Roofs & Overcharges Saga - Nov RCC

The saga of the leaking roofs, poor administration and opaque accounting goes on.

In the latest episode, a report is made to the RCC in November 2016:

Click to read the whole RCC document pack

... in which the RCC is asked to note the progress made by the [latest] Working Party.

You really should read the document for yourselves, but here are some things which struck me:

Note the entry in Appendix A regarding the warranties for the roof works:

Ben Jonson House Warranties still active ... in theory

Good news for Ben Jonson House, except that we understand that the warranties have been invalidated because the BEO tried to fix the leaks themselves without notifying the guarantor.  And indeed the City seems to admit this in point 8 of the report.

In point 11 the City also admit to other administrative issues: "there has been no system in place to systematically record roof repairs and their causes", so they don't even know what they themselves have done, or why.

The report then seems to go on to cost-justify the actions which were taken in the past (even though they don't have a record, remember), concluding that, actually, by doing everything wrong they ended up saving us money.  I may be paraphrasing.

But surely it was either wrong to get the warranties in the first place, or it was wrong to mis-administer them.  It can't be both, can it?

The report then says "members of this Working Party are satisfied that systems are now in place to ..." make the world a better place.  Lovely.  But no real details of what will be done.

Point 21 then says " see if anything can be done economically and sensibly to reinstate the warranties that have not, as yet, expired". But why bother if the above revisionist cost-justification is reasonable? ... this leaves me confused.

The house group will now try to get a description of what the BEO actually plans to do.  Wish us luck.