In a further extraordinary twist to the Millwall compulsory purchase saga the Guardian can reveal that Lewisham council awarded half a million pounds of public money to the foundation at the heart of the land-seizure scheme based on a report containing significant misleading claims.

The false information relates to claims of a funding deal with the prestigious sports body Sport England. These claims have been made repeatedly by the Surrey Canal Sports Foundation, whose directors include Sir Steve Bullock, the mayor of Lewisham. The foundation is a charitable company set up by Renewal, the offshore-registered developers who stand to be granted the right to build on Millwall’s land at the Den.

Millwall stadium controversy intensifies as false funding claims revealed Read more

The Surrey Canal Sports Foundation exists to raise funds to build a £40m “sports village” – known as the Energize Centre – that is vital to the entire development. The Bullock-associated foundation made the misleading claims of a £2m funding agreement repeatedly during the process of securing the £500,000 grant of public money toward this total. These claims are made in company accounts, a pitch brochure and a council funding recommendation report, all of which carry the mayor’s name.

In reality there is no funding agreement with Sport England. Nor is there a current application for funding. A Sport England spokesman told the Guardian: “In 2010 we received a funding application from the Surrey Canal Sports Foundation, but this was subsequently withdrawn in 2013. We therefore have no funding agreement, of any kind, in place with them.”

The Guardian also understands that the Charity Commission has started looking into the Surrey Canal Sports Foundation. That news has emerged a day after the Guardian reported the inaccurate claims of the Sport England funding agreement. The Charity Commission has not divulged what it is examining.

Sport England is the UK’s most prestigious sports funding body, distributing £347m each year to carefully vetted grassroots charities at the end of a formal application process and only when strict conditions are met. Sport England’s financial support is seen as a rubber stamp of authenticity that can also unlock other sources of public and charitable money.

The revelation that the mayor has been involved on both sides of a grant of public funds informed by inaccurate information could move the Millwall land-grab story out of the realms of the sports pages and into wider territory.

It has been a curiosity of the continuing Millwall CPO proceedings that the elected mayor of a council seeking to impose the seizure of the club’s land should also be a director of a charitable company that relies on the order going through. As is entirely proper, Bullock has declared his interest from the start and excuses himself from any discussion of the £1bn regeneration project during council business.

Bullock told the Guardian on Monday: “To the best of my knowledge the descriptions of the relationships and financial promises in the Surrey Canal Sports Foundation annual report are accurate and I believe that I have discharged my duties as a trustee and director appropriately in relation to this report.

“On the basis of the information provided at meetings of the SCSF Board I am satisfied that funding has been promised by Sport England.”

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Surrey Canal Sports Foundation website, detailing £2m Sport England funding pledge. Photograph: surreycanalsportsfoundation.org.uk

If the mayor has been misled into putting his name to inaccurate claims because of a failure to share relevant information then serious questions will be asked about the foundation’s administration. Bullock has been dubbed Mayor Bananaman on social media after it emerged that the address of the foundation to which he puts his name was previously listed on its website as 29 Acacia Road, an apparently unconnected location in north London that appears, in a bizarre detail, to be a version of the home address of the cartoon superhero Bananaman, real name Eric Wimp.

That was still in place in the summer of 2014 when the grant of half a million pounds of council money was secured. As were the false claims of a Sport England funding agreement. The introduction to a pitch brochure called New Energy given to the council in January 2014 states: “The Foundation already has £12m in commitments from Sport England and the Developer Renewal … I would ask the London Borough of Lewisham to publicly and financially support this project.”

Inside the brochure the words “£2m pledged by Sport England” are picked out in a large bright red graphic. Sport England is mentioned eight times in all. This brochure was sent to Bullock’s Labour council with his name and face prominently attached.

Six months later, in July 2014, the council agreed to award the grant. That decision was approved with the recommendation of an internal Lewisham report to the mayor and cabinet dated 25 June 2014. In that report it is stated again that “Sport England pledged, in 2012, £2million towards the capital costs”.

Reservations about the grant were raised at the time by the council’s own scrutiny committee, with the councillor Liam Curran calling the entire scheme vague and expressing doubts about awarding the money. Council meeting minutes show Curran’s doubts were specifically reassured by mention of the promise of £2m Sport England funding.

Vote on compulsory purchase of Millwall land dramatically postponed Read more

In a statement Bullock said: “I was not involved in the drafting of the report considered by the council so am not in a position to answer this question definitively although I understand that documentary evidence of the offer was seen prior to the report being considered.”

Transfer of the funds from council accounts has yet to happen, the Guardian understands, although the promise to do so is in place. For now the award of half a million pounds on the back of a misleading dossier and a series of false funding claims will raise some deeply uncomfortable questions.

In particular the 25 July report recommending the money be donated was signed off by Lewisham council’s head of law. Questions will be asked about what kind of due diligence was performed on the intended recipient of half a million pounds of public money. A simple email to Sport England’s freedom of information service could have confirmed almost immediately that in fact no funding agreement was in place.

A council spokesman said: “The council has previously seen a letter of support for the Energize Centre from Sport England, and has had it reconfirmed in 2016 that all pledges remain valid and that Sport England are awaiting the council’s CPO decision prior to ‘active discussion’ resuming.”

In a related matter, Bullock could also have questions to answer about his responsibility for information published on behalf of a charitable limited company of which he is a director. The Sport England funding “pledge” is mentioned prominently in the foundation’s company accounts for the past two years, for which all directors carry a joint responsibility. The £2m Sport England funding agreement claim was still splashed across the foundation’s website until Wednesday this week, when it was taken down without explanation.