of 2023/24, following the correction of historical accounting errors, and overspent its planned general fund revenue budget for 2024/25 by 20 million pounds, which auditors attribute in part to "significant weaknesses in the budget setting process for 2024/25 and prior years" [2]. Securing exceptional financial support from government let the council balance both its 2024/25 and 2025/26 budgets [2]; for 2026/27 alone, the government's own published list of exceptional financial support requests records 48.754 million pounds agreed in principle for the council [3]. Auditors have repeatedly flagged that the council still cannot demonstrate how it will maintain a balanced position in future years without that support, or rebuild reserves enough to withstand a future financial shock [2].
At the committee table, Conservative councillor Julian Sharpe, who represents Ascot and Sunninghill, did not dispute any of the figures, only the wait attached to them. He called the recovery plan "really, quite a gloomy report" and told the meeting: "We've still got at least another couple of years to go through which seems like an awful long time to wait to get an unqualified set of accounts" [5].
What is not established here
Auditors' own commentary on the council's wider arrangements, reported separately, records that the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government is "encouraged by the progress being made and has not decided to intervene more formally, although that remains an option" [2]. No evidence turned up of the government having since moved on that option, and no date for such a decision has been set. Whether the committee's dispute over a C or a D ever changes Grant Thornton's published assessment is also not yet settled; the September report describes the category as provisional.
A council can argue about the letter on its own report card for as long as it likes. Until Windsor and Maidenhead produces a set of accounts its auditor can actually sign off, the letter, whichever one it ends up being, is the only grade residents have to go on.
Sources
- Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead, Audit and Governance Committee, report pack including Grant Thornton "Regaining Assurance Strategy" capacity assessment, 7 September 2026. https://rbwm.moderngov.co.uk/documents/g10163/Public%20reports%20pack%20Monday%2007-Sep-2026%2018.30%20Audit%20and%20Governance%20Committee.pdf?T=10
- Grant Thornton UK LLP, "Auditor's Annual Report, Year ending 31 March 2025", Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead. https://rbwm.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s67628/RBWM%20Interim%20Auditors%20Annual%20Report%20202425.pdf
- Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, "Exceptional Financial Support for local authorities for 2026-27", GOV.UK guidance. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptional-financial-support-for-local-authorities-for-2026-27
- Elena Chiujdea, Local Democracy Reporter, "RBWM has to wait an 'awful long time' to get assurance from auditors about its finances, says councillor", Maidenhead Advertiser, 8 September 2026. https://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/news/council-and-politics/709172/rbwm-has-to-wait-an-awful-long-time-to-get-assurance-from-auditors-about-its-finances-says-councillor.html
- Elena Chiujdea, Local Democracy Reporter, "'Major' audit problems threaten years more uncertainty over RBWM's finances", Maidenhead Advertiser, 3 September 2026. https://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/news/council-and-politics/709071/major-audit-problems-threaten-years-more-uncertainty-over-rbwms-finances.html