Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Simon Kirby Aug 29 2012, 05:38 PM

NTC set a deadline for the end of August for Costain either to accept or deny liability for what the council claim was crack damage caused by Costain's dewatering of the Parkway underground carpark construction site. If Costain accept liability for any damage then they'll be obliged to pay to repair it, and if the deadline passes and they haven't accepted liability then NTC have said that they will sue the company for the cost of repairing the damage without any further delay. NTC have so far spent in the region of £20k in professional fees, but have conspicuously failed to publish the hydrogeological report that they commissioned, citing various excuses along the way, and most recently blaming Costain for refusing to sanction its publication. It'll be good to see some closure on this now, and to get the report into the public domain.

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 6 2012, 05:55 PM

It looks like NTC have said: right, really, definitely this time, really, it's the middle of September, or we really will see you in court, really!

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 6 2012, 06:51 PM

Or just roll over for a developer as usual?

Posted by: Newbelly Sep 7 2012, 05:11 PM

I too would like to see this issue resolved and to know the truth. But we do not know what the expert evidence says, or which party really wishes it to remain unread by the public. £20k is not a great deal to spend on expert advice in such circumstances.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 10 2012, 10:31 AM

Photo on the web site today:


I see a section of the retaining wall cracked and bulged, but I also see that the section of wall to the left of the crack is new, and the cracking extends into this new section of brickwork.

Does anyone know when this brickwork was replaced and why? It's just the cracking extending into the new brickwork tells me that the new bit was built before the crack developed in 2010, and it's possible that it was a rebuild after some similar cracking to what we see now which happen before the 2010 abstraction. If that's right then it's very likely that this new cracking is the result of the same ground movement and nothing to do with abstraction. If the damage and repair was all done after the abstraction then the ground has continued to subside and that also doesn't make sense if the subsidence was caused by the abstraction.

For my money the cracking here is all to do with tree roots. Recommended safe planting distance for a sycamore is 12 metres (see http://www.subsidencebureau.com/subsidence_trees.htm) and the sycamores you can see in the photo are within a meter of the wall. More damaging still are the roots of trees that have been felled and have now rotted and collapsed - that tends to happen about 10 to 20 years after the tree is felled. There have been planty of trees felled in the park, and that sink hole between the two trees in the photo is suspiciously like the hollow a tree would leave behind, or else just the collapse of some peat - there's a reason the area was previously known as "the marsh".

Posted by: JeffG Sep 10 2012, 01:37 PM

Before I finished reading your post, I was also going to say it was most likely due to tree roots. The ground between the trunk and the wall is already raised and devoid of grass.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 10 2012, 04:21 PM

Of course it's possible that NTC aren't claiming that the dewatering caused this bit of damage and that NewburyToday just used a pciture of some cracking in the park, but other than this retaining wall I don't think there's much else in the park that can have been damaged to any great degree - the football pitches just needed a couple of bags of topsoil brushing in. At one time NTC were asking for £100k, but I can't see how the bill would be that big even if they rebuilt the whole of that retaining wall, and if the argument is as complicated as they say then they seem likely to run up a bill on legal costs of way more than the £25k they've already spent without any certainty of recouping anything, but with a reasonable prospect of paying Costain's legal costs should they lose their claim.

It just seems to me that unless the hydrogeological report came out saying that the dewatering was absolutely definitely the cause of the damage then litigation was always going to be a pointless gamble, and it was pretty clear right from the start that the hydrogeological report didn't give them the answer that they were depending on because they choked on publishing the report two years ago and it's only in the last couple of months that they've invented this implausible story about Costain refusing permission to publish proprietary information.

Come on Newbury Weekly - we need to see the report - use the Environmental Information Regulations to force NTC to publish. They've spent £25k of public money persuing a claim for damage worth arounf £10k, much of which seems likely to have been caused by tree roots and the settlement of marsh peat. It's far from clear how this has been in the public interest.

Posted by: Adrian Hollister Sep 10 2012, 05:28 PM

When ever you get a development of this size and disruption you must expect anomalies like this. Sounds darn obvious to me that if you find what appears a low lying large under ground water source and drain it there will be an impact to the surrounding area. I can't be of any shock to the council that things like this can go wrong. There can't be any shock either to the developer who took the risk building and making good profit from it - as they own the risk they have a moral (and perhaps legal) obligation 'fix' the problem. They should just get on with it: fixing cracks in houses, repairs of parks, walls etc shouldn't be too difficult for a large construction company.

Posted by: Newbelly Sep 10 2012, 06:43 PM

But if they were to do that, it may be seen as an admission of liability in respect of other losses to third parties not yet apparent.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 11 2012, 07:18 AM

It's far from clear how this has been in the public interest.

Beacuse at the time ( remember, a hot dry summer, etc etc ) folk were screaming blue murder that the evils that were Costain & the PW development had killed off Victoria Park. Instead of saying 'Look this is a dry summer - like what Costain are saying ' NTC listened to the people of Newbury & decided to get an independent report done.

Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 11 2012, 07:39 AM

Not at all. Getting the original hydrogeological report (at a cost of £4k wasn't it) was entirely correct and prudent as there was on the face of it a reasonable possibility that Costain's dewatering was responsible for some damage in the park.

However, having received the report the Council choked and refused to publish, making one spurious excuse after another for not doing so. The bill has now crept up to £25k and still no evidence from the Council to support the public interest in persuing their claim, and this is what needs some clarification.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 11 2012, 07:41 AM

All in due course. Patience is a virtue......

Posted by: Adrian Hollister Sep 11 2012, 08:17 AM

I don't like the council's obsession with hiding information, but in this case I don't think I would want to show my hand unless I had all the facts. I've no doubt that costain are very used to this situation and will be well prepared, we (represented by the council) also need to be well prepared.

Given the large area of what appears to be subsidence, I wonder if all the insurance companies involved should help fund the council's investigation?

Posted by: Newbelly Sep 13 2012, 01:56 PM

If the expert report only cost £4k, then it does not sound very comprehensive and this may be a reason for it not being used, served or disclosed.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 13 2012, 02:22 PM

It was some local with a pendulum & divining rod......

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 13 2012, 03:37 PM

There was an additional cost for further investigations, but I have a feeling the report finally cost like £8k - again, it would be helpful if the Newbury Weekly could dig all of this information out. I think it's been legal costs that have brought the costs to £25k, but again, I'm not certain.

Under the Environmental Information Regulations the council can withold the report if it is a draft, but I don't believe that has been the case. The original report may not have been detailed enough, but it was a final report, and it should be made public, as should the subsequent additional reports. This nonsense about Costain refusing NTC permission to publish the report only cropped up a month or so ago, and again it would be good if the Newbury Weekly would press them on this apparent inconsistency.

Come on NWN, how about getting those report from NTC?

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 13 2012, 04:14 PM

I heard it was blotting paper.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 28 2012, 05:50 PM

So anywho, where are we with this now? Has Costains coughed up the cash, or has NTC started their threatened legal proceedings?

Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 28 2012, 06:12 PM

Nah, they got a radio station to build! Cracks is boring!

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 29 2012, 11:51 AM

I think you may find that Costain's has declared the NTC as vexatious and are therefore going to ignore them from now on?

Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 29 2012, 07:37 PM

So who's left in Newbury to challenge our politicos over this snafu? Not the Lib Dem liars or the Tory boys obviously, but time was when Richard Garvie might have spoken up, but would he want to upset his Kennet Radio chums before they've even allowed him onto the board of management?

Posted by: Jayjay Sep 29 2012, 09:53 PM

Why would RG assist Newbury electrorate. A population that rejected him for the 'Lib Dem liars and Tory boys'?

Posted by: Cognosco Sep 30 2012, 07:50 AM

If at first you don't succeed? There is more that one way to skin a cat?

Posted by: On the edge Sep 30 2012, 06:17 PM

The if you can't beat them, join them tactic? I thought he was practising for the next coalition - where the party without principle might attempt to form an alliance with Labour.

Posted by: Jayjay Oct 1 2012, 07:16 AM

He is standing for one of the Reading boroughs so cannot stand for Newbury as well.

Posted by: blackdog Oct 1 2012, 08:46 AM

He is trying to get selected as Labour candidate for the Reading East parliamentary seat (there is only one Reading borough) - I doubt that he will succeed. I suspect he will also try for selection as Labour candidate for the Newbury seat.

However, being a parliamentary candidate (especially one unlikely to win) does not stop someone from standing for election to district or parish councils.

Posted by: Jo Pepper Oct 2 2012, 08:24 AM

I just can't see how any of these three political parties can help me. Conservatives are in it for themselves; Lib Dem's will just say anything and lie; Labour seem to be Conservative Lite. There is so little difference. The only person on this forum that has dared to say anything different is Adrian Hollister. He does so despite the angry politico's on here shooting him down in flames for daring to say something different.

More cudos to him and best of luck out there. If all Green's have this level of gumption then I know where I need to look.

Posted by: Andy Capp Oct 2 2012, 11:00 AM

Saying is one thing, putting into practice is another.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Oct 2 2012, 12:33 PM

That's true of course, but will Richard Garvie even be talking the talk anymore? Some ineffectual posturing the other week in the letters page about Sandleford, but he's never going to hold the establishment to account now, not if he wants to be a director Swift-Hook's media company.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Oct 6 2012, 06:56 AM

Come on NWN, what's the latest. If NTC have started proceedings you can report that at least, that's not sub judice. There's a lot of public money involved here, there is a legitimate public interest in knowing what's happening. And it would be really good if you could get hold of that mysterious hydrogeological report so we can judge for ourselves what evidence this is all based on, and you should certainly be able to see the the contractual condition under which Costains are purportedly refusing NTC permission to bulish their own report.

Posted by: Cognosco Oct 6 2012, 09:46 AM

Simon you are not seriously expecting the NWN to break normal operating procedures are you?
They have to abide by the Councils rules the same as the rest of us unfortunates!

Your trouble is you look at a wider picture that the rest of us and you have seen how a normal proper council operates!

This is Newbury remember? Taxpayers are only spoken to when unavoidable such as when an election is imminent!

Posted by: Simon Kirby Oct 6 2012, 04:18 PM

*wibble*

Posted by: NWNREADER Oct 6 2012, 07:47 PM

http://www.avforums.com/forums/attachments/general-chat/206899d1287236507-people-who-use-words-phrases-they-dont-understand-blackadder_iv_-_goodbyeee.jpg

Posted by: Richard Garvie Oct 7 2012, 07:04 PM

Hopefully there will be a response in the paper this week, everybody seems to be getting a bit tetchy on this now. As for me and what I do politically, I will continue to try and hold the council(s) to account. I send roughly five or so press releases a week, sometimes they all make the paper, sometimes none do.

As for anything to do with Reading, I don't think I've officially announced whether I'll stand either way. There is a very strict protocol in place, and if I was going to stand I certainly wouldn't want to breach that. All I will say is that come December, I will have a rough idea as to where I stand (if at all).

I've campaigned here for two years solid, I'd certainly not stop now just because an idea I put forward is recieving some co-operation from people in other political parties.

Posted by: Cognosco Oct 7 2012, 07:41 PM

Did I read this correctly you don't Think you have officially announced?
You have definitely got to keep away from Swift-Half, are you sure you have not crossed the house?

Posted by: Richard Garvie Oct 7 2012, 07:52 PM

Well I know I haven't announced it myself, that would be against the rules!!!... but all will become clear either way in December I guess.