Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2014 15:47:35 GMT
Yes, as I understand it a judge could either order the contract to be performed - so Rovers get the money, Sainsbury's get the property - or award compensation for non-performance of the contract. Further damages may be awarded in either case, if Rovers can show and the judge agrees that Sainsbury's acting the giddy goat has cost us more money. In reality, should the judge enforce the contract, Sainsbury's may well offer to settle it in return for some dosh rather than have the cost and hassle of buying the Mem then trying to sell it again. Is the writ just a pre cursor to the main event when Sainsbury pull the plug ?? Win that and you have a very good chance to win the following court case(s) Sainsbury's have already pulled the plug and are currently covering their back with a doomed appeal regarding delivery hours to demonstrate that they've done all they reasonably could but unfortunately the get out clause applies, cheerio. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2014 18:09:22 GMT
Is the writ just a pre cursor to the main event when Sainsbury pull the plug ?? Win that and you have a very good chance to win the following court case(s) Sainsbury's have already pulled the plug and are currently covering their back with a doomed appeal regarding delivery hours to demonstrate that they've done all they reasonably could but unfortunately the get out clause applies, cheerio. but the appeal is not doomed, go read the Revised planning application my friend and you will find BCC planning doing a sterling job for BRFC  |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Pond on Sept 23, 2014 18:36:32 GMT
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920 
|
Post by Peter Parker on Sept 23, 2014 18:49:59 GMT
MYbe the fences wont be so bad, but that still doesnt IMO make the delivery hours that a wanted acceptable |
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,263
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Sept 23, 2014 18:52:35 GMT
Humility is not your strong point, is it.  When you're talking to someone who clearly hasn't a clue what they're on about, then no. The fact that Higgs and the legal team allowed a co tract to be drawn up with store hours that are not even in place anywhere else in Bristol is the big one. To have allowed that to be a store onerous condition is beyond belief |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Pond on Sept 23, 2014 19:05:27 GMT
MYbe the fences wont be so bad, but that still doesnt IMO make the delivery hours that a wanted acceptable Bristol City planning refused sainsburys application because of the following "For the previous reasons outlined and without prejudice to the applicant, I would object to the application for variation with delivery hours on the basis on insufficient information provided. I cannot accept that increased deliveries at unsociable hours will not cause nuisance to neighbours based on the management controls outlined and the arguably reliable? Quiet Deliveries Demonstration Scheme." looks like Sainsburys submitted a half hearted application with no meat. So we get in specialists and get all the required information that should have been put with the application in the first place. I have to say I'm quite confident with our re-application. |
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Sept 23, 2014 19:40:41 GMT
"Document Unavailable This document is unavailable for viewing at this time.!"  |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Pond on Sept 23, 2014 19:52:50 GMT
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Sept 23, 2014 20:01:23 GMT
Again thatay be all good, but does that make the delivery hours acceptable on the houses in the surrounding area ala Filton avenue? |
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Sept 23, 2014 20:03:39 GMT
Nope, no joy! Thanks but getting same error message. Perhaps it's just me! |
|
|
|
Post by Curly Wurly on Sept 23, 2014 20:19:49 GMT
Again thatay be all good, but does that make the delivery hours acceptable on the houses in the surrounding area ala Filton avenue? Yep... .don't see why not. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Pond on Sept 23, 2014 20:25:09 GMT
Again thatay be all good, but does that make the delivery hours acceptable on the houses in the surrounding area ala Filton avenue? The report shows only 7 existing houses will be affected or not with the new fencing and the times may not be acceptable by the residents but how will they know if the lorries have gone in if they can't hear them with the nice new fencing!  ? |
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Sept 23, 2014 20:48:00 GMT
Again thatay be all good, but does that make the delivery hours acceptable on the houses in the surrounding area ala Filton avenue? The report shows only 7 existing houses will be affected or not with the new fencing and the times may not be acceptable by the residents but how will they know if the lorries have gone in if they can't hear them with the nice new fencing! ? I presume we all know the narrow stretch of Filton Avenue that will lead to the stadium. Its not like a 40 tonne lorry will just glide in is it. Just trying to see the bigger picture. Fences or no fences i see no need why Sainsburys need or indeed should be granted potential 5am deliveries and midnight deliveries. Delivery times greater than for big stores in easer acessed areas |
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Sept 23, 2014 20:54:28 GMT
The report shows only 7 existing houses will be affected or not with the new fencing and the times may not be acceptable by the residents but how will they know if the lorries have gone in if they can't hear them with the nice new fencing! ? I presume we all know the narrow stretch of Filton Avenue that will lead to the stadium. Its not like a 40 tonne lorry will just glide in is it. Just trying to see the bigger picture. Fences or no fences i see no need why Sainsburys need or indeed should be granted potential 5am deliveries and midnight deliveries. Delivery times greater than for big stores in easer acessed areas Are there currently any restrictions on Filton Avenue preventing lorries using the road , at say 11.30pm or 5.30am? |
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Sept 23, 2014 20:59:38 GMT
I presume we all know the narrow stretch of Filton Avenue that will lead to the stadium. Its not like a 40 tonne lorry will just glide in is it. Just trying to see the bigger picture. Fences or no fences i see no need why Sainsburys need or indeed should be granted potential 5am deliveries and midnight deliveries. Delivery times greater than for big stores in easer acessed areas Are there currently any restrictions on Filton Avenue preventing lorries using the road , at say 11.30pm or 5.30am? Who knows. I have no time for TRASH, Carstairs or many of Bristols NIMBYs, however i dont think it is as simple as building a few fences will magically make the whole thing okay. What is the actual retail argument, the one Sainsburys dont actually want to make? |
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Sept 23, 2014 21:04:43 GMT
The report shows only 7 existing houses will be affected or not with the new fencing and the times may not be acceptable by the residents but how will they know if the lorries have gone in if they can't hear them with the nice new fencing! ? I presume we all know the narrow stretch of Filton Avenue that will lead to the stadium. Its not like a 40 tonne lorry will just glide in is it. Just trying to see the bigger picture. Fences or no fences i see no need why Sainsburys need or indeed should be granted potential 5am deliveries and midnight deliveries. Delivery times greater than for big stores in easer acessed areas Yes, there won't be fences on the front of the properties on Filton Avenue. The slip road down will be wider though, as I understand the houses either corner would be knocked down which also gives room for the roundabout that's being incorporated. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Pond on Sept 23, 2014 21:05:59 GMT
The report shows only 7 existing houses will be affected or not with the new fencing and the times may not be acceptable by the residents but how will they know if the lorries have gone in if they can't hear them with the nice new fencing! ? I presume we all know the narrow stretch of Filton Avenue that will lead to the stadium. Its not like a 40 tonne lorry will just glide in is it. Just trying to see the bigger picture. Fences or no fences i see no need why Sainsburys need or indeed should be granted potential 5am deliveries and midnight deliveries. Delivery times greater than for big stores in easer acessed areas I'm sure a 40 tonne lorry would enter the site a lot easier later on in the evening than rush hour with cars going in and coming out. |
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Sept 24, 2014 11:09:58 GMT
Yes, as I understand it a judge could either order the contract to be performed - so Rovers get the money, Sainsbury's get the property - or award compensation for non-performance of the contract. Further damages may be awarded in either case, if Rovers can show and the judge agrees that Sainsbury's acting the giddy goat has cost us more money. In reality, should the judge enforce the contract, Sainsbury's may well offer to settle it in return for some dosh rather than have the cost and hassle of buying the Mem then trying to sell it again. But that's not what we're asking the court to do, is it? We're asking for compensation of a couple of hundred grand or whatever it is for costs incurred by us since April (or whenever) due to Sainsbury's 'dragging their feet' on a contract they told us they were pulling out of, in compliance with clauses whatever, in February, which we refused to accept turning instead to offering to pay for noise abatement measures. If we'd had the confidence to be able to claim non-compliance, we could have done so then. At the moment, yes. |
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Sept 24, 2014 11:10:32 GMT
Yes, as I understand it a judge could either order the contract to be performed - so Rovers get the money, Sainsbury's get the property - or award compensation for non-performance of the contract. Further damages may be awarded in either case, if Rovers can show and the judge agrees that Sainsbury's acting the giddy goat has cost us more money. In reality, should the judge enforce the contract, Sainsbury's may well offer to settle it in return for some dosh rather than have the cost and hassle of buying the Mem then trying to sell it again. Is the writ just a pre cursor to the main event when Sainsbury pull the plug ?? Win that and you have a very good chance to win the following court case(s) Exactly. |
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Sept 24, 2014 11:13:26 GMT
MYbe the fences wont be so bad, but that still doesnt IMO make the delivery hours that a wanted acceptable Why? If the deliveries can be done within an acceptable level of noise, then spreading the same number of deliveries over a longer period has to be a good thing, doesn't it? |
|
?