![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
peterbirksNot much development on the sewer front. I managed to find the property services company in charge of next door, and I will be speaking to (and meeting) the company owner at the weekend. Apparently he wants to go to war with Thames Water, since he has done so before, and won. He also wants nothing to do with DynoRod, whom he consideres too expensive. So that's all a bit of added aggravation.
I've sent a mandate to the DynoRod franchisee, which will be submitting that to the insurer and let's see if LV= will come good for the £600 daily cost of bringing in the sucking tanker (I assume these have a technical name, but darned if I know what it is).
Ah-hah! Vacuum tanker! Obviously! Here's a small one.
The tenant of Flat (A) next door has forwarded the news to his landlord, and I've been trying to contact the letting agency for Flat (B). The latter is the most important because (I have been informed) there actually IS access to the relevant sewer, via the floor of the kitchen in Flat (B). I'm still waiting for the letting agency for flat (B) (not to be confused with the Property Management Agency for the whole building) to get back to me so that I can apprise them of the situation. However, just being able to get at the sewer pipes from another access point could make an incredible difference to the difficulties of fixing the problem. The only thing that amazes me is that Flat (B) hasn't noticed an absolutely dreadful smell!
There's been no back-up in the past couple of days, but that, of course, is only a matter of time. But at least everyone involved (with the exception of the Council and possibly the owners of flat (B)) now knows about it. With luck the owner of the Property Management Agency will be a decent enough guy and will understand the relative urgency of the situation.
DynoRod promised to expedite the insurance push ASAP. If LV= says no (which I expect them to), then I will fall back on the guy next door's plan to go to war with Thames Water. That at least would be a bit of fun.
+++++++++++
I managed to get a story on BP's report on the Macondo oil spill up onto our website by about 2.30pm yesterday, which was pleasing, given that it was the lead story on Radio 4 at 5pm.
My first interpretation of the report that, given it was BP that put it together, it didn't look good for BP. In order of potential seriousness, Transocean and Cameron International have the most to lose, in that the companies could cease to exist. Cameron remained silent in reponse, while Transocean is falling back on the line that it was a faulty well design, and nothing else (except maybe cost-cutting by BP), that caused the disaster. Even if you take BP's report as biased (which it mainly is in terms of omission rather than in what it does say), Transocean does not come out covered in glory. I don't think that the line "sure, our guys were useless, but that was because BP didn't pay enough" -- is a valid defence. My hunch is that Transocean will lose a few legal battles in years to come.
BP's main aim at the moment is to show what it has always maintained -- that it was not grossly negligent (and this is what Transocean effectively has to prove if it is to get out of trouble). BP wants to show this because if it does it's "sleeping partners" Anadarko and Mitsui Sumitomo will have to call on their insurers to pay their share of the costs -- a possibility that is causing a few sphincters to tighten in the London (insurance) market. BP is self-insured, so the London market doesn't give a shit about them.
However, the one thing that came out yesterday, not picked up by the press, was that the company with the smartest lawyers is clearly Halliburton. Its response to BP's post was a masterpiece:
Brilliant, on many levels.
__________________
I've sent a mandate to the DynoRod franchisee, which will be submitting that to the insurer and let's see if LV= will come good for the £600 daily cost of bringing in the sucking tanker (I assume these have a technical name, but darned if I know what it is).
Ah-hah! Vacuum tanker! Obviously! Here's a small one.
The tenant of Flat (A) next door has forwarded the news to his landlord, and I've been trying to contact the letting agency for Flat (B). The latter is the most important because (I have been informed) there actually IS access to the relevant sewer, via the floor of the kitchen in Flat (B). I'm still waiting for the letting agency for flat (B) (not to be confused with the Property Management Agency for the whole building) to get back to me so that I can apprise them of the situation. However, just being able to get at the sewer pipes from another access point could make an incredible difference to the difficulties of fixing the problem. The only thing that amazes me is that Flat (B) hasn't noticed an absolutely dreadful smell!
There's been no back-up in the past couple of days, but that, of course, is only a matter of time. But at least everyone involved (with the exception of the Council and possibly the owners of flat (B)) now knows about it. With luck the owner of the Property Management Agency will be a decent enough guy and will understand the relative urgency of the situation.
DynoRod promised to expedite the insurance push ASAP. If LV= says no (which I expect them to), then I will fall back on the guy next door's plan to go to war with Thames Water. That at least would be a bit of fun.
+++++++++++
I managed to get a story on BP's report on the Macondo oil spill up onto our website by about 2.30pm yesterday, which was pleasing, given that it was the lead story on Radio 4 at 5pm.
My first interpretation of the report that, given it was BP that put it together, it didn't look good for BP. In order of potential seriousness, Transocean and Cameron International have the most to lose, in that the companies could cease to exist. Cameron remained silent in reponse, while Transocean is falling back on the line that it was a faulty well design, and nothing else (except maybe cost-cutting by BP), that caused the disaster. Even if you take BP's report as biased (which it mainly is in terms of omission rather than in what it does say), Transocean does not come out covered in glory. I don't think that the line "sure, our guys were useless, but that was because BP didn't pay enough" -- is a valid defence. My hunch is that Transocean will lose a few legal battles in years to come.
BP's main aim at the moment is to show what it has always maintained -- that it was not grossly negligent (and this is what Transocean effectively has to prove if it is to get out of trouble). BP wants to show this because if it does it's "sleeping partners" Anadarko and Mitsui Sumitomo will have to call on their insurers to pay their share of the costs -- a possibility that is causing a few sphincters to tighten in the London (insurance) market. BP is self-insured, so the London market doesn't give a shit about them.
However, the one thing that came out yesterday, not picked up by the press, was that the company with the smartest lawyers is clearly Halliburton. Its response to BP's post was a masterpiece:
"deepwater operations are inherently complex and a number of contractors are involved which routinely make recommendations to a single point of contact, the well owner ((i.e., BP)). The well owner is responsible for designing the well programme and any testing related to the well. Contractors do not specify well design or make decisions regarding testing procedures, as that responsibility lies with the well owner". "
Brilliant, on many levels.
__________________
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-09-09 02:49 pm (UTC)