Why is Stoke on Trent refusing to provide owners of the Big House, Burslem with any information regarding the insurance claim lodged by the Council back in March 2012?
Six requests for a copy of the health and safety report, a copy of the damp report and a copy of the structural engineer’s report relating to the damage caused by Stoke City Council have so far been made to the City Council, so far no information has been received from the Council.
For more information the the Big House there is a Facebook page please visit, like and ask the Council supports the Big house
Today I received a copy of the Seventh request being made by the owner I’ll update this article if any information from the council is finally forth coming.
Dear Mr Vernon,
RE: STOKE CITY COUNCIL’S ATTEMPT TO UNDERMINE EIGHT EXPERT REPORTS BY EMPLOYING A “COWBOY” SURVEYOR
We refer to our previous correspondence concerning the insurance claim, our outstanding emails and to the EIGHT expert reports already in Stoke City Council’s possession (which rule in our favour).
Our previous attachments show the “independent” structural engineer (who regularly undertakes work for Stoke City Council) wearing a safety helmet only when he knows he is being filmed by onlookers. The rest of the time he was filmed and photographed wearing casual clothes contrary to the rules and regulations a proper authorised/approved structural engineer must follow.
We were aware that it was Stoke City Council’s intention to employ a “cowboy” structural engineer which is why we allowed hidden technology to film him.
The “independent” structural engineer was filmed wearing a safety mask on his chin and brown Hush Puppy-like shoes on his feet inside The Big House proving once again that Stoke City Council had ulterior motives for employing him and that his attendance at The Big House had nothing whatsoever to do with restoration and conservation as you personally claimed in court.
It is also interesting to note that the “independent” structural engineer was not permitted to examine the damage done to The Big House by Stoke City Council’s pavement because Stoke City Council refused to re-open the exploratory trench dug at the side of The Big House in March 2012 (twenty twelve). This is despite the fact that said exploratory trench was only filled with rubble and sealed with tarmac.
Although our own structural engineer felt the need to dig a bore hole at the rear of The Big House (where the land consists of gravel and yellow clay) to study The Big House’s foundations no one from Stoke City Council sought permission from us to dig a bore hole and subsequently Stoke City Council’s “independent” structural engineer did not examine The Big House’s foundations and merely wondered around the interior and exterior of The Big House with a yellow spirit level available from any DIY store (and Wilkinsons).
We are disappointed and concerned that no consideration is being given to The Citizens Charter and that Stoke City Council is of the opinion that it can take as much time as it likes to respond to our correspondence.
This is particularly ironic as Mr David Joy, solicitor previously demanded a response to one of his emails by 5pm on the same day that it was written.
Whilst you have told us that it is not within the “remit” of your Environmental Health Officer to tell us where the Dry Rot is inside The Big House (which has been caused by Stoke City Council) we hope that it is within Ms Jane Corfield’s “remit” to tell us where the Dry Rot is in order that we can have it speedily removed.
We have repeatedly made known the willingness of a third party to wrap the contaminated floorboards in cling film and to remove them from The Big House (which is something that Stoke City Council (which is responsible for the Dry Rot) should have done when it forced entry into The Big House to view the damage it is causing).
Once again, Stoke City Council is guilty of doing NOTHING to reduce the amount of damage it is causing and has not even made arrangements to stop the flow of water pouring into The Big House (see photographs displayed on the internet) despite having been made aware of the problem in December 2011 (twenty eleven).
To date, our requests for a copy of the health and safety report, a copy of the damp report and a copy of the structural engineer’s report relating to the damage caused by Stoke City Council have not resulted in any information being received.
You have personally sought to prevent us from receiving information under The Freedom of Information Act and we are now in possession of documentation proving this.
The difficulty we are experiencing obtaining insurance cover for The Big House as a direct result of the problems being caused by Stoke City Council is not something that Stoke City Council has sought to address and a copy of this email will be sent to the Chief Executive of English Heritage for this reason.
Perhaps you should reconsider the way in which you prioritise your work because if you think that is acceptable to leave The Big House uninsured as a result of Stoke City Council’s mistakes and failure to correct them you should quit the legal profession now (which is something we feel you should consider doing anyway).
You continue to behave in a way that is not normally associated with professional people, let alone practising solicitors and the arrogant email that you sent to us last Friday highlights the need for someone to monitor your emails and for changes to be made within Stoke City Council’s Legal Department.
Whilst you falsely alleged that you did not know anything about the insurance “aggravation clause” you have now received copy correspondence from Stoke City Council referring to said “aggravation clause” which was referred to in Court and in our emails to you.
Although you stated that my emails would be dealt with whilst you were on annual leave, no one from Stoke City Council attempted to contact me regarding any of the outstanding issues whilst you were away from the office and no one from Stoke City Council has attempted to contact me since your return from annual leave either.
You will recall that you asked us to contact you should The Zurich fail to contact us prior to the end of August 2013.
Please be advised that as at today’s date The Zurich has still not made contact with us.
You will be aware that The Zurich insurance claim was lodged by Stoke City Council.
The insurance claim commenced being processed on 30 March 2012 (twenty twelve).
We have not been permitted to view the claim form lodged by your Mr Dawson.
No one is prepared to tell us what can and cannot be claimed under the policy.
THE CLAIM WAS SUPPOSED TO BE PROCESSED WITHIN THREE MONTHS.
We look forward to receiving a communication from The Zurich.
We look forward to receiving a reply to our outstanding emails.
Thank you for your assistance.
THE WEDGWOOD BIG HOUSE