Road resurfacing, Amey & Streets Ahead

[Longcol]

T

Why DO you absolutely insist, against all evidence, that Amey don't do poor quality work? What more proof do you want? YOUR road collapsing?

 

Roads "collapsing" would suggest to me that old drains / sewers are the problem - this was certainly the case on Commonside over the last few years until Yorkshire Water replaced the drain.

 

Observing the road surface it looks like that this is pretty widespread in my local area, eg. Ripley Street / Walkley Lane, Springvale Road, Montgomery Terrace.

[Guest makapaka]

Roads "collapsing" would suggest to me that old drains / sewers are the problem - this was certainly the case on Commonside over the last few years until Yorkshire Water replaced the drain.

 

Observing the road surface it looks like that this is pretty widespread in my local area, eg. Ripley Street / Walkley Lane, Springvale Road, Montgomery Terrace.

 

Roads aren’t collapsing because of the streets ahead works. There may be bad workmanship in areas.

 

This is kind of my point - people post “roads are collapsing” it’s not true but if you question it you are accused of supporting amey.

 

It’s bats.

[cgksheff]

Roads aren’t collapsing because of the streets ahead works. There may be bad workmanship in areas.

 

This is kind of my point - people post “roads are collapsing” it’s not true but if you question it you are accused of supporting amey.

 

It’s bats.

 

"road surface collapsing" is not the same as "road collapsing".

 

We all know who's bats.

[Cyclone]

I haven't disagreed - I asked you to explain where you got the information from.

A question which I answered.

And you did disagree;

"Not finishing by the agreed completion date doesn’t necessarily mean the contractor is in “serious material breach”."

 

As for why it may not be a "serious material breach" - what if they have been granted an EOT under the Contract for example?

Agreed, then they wouldn't be in breach.

Since the council attempt to keep as much secret as possible we don't know if that's the case though.

 

All i'm saying is that if all you're going on is that a date when they planned to finish has expired - that doesn't automatically mean the Contractor is in serious breach.

 

So I asked where you got the information from - as maybe you had some evidence that this was the case. If you had - and that was the case - then so be it.

No information other than the original contract and the failure to complete by the date specified.

 

---------- Post added 07-04-2018 at 08:53 ----------

 

Unless you have seen the contract how can you know?

 

Large portions of the contract have been made public, the requirement to resurface in the five years from commencing was in fact loudly broadcast by both SCC and Amey at the start of the contract.

 

---------- Post added 07-04-2018 at 09:01 ----------

 

They should do - but you will always have issues arising.

 

Our road is perfect - but I don’t believe that suggests every other road they have resurfaced is.

 

For that same reason we shouldn’t assume the opposite where some roads have problems.

 

As the other poster said - the repairs are done at their cost so hopefully they will want to limit any poor workmanship.

 

Just a reminder of what you actually said.

 

I don't think anyone is 'assuming' based on a just 'some' roads. There are extensive reports of poor quality work.

[Guest makapaka]

A question which I answered.

And you did disagree;

"Not finishing by the agreed completion date doesn’t necessarily mean the contractor is in “serious material breach”."

Agreed, then they wouldn't be in breach.

Since the council attempt to keep as much secret as possible we don't know if that's the case though.

No information other than the original contract and the failure to complete by the date specified.

 

---------- Post added 07-04-2018 at 08:53 ----------

 

 

Large portions of the contract have been made public, the requirement to resurface in the five years from commencing was in fact loudly broadcast by both SCC and Amey at the start of the contract.

 

---------- Post added 07-04-2018 at 09:01 ----------

 

 

Just a reminder of what you actually said.

 

I don't think anyone is 'assuming' based on a just 'some' roads. There are extensive reports of poor quality work.

 

Your logic is that because we don’t know you can assume. No other information so you can say that they are in “serious material breach” and I’m wrong for asking you to justify it - don’t talk daft.

[paula4sheff]

Your logic is that because we don’t know you can assume. No other information so you can say that they are in “serious material breach” and I’m wrong for asking you to justify it - don’t talk daft.

 

So what evidence do you want of amey providing 'poor quality work?'

 

Currently we have: news reports, reports from various members of the public, herw and other places, and councils across the country claiming amey have provided poor quality work, and battling to get out oerf their contracts as a result.

 

Without replying with a queatipn of your own (your usual trick)- what more proof do you want that amey are providing poor quality work?

[Cyclone]

Your logic is that because we don’t know you can assume. No other information so you can say that they are in “serious material breach” and I’m wrong for asking you to justify it - don’t talk daft.

 

I didn't say you were wrong in asking to justify it, I answered you in fact. Twice.

[fill]

of course it may not be amey's work that is not up to the task ie. substandard

it could just be that the quality of the materials they choose to use is substandard

 

or even could it be

 

that the quality of the world underneath their work is substandard and sheffield ought to be moved if we want decent quality road surface repairs.

[paula4sheff]

of course it may not be amey's work that is not up to the task ie. substandard

it could just be that the quality of the materials they choose to use is substandard

 

or even could it be

 

that the quality of the world underneath their work is substandard and sheffield ought to be moved if we want decent quality road surface repairs.

 

You joke, but i can imagine t hem actually claiming that!

 

Some bits in the latest issue of private eye about them- in slough they have taken road work in house after finding £2 million of undectered overcharge.....including repeatedly charging the council council for cleaning a car park that that had long been demolished!

 

Birmingham council have battled them im court, and the judge found amey to be deliberately reinterpretting the contract in order that the council have to pay them again to redo any work they have done badly. Sheffield council don't have the balls to even criticize amey, let alone take thwm to court, so it would appear likely that they are paid again to redo their own poor work in sheffield.

 

Great aren't they?

 

Page 18 for those interested in reading the full story.

[fill]

You joke, but i can imagine t hem actually claiming that!

 

Some bits in the latest issue of private eye about them- in slough they have taken road work in house after finding £2 million of undectered overcharge.....including repeatedly charging the council council for cleaning a car park that that had long been demolished!

 

Birmingham council have battled them im court, and the judge found amey to be deliberately reinterpretting the contract in order that the council have to pay them again to redo any work they have done badly. Sheffield council don't have the balls to even criticize amey, let alone take thwm to court, so it would appear likely that they are paid again to redo their own poor work in sheffield.

 

Great aren't they?

 

Page 18 for those interested in reading the full story.

 

i wonder if it would be a worthwhile exercise to have someone thoroughly examine why sheffield council's employees and councilors appear to be so emasculated that nobody is it seems able or willing to publicly either criticise amey or hold them to account for some of their less successful endeavors.

 

amey's contracts are i think its safe to say worth a lot of money where a lot of money is concerned there is usually a lot of paperwork perhaps amey's admin and hierarchy is not always fully aware of what is going on in regard to all this waste of our council's money

 

perhaps an open enquiry look to ensure that no familial or business relationships between those who are employed by us or to represent us and amey's owners and employees would be prudent to ensure that we can all be reassured that everything is above board. im sure a lot of us would feel much better if we could have such reassurance, that nothing was in the way of resolving the our council/amey issues.