The Liberty

Yankee_Jack

Key Player
As with any steel structure, it has to be maintained when the steel is exposed to the elements and its coatings are subject to weathering. Look at any significant structure built in the town over the last 50 years and you will see surface degradation and the impacts of the local climate. Frankly, in too many of these buildings it appears that little consideration has been given to the selection of surface materials and coatings and maintenance neglect appears to be the norm. Was the maintenance neglected here or is it a case of defective surface coatings.

Missing The filing deadline by four days means somebody was not paying attention. Corrective action is not going to be a cheap project.
 

Behindthegoal

Key Player
So, who is normally responsible for structural repairs, the freeholder or the leaseholder?
To miss a 12 year deadline by four days is stupid. But Karma is operating. In the grand scheme of things is it right to sue the very council that gave you the money to rectify your undersoil heating error?
 

Ladygargar

Fox in the Box
Staff member
So, who is normally responsible for structural repairs, the freeholder or the leaseholder?
To miss a 12 year deadline by four days is stupid. But Karma is operating. In the grand scheme of things is it right to sue the very council that gave you the money to rectify your undersoil heating error?
Biting the hand that fed you is becoming a national pastime sadly....
 

CroJack

Key Player
So, who is normally responsible for structural repairs, the freeholder or the leaseholder?
Here is how the continental law regulates such cases:

The builder (construction company) is responsible for the structural repairs, the owner (Council) for the maintainance. Also the third party can be responsible and that's an independent quality control supervisor (incpector) who is normally hired by the owner of the project.

In our case:
  • SSMC (Swansea Stadium Management Company) who holds the lease of the property, can't sue the construction company and the independent supervisor (inspector), they can only sue the Council (the owner of the property). The Council is responsible for the maintainance of the Liberty, if something else has not been agreed. If responsible, the Council should imediately repair the damage.
  • The Council can then sue both the construction company and the inependent supervisor (inspector)
 

Ladygargar

Fox in the Box
Staff member
Here is how the continental law regulates such cases:

The builder (construction company) is responsible for the structural repairs, the owner (Council) for the maintainance. Also the third party can be responsible and that's an independent quality control supervisor (incpector) who is normally hired by the owner of the project.

In our case:
  • SSMC (Swansea Stadium Management Company) who holds the lease of the property, can't sue the construction company and the independent supervisor (inspector), they can only sue the Council (the owner of the property). The Council is responsible for the maintainance of the Liberty, if something else has not been agreed. If responsible, the Council should imediately repair the damage.
  • The Council can then sue both the construction company and the inependent supervisor (inspector)
Probably because the paint came from Caseys - or Travelworld - neither do paint - but neither do Football either :mad:
 
Top Bottom