Jump to content

Sheffield Council Could Be Suing Moor Owners


Recommended Posts

57 minutes ago, Mister M said:

I thought the traditional market down Castlegate smelt awful, and looked really shabby in the end.

Because it was never maintained.

Almost everything the council owns has been allowed to run down and then they use that as the excuse to close and demolish.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to know why a council strapped for cash can afford to be forever suing somebody.

I, by the way, have not voted for this council ever since the World Student Games and the digging and filling in of many big holes.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Organgrinder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont vote labour locally ,but why dont the council own the moor? and who decides what goes on it? i know the local funfair have the xmas and summer rights to the market stalls ect and i believe no one else can bid for the rights,but with the market stalls outside why are they not made to be a feature like many other citys? or a attraction like many other town/citys?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, crookesey said:

If council members bother to read any of this they will look at it as right wing trouble making, and most of you guys will carry on voting for them, you therefore deserve everything that you get (or more to the point don’t get).

As someone who despises Tory politics, what choice do I have? Lib-Dems have Gail Smith (met her - can't stand her). Greens I like in principle, but have some bat**** ideas. I just don't bother voting or spoil my paper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, bassett one said:

did SCC ever own the moor ? and if they did why did they sell it?,after further reading SCC cannot stop the owners doing anything they want it seems.

Yes. Probably because the company was prepared to invest significant amounts of money in it that the council didn’t have access to.

6 hours ago, Organgrinder said:

I would like to know why a council strapped for cash can afford to be forever suing somebody.

So by implication, you think they shouldn’t sue anyone, so those folk who they have a reason to seek redress in court against can get away with anything as they know the council won’t resort to the courts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Organgrinder said:

Because it was never maintained.

Almost everything the council owns has been allowed to run down and then they use that as the excuse to close and demolish.

 

There is often “capital”funding available to build things, but “revenue” funding that is used for maintenance is far more limited.  ( roads are a good example) It’s just a factor of how the government has set up local authority finance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.