I
Bryan Baron 2
Well-known member
Good to see they are also pledging 500,000 to the clean up. At least the river should get some benifit from the incident.
As the 125,000 will go nowhere near the river.
As the 125,000 will go nowhere near the river.
The bad one
Well-known member
For once the EA had one of these bastards in the Crown Court and the judge has let them off with a smacked wrist.
Shame on you Justice X.
The Crown CourtJudge had the power of unlimited fine and imprisonment of the site manager to send a real message to all the Water Companies here and he wimped out by fining them less than lose change in the pockets of TW.
Shame on you Justice X.
The Crown CourtJudge had the power of unlimited fine and imprisonment of the site manager to send a real message to all the Water Companies here and he wimped out by fining them less than lose change in the pockets of TW.
The bad one
Well-known member
And for those that think 125k is a large amount, in 2006 TW recorded a 31 % increse in its profits (pre tax)to just over a third of a billion pound.
W
Wolfman Woody
Guest
I think you will find, Phil, if you dig around the foundations of this story that the ACA were on the case from the very beginning and the pledge of £500,000 is largely due to them.
Whilst I can't disagree with you that a prison sentence for top executives would be in order in many cases, Thames Water came clean about this incident from the very start. Accidents do happen, maybe too frequently, but penalising directors won't always work. In this case I believe the best solution has been found for all concerned and just hope that it doesn't happen again.
Whilst I can't disagree with you that a prison sentence for top executives would be in order in many cases, Thames Water came clean about this incident from the very start. Accidents do happen, maybe too frequently, but penalising directors won't always work. In this case I believe the best solution has been found for all concerned and just hope that it doesn't happen again.
The bad one
Well-known member
Disagree with your comments, they coughed up the 500k to avoid the court case the ACA would have brought against them. Total cost of that case would have reached and probably exceeded, the figure anyway. Just swapped the cost it would have cost them and in doing so, they could use it to curry favour to avoid real substantive fine that would impact on their profits and make the shareholders to start asking questions of the company and their pollution record.
It highlights to me the dangers of rushing in to early to get the compo. Had they waited, and they have 3 years to bring such a case, TW would not have had this for currying the judge with. And aproper financial penalty would most likelyhave been given and beseen to be given.
This kind of opportunity comes along very rarely, it's normally dealt with in the lower court where themax is 20k + costs.We, Angling, should not give them any means whatsoeverto avoid paying maximumfine possible.
Accidents happen???? And their own brief called it "aJuvenile mistake"!
And how many times have they polluted watercourses in their region over the last 5 years?
Has the juvenile (Plant Manager) who allowed this mistake, note the word used by the brief, been sacked?
It's comment like yours that are letting the bastards get away with.
It highlights to me the dangers of rushing in to early to get the compo. Had they waited, and they have 3 years to bring such a case, TW would not have had this for currying the judge with. And aproper financial penalty would most likelyhave been given and beseen to be given.
This kind of opportunity comes along very rarely, it's normally dealt with in the lower court where themax is 20k + costs.We, Angling, should not give them any means whatsoeverto avoid paying maximumfine possible.
Accidents happen???? And their own brief called it "aJuvenile mistake"!
And how many times have they polluted watercourses in their region over the last 5 years?
Has the juvenile (Plant Manager) who allowed this mistake, note the word used by the brief, been sacked?
It's comment like yours that are letting the bastards get away with.
W
Wolfman Woody
Guest
Once again, Phil, you have proved my point about you, but I won't reiterate it.
If you want any further clarification of that particular case you had better get on to the CEO of your Angling Trust, Mark Lloyd (formerly Director of the ACA), who knows far more about it than you or I do.
.
For the benefit of anyone else - the ACA <u>ALWAYS</u> tried to avoid going to court and often settled cases amicably (?) as this was the least costly solution for them also. The record of Thames Water is very well publicised in the south east (it's home ground) and many is the time I would have loved to have seen their board of directors strung up on Westminster Bridge, particularly after letting so many millions of tonnes of a sewage into the river after storms, when much of that could have been prevented. In this case it is possibly still the best solution to have been found and doubtful that Thames Water would have faced a more severe fine. Like it or lump it, the river may soon recover thanks to the negotiations taken at an early stage.
You don't always need a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Unless that nut is a bad one.
/forum/smilies/big_smile_smiley.gif
If you want any further clarification of that particular case you had better get on to the CEO of your Angling Trust, Mark Lloyd (formerly Director of the ACA), who knows far more about it than you or I do.
.
For the benefit of anyone else - the ACA <u>ALWAYS</u> tried to avoid going to court and often settled cases amicably (?) as this was the least costly solution for them also. The record of Thames Water is very well publicised in the south east (it's home ground) and many is the time I would have loved to have seen their board of directors strung up on Westminster Bridge, particularly after letting so many millions of tonnes of a sewage into the river after storms, when much of that could have been prevented. In this case it is possibly still the best solution to have been found and doubtful that Thames Water would have faced a more severe fine. Like it or lump it, the river may soon recover thanks to the negotiations taken at an early stage.
You don't always need a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Unless that nut is a bad one.
/forum/smilies/big_smile_smiley.gif
You don't always need a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Unless that nut is a bad one.
I must say, I like that one Woody.
I must say, I like that one Woody.
The bad one
Well-known member
Err costs awarded when, they ACA won dooooh! That means it cost them nothing! In most cases it was the defendant that wanted to settle if what they put in their yearly mag was anything to go.
And for the record I disagreed with Mark Lloyd then over the settlement and still do. Had they waited until the CRIMINAL trial was done with, Guilty as charged, would have strengthenthe ACA hand to screw them for more money than they did.
As for your comment about the river soon recovering It show just how thick you are. The river lost fish, chub up to 5 lbs,barbel in to double figures, roach up to 2 lb. The bulk of restocking will be with fish of year 1 & 2 class, that's fish of less than a pound. Or some old ropey largerfish stockthat been in the hatchery for donkeys years and past its sell by date with a life expectancy of 4-6 years max.
For the year 1-2 class to attain the weight of the stock lost, it will take a decade at least. That's a decade of lost amenity to fish for fish of the quality it had pre pollution to the local anglers who fished it. And that's soon isit The great Oracle one?
There none so blind as those who are to thick or woodyto workout theconsequences!
And for the record I disagreed with Mark Lloyd then over the settlement and still do. Had they waited until the CRIMINAL trial was done with, Guilty as charged, would have strengthenthe ACA hand to screw them for more money than they did.
As for your comment about the river soon recovering It show just how thick you are. The river lost fish, chub up to 5 lbs,barbel in to double figures, roach up to 2 lb. The bulk of restocking will be with fish of year 1 & 2 class, that's fish of less than a pound. Or some old ropey largerfish stockthat been in the hatchery for donkeys years and past its sell by date with a life expectancy of 4-6 years max.
For the year 1-2 class to attain the weight of the stock lost, it will take a decade at least. That's a decade of lost amenity to fish for fish of the quality it had pre pollution to the local anglers who fished it. And that's soon isit The great Oracle one?
There none so blind as those who are to thick or woodyto workout theconsequences!
I
Ian Cloke
Guest
Gorgeous Bob Bradford
New member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2007
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 0
This lifted off the link, is the bones of it;
"Mitchell said they also wanted water companies to invest more on maintenance to reduce the risk of pollution, something which would have to be approved by the industry regulator, Ofwat. "In 2007 water companies were responsible for one fifth of all serious pollution incidents – many of which were caused by poorly maintained, overloaded or ageing sewerage infrastructure," he said."
My opinion is, many of these incidents would be avoided by investing heavilyin bettermaintenance instead of creaming off huge profits for theirforeign shareholders,, even if the water company'sare found guilty and fined ,this isviewed as a cheap way of disposing ofthe waste, much cheaper than upgrading their works,I agree entirely with the statement by Mitchell, something needs to be done, the foreign owned water company's are getting away with murder (wildlife and fish),and theywill continue topollute until this consistent problem is addressed properly , the fines imposed are clearly not acting as a proper deterrent, the fact that there are so manycases countrywide proves this.
"Mitchell said they also wanted water companies to invest more on maintenance to reduce the risk of pollution, something which would have to be approved by the industry regulator, Ofwat. "In 2007 water companies were responsible for one fifth of all serious pollution incidents – many of which were caused by poorly maintained, overloaded or ageing sewerage infrastructure," he said."
My opinion is, many of these incidents would be avoided by investing heavilyin bettermaintenance instead of creaming off huge profits for theirforeign shareholders,, even if the water company'sare found guilty and fined ,this isviewed as a cheap way of disposing ofthe waste, much cheaper than upgrading their works,I agree entirely with the statement by Mitchell, something needs to be done, the foreign owned water company's are getting away with murder (wildlife and fish),and theywill continue topollute until this consistent problem is addressed properly , the fines imposed are clearly not acting as a proper deterrent, the fact that there are so manycases countrywide proves this.
C
Cakey
Guest
I was nearly a fan then Boring Bob ....until the last 14 words
Gorgeous Bob Bradford
New member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2007
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 0
/forum/smilies/smile_smiley.gif
W
Wolfman Woody
Guest
"As for your comment about the river soon recovering It show just how thick you are. The river lost fish, chub up to 5 lbs,barbel in to double figures, roach up to 2 lb. The bulk of restocking will be with fish of year 1 & 2 class, that's fish of less than a pound. Or some old ropey largerfish stockthat been in the hatchery for donkeys years and past its sell by date with a life expectancy of 4-6 years max.
For the year 1-2 class to attain the weight of the stock lost, it will take a decade at least. That's a decade of lost amenity to fish for fish of the quality it had pre pollution to the local anglers who fished it. And that's soon isit The great Oracle one?
There none so blind as those who are to thick or woodyto workout theconsequences! "
Thank you for your kind words, Bob. Your popularity through your style of diplomacy just grows and grows.
Surprisingly, the Wandle (it was never a prime river by, say, Kennett standards or have you seen it?) could recover in 4-5 years, maybe not quite making up for all the fish that died, buy sufficient to provide a lot of local anglers with decent sport again. Or would you have waited this 18 months for court case before the ACA (or FL now) could even start negotiating/pursuing their case for restoration?
There are, after all, two cases. One is a fine, which goes straight to the Government and anglers do not see a penny of, that's the £125,000. Then the ACA have to start and that could have taken a further 18 months- 2 years to reach a settlement. So by your ham-fisted methods it might have been <u>3 years or more</u> before a start could be made on restoring the river.
Thank God you have nothing to do with the new AT/FL other than being a gobby member.
BTW, have you had anything to do with the Water Framework Directive, on any local consultatives? There's your chance to voice opinion!
For the year 1-2 class to attain the weight of the stock lost, it will take a decade at least. That's a decade of lost amenity to fish for fish of the quality it had pre pollution to the local anglers who fished it. And that's soon isit The great Oracle one?
There none so blind as those who are to thick or woodyto workout theconsequences! "
Thank you for your kind words, Bob. Your popularity through your style of diplomacy just grows and grows.
Surprisingly, the Wandle (it was never a prime river by, say, Kennett standards or have you seen it?) could recover in 4-5 years, maybe not quite making up for all the fish that died, buy sufficient to provide a lot of local anglers with decent sport again. Or would you have waited this 18 months for court case before the ACA (or FL now) could even start negotiating/pursuing their case for restoration?
There are, after all, two cases. One is a fine, which goes straight to the Government and anglers do not see a penny of, that's the £125,000. Then the ACA have to start and that could have taken a further 18 months- 2 years to reach a settlement. So by your ham-fisted methods it might have been <u>3 years or more</u> before a start could be made on restoring the river.
Thank God you have nothing to do with the new AT/FL other than being a gobby member.
BTW, have you had anything to do with the Water Framework Directive, on any local consultatives? There's your chance to voice opinion!
C
Cakey
Guest
tell me why you edited Bob ?
Gorgeous Bob Bradford
New member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2007
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 0
"Thank you for your kind words, Bob. Your popularity through your style of diplomacy just grows and grows."
"Thank God you have nothing to do with the new AT/FL other than being a gobby member."
???????????????????
Woody you had better go and have a lay down, then when you are suitably refreshed, re-read the post you are attributing to me,/forum/smilies/party_smiley.gif because I did not write it/forum/smilies/party_smiley.gifthen humbly apologise to me on here,/forum/smilies/party_smiley.gif not for the first time your "facts" arewrong, are you always this confused?/forum/smilies/party_smiley.gif, small wonder you rarely make any real sense./forum/smilies/disappointed_smiley.gif
"Thank God you have nothing to do with the new AT/FL other than being a gobby member."
???????????????????
Woody you had better go and have a lay down, then when you are suitably refreshed, re-read the post you are attributing to me,/forum/smilies/party_smiley.gif because I did not write it/forum/smilies/party_smiley.gifthen humbly apologise to me on here,/forum/smilies/party_smiley.gif not for the first time your "facts" arewrong, are you always this confused?/forum/smilies/party_smiley.gif, small wonder you rarely make any real sense./forum/smilies/disappointed_smiley.gif
Gorgeous Bob Bradford
New member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2007
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 0
BTTT.
W
Wolfman Woody
Guest
Yes, I do apologise, Bob.
I made a clumpsy mistake by looking directly above and saw your name, without realising it was the Bad One, perhaps it should have been more obvious. And I have to also admit that when thinking it was you, it was over the top. I was also trying to post just before going to work, so it was an error made in haste.
<u>So one thousand apologies, Bob, genuinely heartfelt. </u>
So where it says "Bob" in my previous post substititute whatever expletive you can think of. It's getting confusing when the Bad One will not use his own name, I'm sure his original name and avatar are still around.
.
Incidentally Bob - I liked your link to that Gareth Purnell video about the AT. Why it was locked, well that is down to Graham and he has explained, but were it not for the other crap flying on these threads I thought it deserved its own thread. My opinion.
I made a clumpsy mistake by looking directly above and saw your name, without realising it was the Bad One, perhaps it should have been more obvious. And I have to also admit that when thinking it was you, it was over the top. I was also trying to post just before going to work, so it was an error made in haste.
<u>So one thousand apologies, Bob, genuinely heartfelt. </u>
So where it says "Bob" in my previous post substititute whatever expletive you can think of. It's getting confusing when the Bad One will not use his own name, I'm sure his original name and avatar are still around.
.
Incidentally Bob - I liked your link to that Gareth Purnell video about the AT. Why it was locked, well that is down to Graham and he has explained, but were it not for the other crap flying on these threads I thought it deserved its own thread. My opinion.
Gorgeous Bob Bradford
New member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2007
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 0
I accept your apology Woody, I thought perhaps it was a Freudian slip /forum/smilies/smile_smiley.gif, Life's too short to hold grudges, so as far as I am concerned that is the end of it.
Graham Marsden and I have discussed his reason's for blocking my thread, he and I understand each others view points on this matter, and once again, that is the end of it, the fact remains, it was a bloody good link and very enlightening, I thought Gareth Purnell did an excellent job, Keith Arthur (who was there)has gone on record as saying, no-one present at the launch had a negative word to sayabout it, bearing in mind just who was in attendance, I think that speaks volumes..........surely they cannot all be wrong? time will, as ever, tell,
Regards Bob.
Graham Marsden and I have discussed his reason's for blocking my thread, he and I understand each others view points on this matter, and once again, that is the end of it, the fact remains, it was a bloody good link and very enlightening, I thought Gareth Purnell did an excellent job, Keith Arthur (who was there)has gone on record as saying, no-one present at the launch had a negative word to sayabout it, bearing in mind just who was in attendance, I think that speaks volumes..........surely they cannot all be wrong? time will, as ever, tell,
Regards Bob.
The bad one
Well-known member
"Thank you for your kind words, Bob. Your popularity through your style of diplomacy just grows and grows."
"Thank God you have nothing to do with the new AT/FL other than being a gobby member."
???????????????????
Woody you had better go and have a lay down, then when you are suitably refreshed, re-read the post you are attributing to me,/forum/smilies/party_smiley.gif because I did not write it/forum/smilies/party_smiley.gifthen humbly apologise to me on here,/forum/smilies/party_smiley.gif not for the first time your "facts" arewrong, are you always this confused?/forum/smilies/party_smiley.gif, small wonder you rarely make any real sense./forum/smilies/disappointed_smiley.gif
Need I say anything more other than you've lost the plot you prat!
And the EA agree with me as well!
This thead is turning out to be a very Bad One for you Oh Oracle One!
"Thank God you have nothing to do with the new AT/FL other than being a gobby member."
???????????????????
Woody you had better go and have a lay down, then when you are suitably refreshed, re-read the post you are attributing to me,/forum/smilies/party_smiley.gif because I did not write it/forum/smilies/party_smiley.gifthen humbly apologise to me on here,/forum/smilies/party_smiley.gif not for the first time your "facts" arewrong, are you always this confused?/forum/smilies/party_smiley.gif, small wonder you rarely make any real sense./forum/smilies/disappointed_smiley.gif
Need I say anything more other than you've lost the plot you prat!
And the EA agree with me as well!
This thead is turning out to be a very Bad One for you Oh Oracle One!