free web stats
Your free online newspaper for Merseyside...  

Read our Tracking & Cookie Usage Policy

Email | Latest edition | Archive | Terms & Conditions

Business Index Search


 

Navigation

 

Latest Edition
 

Back to Archive


Please beware that this is an archived news page.


This page has been archived as a historical record only.

ALL OFFERS / DEALS ARE NO LONGER VALID WITH IN THIS NEWS PAGE

Some features and links on this page might no longer be functioning.
 



© 2000-2013

PCBT Photography

Southport Reporter® is the Registered Trade Mark of Patrick Trollope.

Get your Google PageRank

 
 
 
border="1" width="640" height="1" bordercolor="#99CCFF">

Is Southport cursed?

Well, we are still awaiting a response to our questions about the redevelopment of Eastbank Street and Scarisbrick Avenue, but we decided to copy the letters sent to our posters so we can have a record of them for a later date.  Well done to our chat room posters for getting some information!  We still await the official press release, and as soon as we get it, you will all be able to read it here!

Posted on the chat site this week by Barbara, 
"I sent out an immediate reply to you but it went out through the route it came in- Here it is.  We seem cursed by contractors going bust. But the situation is this. The money is there for the job i.e. completing the baths- the particular contractor cannot complete. I understand the contractor who made the second bid for the contract is being contacted and will probably accept the work. The situation is as with the Pier where one contractor has taken over from another and as you can see is now getting on with the job. It is not like Plaza where the money was not there to complete the job.  There is an argument as to whether contractors are being wisely chosen. What I can say is that no contractor is allowed to bid unless Finance and Technical Officers of the council can do the work Bids are accepted for jobs like this expressly on their recommendation. In this case the recommended bidder was clearly the lowest  The officers can be criticised by the District Auditor if they do not recommend the lowest bidder without clear justification as in the old days going for a higher bidder looked like corruption. Whether they acted wisely in this case though remains to be seen. Keep in touch. 
John" 
It went back to the sender via the Website which is not run directly by me and was not apparently forwarded to you. 
These glitches happen with e- mail. You should have got the original message on the 28th. This is being e-mailed direct i.e. not using the Reply button in Outlook Express 
Anyway since the reply I am led to believe that negotiations to continue work with other contractors are progressing rapidly which sounds hopeful "

Below information was Posted up by TIM JOHNSON 

"Dear Tim, 

Thank you for your letter. There seems a curse on contractors in Southport. They are hired to do work only after financial checks are run on them and there is a record of completed work to look at. In the case of  the original Pier contractor Christiani and Nielsen they had been in 
existence for 85 years before they came to Southport.  It is not obvious that the council or anyone apart from the contractor can prevent contractors from going bust. The key point in the case of the Pier, Eastbank St and the Baths is that the money is all in place and rectifying the situation is a question of getting another contractor in. The delay is very upsetting for all concerned but if the money is there, and it is, the work can be completed.  I would welcome any further thoughts about this matter but it is not at the moment obvious what the council as opposed to the contactor can do about his trading position.  If financial and work record references are properly taken up in advance of a job what more should be done?  Put it another way if you hired someone to work on your house and they had good  financial references and had previously completed satisfactory work elsewhere would you hire them?  Thanks again for the e-mail."