Tanya Ivackovic vs CEC: Case Two – The Council Concedes

Case 2 – Render

CEC Settle prior to court:
£1,738.68 refunded by City of Edinburgh Council on 4 June 2014

This case centered around the fact that the original Notice was for a repair of existing render areas only. Action proceeded to re-render the entire gable when it was evident that the Ground and Second Floor levels were the only areas which had an original render covering and that the mid area (across and for the full height of the 1st Floor level) had no original render application whatever.

In addition Action proceeded to strip off and replace lead flashings and cut back projecting quoin stones neither of which work items were described on the Statutory Notice.

Having raised this Second action it will come as no surprise that CEC adopted the same delaying tactics to avoid court action but again as the certainty of a court appearance loomed they conceded and initially made payment to me alone, since I was the person who had raised the action.

This was a cynical departure from CEC’S attitude to my 1st successful claim in respect of the water overcharge which when conceded they made payment to all the co-owners. Following conceding this 2nd overcharge there was a deliberate attempt to avoid reimbursing my co-owners with at one stage CEC suggesting that if co-owners felt they were entitled to the same reimbursement they should raise an individual court action.

After much correspondence CEC were persuaded to rightfully reimburse the other owners.

NO EXPLANATION WAS EVER GIVEN AS TO WHO INSTRUCTED WORKS TO BE CARRIED OUT THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED ON THE STATUTORY NOTICE AND ALSO WHO INSTRUCTED RENDER TO BE APPLIED TO AN AREA WHICH HAD NOT PREVIOUSLY HAD A RENDER APPLICATION – AGAIN NO APOLOGY.

Action were again paid for all this additional work and this was sanctioned and approved by CEC and also by an external consultant.

Tanya Ivackovic

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *