Newly resurfaced roads breaking up already

[HandyBob 10]

The Sheffield Star paper has done a story on this .... http://www.thestar.co.uk/our-towns-and-cities/sheffield/roads-in-sheffield-crumbling-just-months-after-being-fixed-in-2bn-overhaul-1-8424418.

 

When the old Sheffield Works Dept did the roads there would last more that a few months, and there didn't close roads off but only half and had traffic lights, unless there had to.

[Planner1 438]

You would think that would be the case wouldn't you? You'd expect any even half decent council to have put that clause in the contract.

 

We shall never know however as details of the contract have been judged to be "commercially sensitive" despite Freedom of Information requests.

As others have said, Amey are responsible for maintaining the roads to the agreed standard for the next 25 years. So, if the surfacing fails early, it really is their problem.

 

They are currently scheduling remedial works in the areas where the new surfacing has failed, as well as completing the last year of the core investment works to pick up areas which haven't been resurfaced yet.

 

---------- Post added 13-03-2017 at 13:19 ----------

 

The Sheffield Star paper has done a story on this .... http://www.thestar.co.uk/our-towns-and-cities/sheffield/roads-in-sheffield-crumbling-just-months-after-being-fixed-in-2bn-overhaul-1-8424418.

 

When the old Sheffield Works Dept did the roads there would last more that a few months, and there didn't close roads off but only half and had traffic lights, unless there had to.

 

Sheffield Works Dept weren't resurfacing the vast majority of the roads in the city over a relatively short timescale were they though? Closing the road is the fastest way of getting the work done.

[Mogster 10]

As others have said, Amey are responsible for maintaining the roads to the agreed standard for the next 25 years. So, if the surfacing fails early, it really is their problem.

 

They are currently scheduling remedial works in the areas where the new surfacing has failed, as well as completing the last year of the core investment works to pick up areas which haven't been resurfaced yet.

 

So more disruption which wouldn't be needed if the work had been done well, and the point still remains that these repairs will need to be paid for - by whom? I would love to know what the commercial arrangements are for this. If Amey are getting paid for maintenance as well as resurfacing, perhaps there is a perverse incentive for them to lay roads that will require lots of maintenance? Call me a cynic if you like but private companies seem to see the public purse as an easy cash cow and right now I have no confidence that my council tax is being spent wisely

Edited March 13, 2017 by Mogster
Can't spell

[Detetcive 10]

So more disruption which wouldn't be needed if the work had been done well, and the point still remains that these repairs will need to be paid for - by whom? I would love to know what the commercial arrangements are for this. If Amey are getting paid for maintenance as well as resurfacing, perhaps there is a perverse incentive for them to lay roads that will require lots of maintenance? Call me a cynic if you like but private companies seem to see the public purse as an easy cash cow and right now I have no confidence that my council tax is being spent wisely

 

Could I suggest you report these road to SCC? If they have already been done, this is clearly unacceptable however, the road up to Crookes for example is not finished and you may have been on a bit yet to be re-surfaced.

[Longcol 602]

So more disruption which wouldn't be needed if the work had been done well, and the point still remains that these repairs will need to be paid for - by whom? I would love to know what the commercial arrangements are for this. If Amey are getting paid for maintenance as well as resurfacing, perhaps there is a perverse incentive for them to lay roads that will require lots of maintenance? Call me a cynic if you like but private companies seem to see the public purse as an easy cash cow and right now I have no confidence that my council tax is being spent wisely

 

It's a fixed price contract over 25 years to replace and maintain roads so it is in Amey's financial interest to get the work done properly in the first instance so they don't incur maintenance costs.

[Mogster 10]

It's a fixed price contract over 25 years to replace and maintain roads so it is in Amey's financial interest to get the work done properly in the first instance so they don't incur maintenance costs.

 

Really? my even more cynical side would point out that whatever legal entity Amey have created to deliver this contract could fold, leaving us with a mess. Wouldn't be the first time something like this has happened. However I am slightly reassured by this

Edited March 13, 2017 by Mogster

[Planner1 438]

So more disruption which wouldn't be needed if the work had been done well, and the point still remains that these repairs will need to be paid for - by whom? I would love to know what the commercial arrangements are for this. If Amey are getting paid for maintenance as well as resurfacing, perhaps there is a perverse incentive for them to lay roads that will require lots of maintenance? Call me a cynic if you like but private companies seem to see the public purse as an easy cash cow and right now I have no confidence that my council tax is being spent wisely

 

There are many reasons why surfacing might fail. Problems with the materials can occur for example.

 

Amey sub-contract the surfacing work to specialist contractors, so if there is any problem with the material or workmanship they will most certainly be able to have redress on the suppliers.

 

As others have said, the council pay a fixed annual amount, for which Amey:

• carry out the initial "core investment" work, to resurface roads and footways and replace street furniture
  
• maintain the city's highways infrastructure for 25 years to the specified standard
  

 

If Amey use materials / techniques which mean that the surfacing / infrastructure deteriorates and needs attention more quickly than planned, it is their problem and any work necessary is carried out at their cost.

 

---------- Post added 13-03-2017 at 14:04 ----------

 

Really? my even more cynical side would point out that whatever legal entity Amey have created to deliver this contract could fold, leaving us with a mess. Wouldn't be the first time something like this has happened. However I am slightly reassured by this

 

Amey carry out similar contracts in other places, if they folded the company set up to service the Sheffield contract and walked away, their reputation would be in tatters and it would not bode well for any future bids elsewhere.

[sheffandy 33]

 

Amey carry out similar contracts in other places, if they folded the company set up to service the Sheffield contract and walked away, their reputation would be in tatters and it would not bode well for any future bids elsewhere.

 

As opposed to the bright shiny reputation that they currently have in Sheffield?

[vincentb 10]

Amey carry out similar contracts in other places, if they folded the company set up to service the Sheffield contract and walked away, their reputation would be in tatters and it would not bode well for any future bids elsewhere.

 

I'd like to think so - but when Stagecoach just walked away from the East Coast Mainline rail franchise, it doesn't seem to have set them back for future contracts, sadly.

[Robin-H 11]

There are many reasons why surfacing might fail. Problems with the materials can occur for example.

 

Amey sub-contract the surfacing work to specialist contractors, so if there is any problem with the material or workmanship they will most certainly be able to have redress on the suppliers.

 

As others have said, the council pay a fixed annual amount, for which Amey:

• carry out the initial "core investment" work, to resurface roads and footways and replace street furniture
  
• maintain the city's highways infrastructure for 25 years to the specified standard
  

 

If Amey use materials / techniques which mean that the surfacing / infrastructure deteriorates and needs attention more quickly than planned, it is their problem and any work necessary is carried out at their cost.

 

---------- Post added 13-03-2017 at 14:04 ----------

 

 

Amey carry out similar contracts in other places, if they folded the company set up to service the Sheffield contract and walked away, their reputation would be in tatters and it would not bode well for any future bids elsewhere.

 

Hmm. A few places seem to be getting out of contracts with AMEY early..

 

https://www.constructionnews.co.uk/markets/sectors/roads/exclusive-highways-england-looks-to-replace-amey-on-400m-contracts/10015283.article

 

"Amey will be replaced on Area 6 (covering East Anglia) and Area 8 (covering Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire and parts of Suffolk) next March two years earlier than expected."

 

http://www.letsrecycle.com/news/latest-news/peterborough-proposes-mutual-end-to-23-year-amey-contract/

 

"Peterborough city council has proposed terminating its 23-year waste collections contract with Amey in what has been described as a ‘mutual’ agreement with the firm, in a bid to save around £100,000 per year."

 

http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-News/amey-loses-lu-maintenance-contract-after-cost-concerns

 

"Maintenance work on key London Underground lines will be moved back in-house after concerns about the cost of its contract with Amey.

Transport for London (TfL) announced today that it will move maintenance on the Jubilee, Northern and Piccadilly lines in-house at the end of 2017, the earliest date possible."

 

The claims and counterclaims between Birmingham Council and AMEY shouldn't have done their reputation much good either.

 

http://www.transport-network.co.uk/Birmingham-and-Amey-locked-in-claim-and-counterclaim/11522

[Mogster 10]

Sounds like Amey are overdue for a bit of Corporate restructuring, a name change and some rebranding

[nightrider 13]

The contractor is responsible for maintaining the roads for the next 25 years so don't worry.

 

So I take it doing it badly N times is cheaper than doing it properly once or twice?

 

---------- Post added 13-03-2017 at 18:43 ----------

 

There are many reasons why surfacing might fail. Problems with the materials can occur for example.

 

Amey sub-contract the surfacing work to specialist contractors, so if there is any problem with the material or workmanship they will most certainly be able to have redress on the suppliers.

 

As others have said, the council pay a fixed annual amount, for which Amey:

• carry out the initial "core investment" work, to resurface roads and footways and replace street furniture
  
• maintain the city's highways infrastructure for 25 years to the specified standard
  

 

If Amey use materials / techniques which mean that the surfacing / infrastructure deteriorates and needs attention more quickly than planned, it is their problem and any work necessary is carried out at their cost.

 

 

Ok, but its still not a great situation because it causes more disruption to people who find roads being closed yet again, or having their cars towed when work is suddenly done at short notice (as happened to me).