The NAC story continues to escalate, Bertie’s baby is a disaster. There is something distinctly iffy going on, and the whole truth may never come out. The SBP reported Sunday that the Center may cost upwards of €20 million to repair. Dublin Waterworld sound like a very strange organisation indeed.
Despite repeated claims that the pools in the centre were leaking “like a sieve”, it is understood that in the examination yesterday the only leaks detected were in piping in the centre. Such piping is the responsibility of Dublin Waterworld.
This examination also contradicted a report for Dublin Waterworld by engineering firm Malachy Walsh & Partners which found evidence of leaks from cracks in the pools.
While cracks were found yesterday, these were said to be dry. Such cracks were also described as a normal offshoot from the construction process. The examination also found no evidence that the building was at risk from subsidence.
Rohcon’s spokesman declined to comment on the examination, stating only that a full statement would be issued when the examination was complete.
CSID chief executive Donagh Morgan also declined to comment on the findings.
“They’re in the process of conducting investigations into the alleged defects that have been published in the media and CSID look forward to the completion of those investigations,” he said.
Minister for Sport John O’Donoghue said yesterday that the centre was not “a shambles” and added that he supported CSID’s legal action. “The impression has been created that there is some kind of a shambles of a building up in Dublin falling down and leaking 5,000 gallons of water every now and then. This is to my knowledge untrue.”
One thought on “Firm disputes claims of leaks at aquatic centre”
I can’t comment on this, from a cockeyed legal point of view, as the comment being published exposes me to the grippers too.
News papers have lawyers on retainer, who know enought to contact their old master who is an acknowledged expert, and peruse all before publication grilling the journo about how to prove etc before ok ing the publication.
Serious and to a non-lawyer boring stuff. Not to someone whose assets are in the wringer.
NB republishing what has been said in a news paper ensures only that you will have stimulating company when in the dock…
Comments are closed.