Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with LinkedIn Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Photo

SIC HQ - Whitehoose


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#21 brecken

brecken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts

Posted 06 March 2017 - 09:47 AM

You can't make this crap up.....

 

http://www.shetlandt...ters-in-lerwick

 

UHA Committee are gonna have to invest in a bigger Bill, or they're never gonna get it all on this year.

 

 

Looks likely we are going to have to pay to fix the Councils fock up with their sharn-Hoose and again nobody is accountable, no completion certificate what next? Common procedure my ass maybe for incompetent idiots!
Time somebody gave that corporate management team a kick up the ass and started to make them accountable, if it wasn’t for the cost of their catalogue of fock-ups we’d comfortably be able to provide a high level of public services with the moneys allocated by the Scottish Government.
Maybe we should have kept Dave Clark.


Edited by brecken, 06 March 2017 - 09:57 AM.

  • Rasmie, Frances144, waarigeo and 2 others like this

#22 Wheelsup

Wheelsup

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 347 posts

Posted 06 March 2017 - 02:57 PM

it's the lack of honesty that troubles me. what else are they covering up.


  • Frances144 likes this

#23 tooney1

tooney1

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 201 posts

Posted 06 March 2017 - 03:50 PM

So do we know who's fault it was yet - building contractor or structural engineer?



#24 brecken

brecken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts

Posted 06 March 2017 - 08:26 PM

it's the lack of honesty that troubles me. what else are they covering up.

Not really a strong point honesty and clarity with the SIC more likely to get a load of waffle and a pack of lies.

And I dread to think what they've covered up over the years, they won't even answer there freedom of information requests so hard to find out anything!


  • George. likes this

#25 brecken

brecken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts

Posted 24 March 2017 - 09:46 AM

You can't make this crap up.....

 

http://www.shetlandt...ters-in-lerwick

 

UHA Committee are gonna have to invest in a bigger Bill, or they're never gonna get it all on this year.

What the 'f''eck'!

 

7 months on and nothing happening, no repairs started yet, but the councils working as hard they can, sound about right for this council!
Can’t tell us what the problem is!
Can’t tell us when it’ll be fixed!
Can’t tell us how much it’ll cost!
Can’t tell us fock-all, don’t want to tell us fock-all! Unless of course it’s a pile of Sharn, typical SIC
SIC still paying the lease and liable for the repairs, I dread to think what this balls-up will end up costing us!

https://soundcloud.c...d-of-march-2017


Edited by brecken, 24 March 2017 - 09:50 AM.


#26 Ghostrider

Ghostrider

    1crankymofo

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8992 posts

Posted 27 October 2017 - 05:36 PM

.....and in true SIC fashion, lets pay a cool £ 1/2 Million plus for absolutely sweet F.A!

 

http://www.shetlandt...il-headquarters

 

Then, there's the cost of the "repairs" themselves to add on..... :???:

 

Hiring a couple of big dozers and shoving the lot over the edge to extend the North Ness a few yards would have been much better and cheaper all round.

 

I wonder if they were hoping this news would get a big buried under the "good news" of the "two sheds" AHS being open for its first day of business....No chance! More like it makes folk wonder how long the "two sheds" will last before they're in the same boat.


Edited by Ghostrider, 27 October 2017 - 05:38 PM.

  • suuusssiiieee, brecken and LGR PATONEXCHANGE like this

#27 magnie ii

magnie ii

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 60 posts

Posted 27 October 2017 - 05:52 PM

.....and in true SIC fashion, lets pay a cool £ 1/2 Million plus for absolutely sweet F.A!

 

http://www.shetlandt...il-headquarters

 

Then, there's the cost of the "repairs" themselves to add on..... :???:

 

Hiring a couple of big dozers and shoving the lot over the edge to extend the North Ness a few yards would have been much better and cheaper all round.

 

I wonder if they were hoping this news would get a big buried under the "good news" of the "two sheds" AHS being open for its first day of business....No chance! More like it makes folk wonder how long the "two sheds" will last before they're in the same boat.

 

nothing changes new council but just as much of a cock up



#28 Urabug

Urabug

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 699 posts

Posted 27 October 2017 - 06:38 PM

With an extortionate electricity and water bill for an empty building,I think it must have been converted into a greenhouse and they are growing weed   :oops:  



#29 fionajohn

fionajohn

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 370 posts

Posted 27 October 2017 - 06:38 PM

the biggest problem as far as i can see with the whitehouse isit was built by contractors whos heads belong to the goat club ...they want as much money as they can screw out of the project ...the sis membership are also mostly goat club members so us the gullible public will fill their banks ....we cant have a falling out of bretheren can we   tut tut ..power rules 



#30 suuusssiiieee

suuusssiiieee

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 310 posts

Posted 27 October 2017 - 07:00 PM

I'm maybe thick but what obligation does the SIC have to keep paying the rent? Surely as landlords SLAP are breaching the tenancy agreement by not providing a suitable building in a good state of repair.

 

I hope the legal eagles no doubt on a hefty wedge themselves have a way of getting that money returned in the future.

 

To think of care homes & schools having their budgets slashed, to chuck £536,000 away is nothing short of sickening.

 

As to the new AHS it was certainly thrown up in a rush so lets hope it doesn't start falling apart bit by bit in the years to come.


Edited by suuusssiiieee, 27 October 2017 - 07:01 PM.


#31 Ghostrider

Ghostrider

    1crankymofo

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8992 posts

Posted 27 October 2017 - 07:12 PM

With an extortionate electricity and water bill for an empty building,I think it must have been converted into a greenhouse and they are growing weed   :oops:  

 

Helping themselves to as much of the product as they fancied would explain much of what 'Managers' get up to.


  • fionajohn and Urabug like this

#32 brecken

brecken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts

Posted 27 October 2017 - 07:28 PM

I'm maybe thick but what obligation does the SIC have to keep paying the rent? Surely as landlords SLAP are breaching the tenancy agreement by not providing a suitable building in a good state of repair.

 

I hope the legal eagles no doubt on a hefty wedge themselves have a way of getting that money returned in the future.

 

To think of care homes & schools having their budgets slashed, to chuck £536,000 away is nothing short of sickening.

 

As to the new AHS it was certainly thrown up in a rush so lets hope it doesn't start falling apart bit by bit in the years to come.

Think you might find it's the council's own legal services department who overseen this lease agreement that now leaves them in this predicament without a leg to stand on, unless of course SLAP is feeling charitable! Another classic case of SIC management incompetence, More Turkey than Eagle I’m afraid! Certainly in the IQ department anyway, would be nice for once for someone to take some responsibility for their actions!


Edited by brecken, 27 October 2017 - 07:52 PM.

  • suuusssiiieee, fionajohn, Urabug and 1 other like this

#33 Suffererof1crankymofo

Suffererof1crankymofo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 675 posts

Posted 28 October 2017 - 02:58 PM

You wouldn't put 10 6ft marine tanks on your floorboards and expect things to be hunky dory.  Likewise, if the rumours are true, you wouldn't put a load of filing cabinets or a fancy filing system on a floor without reinforcing it ... in other words, if the Tenant (the SIC) caused the damage, they would be under an obligation to pay the rent for whatever period was stated in the lease whilst repairs were being undertaken and might be liable too for the cost of said repairs.  One would hope they have had an independent structural survey done and also ascertained if they have any course of redress and also if there is a break clause in the lease.



#34 Ghostrider

Ghostrider

    1crankymofo

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8992 posts

Posted 28 October 2017 - 03:06 PM

 

I'm maybe thick but what obligation does the SIC have to keep paying the rent? Surely as landlords SLAP are breaching the tenancy agreement by not providing a suitable building in a good state of repair.

 

I hope the legal eagles no doubt on a hefty wedge themselves have a way of getting that money returned in the future.

 

To think of care homes & schools having their budgets slashed, to chuck £536,000 away is nothing short of sickening.

 

As to the new AHS it was certainly thrown up in a rush so lets hope it doesn't start falling apart bit by bit in the years to come.

Think you might find it's the council's own legal services department who overseen this lease agreement that now leaves them in this predicament without a leg to stand on, unless of course SLAP is feeling charitable! Another classic case of SIC management incompetence, More Turkey than Eagle I’m afraid! Certainly in the IQ department anyway, would be nice for once for someone to take some responsibility for their actions!

 

 

You get what you pay for I'm afraid, like in all public services. Lawyers etc in the real world are paid on productivity and results, so only the lazy and incompetent are content to churn out the mind-numbingly mundane tat a pubic body generates day after day, for a flat rate salary which they'll get regardless, even if they do nothing productive or worthwhile at all.

 

The few half decent ones public bodies manage to recruit early in their careers soon get sick of it, or get driven out by brain dead anal types senior to them, and move on to work in the private sector.

 

Whatever you think of privatization, there's much to be said for public bodies hiring in professional services from the private sector, who are hired, paid and fired according to competence and productivity only, rather than relying on an in house team the ruling core of which are inevitably the incompetent, unambitious deadbeats of their profession.


  • brecken likes this

#35 Urabug

Urabug

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 699 posts

Posted 24 January 2018 - 07:59 PM

"FAKE NEWS" it was safe all the time ! 

 

Now will we see a staff vacancy appear anytime soon ?


  • gafynandrew and brecken like this

#36 gafynandrew

gafynandrew

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 177 posts

Posted 17 February 2018 - 05:46 PM

Lets see your proof of that......

the biggest problem as far as i can see with the whitehouse isit was built by contractors whos heads belong to the goat club ...they want as much money as they can screw out of the project ...the sis membership are also mostly goat club members so us the gullible public will fill their banks ....we cant have a falling out of bretheren can we   tut tut ..power rules 


  • Frances144 and whalsa like this

#37 George.

George.

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1116 posts

Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:02 AM

Look what the council are considering doing before they reopen their North Ness headquarters. They're looking to revamp the place when it's only a few years old, and it's been closed for two years because somebody got it wrong and built an unusable building. They haven't yet dealt with the idiot that got it wrong yet.
 
Aren't they finding a good use for the council taxes that we pay in year after year, month after month and week after week.
 
Can they justify wasting the money tht we pay in? Do they call it the Whitehouse or the #hitehouse?
 


#38 suuusssiiieee

suuusssiiieee

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 310 posts

Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:59 AM

I assume the landlord will be paying?

 

If not this is chucking good money after bad.



#39 tooney1

tooney1

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 201 posts

Posted 23 May 2018 - 11:04 AM

Another seemingly unjustifiable cost that adds insult to injury to the whole debacle (what was wrong with the existing reception?)



#40 George.

George.

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1116 posts

Posted 23 May 2018 - 01:11 PM

I assume the landlord will be paying?

 

The landlord is Shetland Leasing & Property Developments Ltd, who are owned by the Charitable Trust. The Trust used to be part of the council but now are supposedly seperate, even though there are some councillors kept in as trustees. This makes me ask, if the council have such a strong link to the landlord of the *hitehouse, who is really paying the bill at the end of the day? You, me and everybody else through payment of council tax perhaps? 


Edited by George., 23 May 2018 - 01:12 PM.

  • suuusssiiieee likes this