Councillor Holborn introduced
Councillor Richard Greening, Chair of the London Borough of
Islington’s Policy & Performance Scrutiny Committee, who
was leading the London-wide scrutiny process of which this
commission meeting was a part. Councillor Greening explained
that:
His committee
instigated its scrutiny of the causes and effects of water main
bursts following a major incident in Upper Street in December 2016
which occurred when a 36in trunk main burst. Many residents and
businesses had been affected and were now going through the
difficult process of attempting to recover their homes and
businesses
The flood was
preceded by a burst on the same main in 2005
The main had now been
re-lined but there were questions over why this did not happen
earlier given the history. This seemed to be a pattern across
London and there were questions over how maintenance and investment
in the network were prioritised
A meeting with the
Greater London Assembly (GLA) Environment Committee was planned in
June to bring together the findings of the various boroughs taking
part in the scrutiny with that committee’s own
investigations, with a view to producing a report with
recommendations aimed at securing improvements
Lambeth’s
experiences in relation to the Herne Hill flood in 2013 and
repeated incidents at Leigham Vale
could add value to the scrutiny process, particularly in relation
to aftercare (such as clean-up operations, communication with
affected parties, the circumstances surrounding goodwill payments
and compensation, and the processing of insurance
claims)
Councillor Holborn introduced
Thames Water’s representatives and thanked them for their
cooperation in producing a report for the commission and attending
the meeting to answer questions.
Nigel Dyer (Infrastructure
Alliance Chief Executive Officer), Alex Nickson (Water Resources & Growth Lead), Hilary
Murgatroyd (Communications), Sarah
Hurcomb (South London General Manager),
and Mark Mathews (Local and Regional Government Liaison Manager)
introduced the agenda report and stated that:
Thames Water (TW)
were grateful for the opportunity to participate in the meeting and
would try to answer questions as openly and honestly as possible.
They were happy to report back to the commission at a later date on
any issues which could not be answered at the meeting
TW apologised
sincerely for the disruption caused by the water main bursts. It
was accepted that such incidents could be devastating to
people’s lives and it was recognised that TW needed to do
things differently
By way of an update
on the situation with regards to Leigham Vale, two events had occurred in quick
succession (on 15 October 2016 and 16 December 2016) and 25
properties had been affected, including six businesses. The pipe
which burst was laid in 1880 and had a diameter of 21in. Re-lining
works were being carried out but five homes were still unoccupied
and it was important to understand why this was. 14 insurance
claims were registered in relation to the October incident, with
ten outstanding and a reserve of £300k held. The December
incident gave rise to 41 claims, of which 31 remained open; in
excess of £360k had already been paid and a further
£630k reserve was held. TW were unable to give details of
individual claims but would make general points with regards to the
insurance situation. Where claims were yet to be settled, this
could be because people hadn’t yet submitted a schedule of
loss
Insurance claims in
Islington were taking a similar amount of time to those in
Leigham Vale but the incident was
larger in scale with around 130 properties affected
The spate of bursts
in late 2016 had had a significant impact on TW but also on the
communities of London
TW were supportive of
the joint scrutiny process and aimed to put things right going
forward
The Trunk Mains
Forensic Review (also referred to as the Cuttill report) was now published on the Thames
Water website at
https://corporate.thameswater.co.uk/about-us/investing-in-our-network/trunk-mains-review
. This was commissioned by TW’s current Chief Executive when
he started in post and was conducted by an independent third party,
Paul Cuttill OBE, in order to give TW
an objective account of the issues and deficiencies
The remit of the
forensic review was to assess four things: the cause of each of the
major bursts which occurred in 2016 (including whether there was a
common underlying cause); the impact of each burst (including who
and what was affected, how badly, and what the costs were); the
immediate response to the incidents; and whether it was necessary
to change the network configuration to prevent further
...
view the full minutes text for item 3.
PDF 133 KB