Council tree felling...

[Baron99]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-40962193

 

Sheffield City Council, (a.k.a.Sheffield Council tax payers), are facing paying Amey financial penalties if the remaining tree felling has not been satisfactorily completed by the end of this year. I wonder though are we being taken for a ride on this?

 

I started a thread a couple of weeks ago that tree felling was due to take place on Sandford Grove Rd between 11th - 15th Dec. Well no work took place. No demonstrators showed up, so that couldn't be the reason for the work not talking place & neither could the weather have been a factor as the same time Amey was supposed to be working on Sandford Grove Rd, Amey workers were turning up at 4:30am to fell trees on Abbeydale Park Rise.

 

This is the 3rd time on 2017, (June; Oct & now Dec), that Amey have failed to carry out scheduled work on Sandford Grove Rd & a few surrounding road.

 

I'm starting to wonder if Amey are deliberately delaying work, so as to ensure the financial penalties actually kick in.

 

Further to the above & no work being carried out in the area between 11th -15th Dec, a new boards have gone up, (some time between Sunday 17th to Monday 18th Dec), stating motorists should remove their cars between 7am - 7pm, as work is due to be carried out from 14th Dec for 8 days (?).

 

You guessed it. Not a single Amey worker in sight as of the 21st Dec.

[Guest makapaka]

Ok , hypothetically speaking , from what you know and have read . Who do you think have the better of the contract , the Council or Amey ?

 

I don't think there's enough information available to form a view.

 

It's also a bit over-simplistic to ask who "has the better of the contract" - there are mountains of things to consider when approaching a question like that.

[Cyclone]

You're being ridiculous, it's quite obvious to everyone that Amey have the whip hand and that the council have signed away any oversight or control that they might have had.

 

---------- Post added 23-12-2017 at 09:15 ----------

 

That is perfectly normal

 

Well, you should be able to dig up plenty of examples then. Go right ahead.

How is it normal for the client to owe damages for the failure of the contractor to deliver on time?

I'm looking forwards to watching you wiggle and squirm on this one.

[Guest makapaka]

You're being ridiculous, it's quite obvious to everyone that Amey have the whip hand and that the council have signed away any oversight or control that they might have had.

 

---------- Post added 23-12-2017 at 09:15 ----------

 

 

Well, you should be able to dig up plenty of examples then. Go right ahead.

How is it normal for the client to owe damages for the failure of the contractor to deliver on time?

I'm looking forwards to watching you wiggle and squirm on this one.

 

Are you not reading previous posts?

 

Here’s another potential scenario.

 

One of the earlier posters said that the council introduced the tree panel post contract (I don’t know if this true so I am assuming the poster is correct).

 

If awaiting decisions of this panel delay the works beyond the agreed completion date, and incur costs for the Contractor, there is every chance that the contractor would be able to recover those costs from the council.

 

What bit are you struggling with?

 

http://corporate.findlaw.com/law-library/delay-claims-in-construction-cases-common-pitfalls.html

Edited December 23, 2017 by makapaka

[Cyclone]

The tree panel doesn't get to make any decisions, and is routinely ignored when it recommends not removing trees, so why would they need to wait for a recommendation they will ignore?

 

A delay caused by the council could result in damages. But that wasn't what the councillor said though. He simply said that if they don't complete on time, the council will be liable.

[cytine]

I wonder how many of the protesters have cut down a perfectly healthy tree just because they simply have to have a real Christmas tree to decorate their homes?

[Robin-H]

I wonder how many of the protesters have cut down a perfectly healthy tree just because they simply have to have a real Christmas tree to decorate their homes?

 

Oh this old chestnut again! I had to dismantle this absolutely preposterous argument last year.

[cytine]

Oh this old chestnut again! I had to dismantle this absolutely preposterous argument last year.

 

So you had to dismantle this argument last year? Who the hell are you and why is it preposterous? No explanation just a preposterous comment.

[Vaati]

The bickering can cease.

[Guest makapaka]

The tree panel doesn't get to make any decisions, and is routinely ignored when it recommends not removing trees, so why would they need to wait for a recommendation they will ignore?

 

A delay caused by the council could result in damages. But that wasn't what the councillor said though. He simply said that if they don't complete on time, the council will be liable.

 

I was just using that as an example - I don’t have the knowledge of the delays encountered on the project.

 

At least you now understand that the contractor may be entitled to damages.

 

I would imagine that’s more likely than the contractor having a clause that allows them to purposefully delay completion and then be paid additional monies.