Laxey in the Sea

[Mercenary]

12 minutes ago, Banker said:

But it’s not the government doing any work or excavation is it?

Every action & inaction in the eyes of the great Manx people is the fault of the corrupt and incompetent IoM government 

[WTF]

24 minutes ago, Banker said:

But it’s not the government doing any work or excavation is it?

but they did give the planning permission for it to happen against the advice of people who knew better,   no permission = no excavation = no problem

[buncha wankas]

10 minutes ago, WTF said:

but they did give the planning permission for it to happen against the advice of people who knew better,   no permission = no excavation = no problem

Wouldn’t building control oversee such works, which building control office covers Laxey ?  

[Gladys]

9 minutes ago, WTF said:

but they did give the planning permission for it to happen against the advice of people who knew better,   no permission = no excavation = no problem

Don't know much about planning, but simplistically, the planning permission does not absolve the contractor from carrying out the work in a safe manner and without impact to the neighbouring properties, surely? 

 

[Banker]

15 minutes ago, WTF said:

but they did give the planning permission for it to happen against the advice of people who knew better,   no permission = no excavation = no problem

But do you hold government responsible for every planning permission when there’s subsequent problems like poor housing, flooding etc?

Surely it’s the responsibility of the land owners & their contractors to ensure that all surrounding properties etc are protected & rectify any problems 

[Gladys]

Looking at the decision, Condition C2 required a properly advised scheme to be agreed with DEFA to reduce the danger of landslide before work commenced.  Presumably this means even demolition. 

That may be where the issue lies.  Did they submit a scheme, was it approved and was the work carried out in accordance  with it? 

[CallMeCurious]

My uinderstanding is;

There has to be a CDM notification of project to H&S and a planning supervisor should be appointed.

The planning supervisor would ensure that RAMS (Risk Assessment and Method Statement) are received from the contractor and approved as satisfactory before works are undertaken, in this case a civil/structural engineer is the logical choice to sign off on the methods.

Then the contractor and his subcontractor should comply with the method statement.

So presumably as well as insurers, there must be a H&S investigation as there was a severe risk to life and limb of anyone living in those houses regardless of the ultimate cause. That is after all what they are there for surely.

[Passing Time]

3 hours ago, Roxanne said:

It wasn't you who said it - it was that Satan behind you.

Oh no he’s not

[CallMeCurious]

2 minutes ago, Passing Time said:

Oh no he’s not

Less of that, this is already enough of a pantomime as it is

[Happier diner]

1 hour ago, CallMeCurious said:

My uinderstanding is;

There has to be a CDM notification of project to H&S and a planning supervisor should be appointed.

The planning supervisor would ensure that RAMS (Risk Assessment and Method Statement) are received from the contractor and approved as satisfactory before works are undertaken, in this case a civil/structural engineer is the logical choice to sign off on the methods.

Then the contractor and his subcontractor should comply with the method statement.

So presumably as well as insurers, there must be a H&S investigation as there was a severe risk to life and limb of anyone living in those houses regardless of the ultimate cause. That is after all what they are there for surely.

At the risk of being argumentative but not disagreeing with you....

Notification of work does not necessarily mean you have to have a planning supervisor. However, I do agree for this kind of work then there would have to be something. At the very least a designer. If there was no design before you start hacking away the bottom of a cliff then that wouldn't look good would it.

Your link to health and safety (which is the primary responsibility of a planning supervisor) is a bit tenuous, but yes, that arguement could be made. 

[CallMeCurious]

1 hour ago, Happier diner said:

At the risk of being argumentative but not disagreeing with you....

Notification of work does not necessarily mean you have to have a planning supervisor. However, I do agree for this kind of work then there would have to be something. At the very least a designer. If there was no design before you start hacking away the bottom of a cliff then that wouldn't look good would it.

Your link to health and safety (which is the primary responsibility of a planning supervisor) is a bit tenuous, but yes, that arguement could be made. 

Guess the argument will come down to if this was 'demolition' and if not, is it more than 30 days or 4 people involved.

Which projects do the CDM Regulations apply to

The CDM Regulations apply to most construction projects. However, there are a number of situations where the Regulations do not apply. These include:

• construction work other than demolition that does not last longer than 30 days and does not involve more than four people;

...

As a client you have the following duties under the CDM Regulations; (whether you are a client or client's agent):

• appoint a planning supervisor;
• provide information on health and safety to the planning supervisor;
• appoint a principal contractor;
• ensure those you appoint are competent and adequately resourced to carry out their health and safety responsibilities;
• ensure that a suitable health and safety plan has been prepared by the principal contractor before construction work starts; and
• ensure the health and safety file given to you at the end of the project is kept available for use.

If you arrange for someone to prepare a design or for a contractor to carry out construction work on the project, you also have duties to ensure they are competent and are adequately resourced to carry out their health and safety responsibilities.

Further details on the role of the Client can be found on CDM Information sheet No

[Zarley]

 

[x-in-man]

All down to the site owners then ..

[John Wright]

All these attempts to blame planning, or breach of regulations, is interesting, but not really relevant in liability terms.

The owners of the higher land/houses have a right of support from the owners of the lower land. Remove that support and the lower land owner, and his servants and agents, are liable.

The insurers of the upper owners will no doubt pay out on a total loss basis and subrogate the claims their clients have.

Of course the claim against the lower owners May get messy if they don’t have insurance, so contractors, engineers, architects etc May get dragged in as defendants or third parties.

That being said, is it a rock fall or is it a steep Earth bank covering a steeply sloping cliff rock face that has slipped? 

[WTF]

4 minutes ago, John Wright said:

All these attempts to blame planning, or breach of regulations, is interesting, but not really relevant in liability terms.

The owners of the higher land/houses have a right of support from the owners of the lower land. Remove that support and the lower land owner, and his servants and agents, are liable.

The insurers of the upper owners will no doubt pay out on a total loss basis and subrogate the claims their clients have.

Of course the claim against the lower owners May get messy if they don’t have insurance, so contractors, engineers, architects etc May get dragged in as defendants or third parties.

That being said, is it a rock fall or is it a steep Earth bank covering a steeply sloping cliff rock face that has slipped? 

what it is is a typical IOM building project fuck up, who is surprised.