Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:31 pm
to cut a long story short, a resident near to where i live has laid a new driveway, but ripped up the section that belongs to the parish council, and shingled it.
They seeked the parish council's permission, but before they got it , they did it anyway, and had the cheek to ask the parish council to pay.
Because they have replaced the drive with 20mm shingle, and it adjoins the highway, the parish council is not happy.
However, they claim that the contractor has put down terram, then 5" of mot, then the shingle, yet when i saw it being laid, it looked suspisciously like black plastic sheeting, not terram.
Why have they done this, and not used terram, and is it considered to be a cheap way out?
I feel that if the parish council simply removes the shingle, and tarmacs ontop of the mot, it may not be a proper job without first looking at this "terram"!
They seeked the parish council's permission, but before they got it , they did it anyway, and had the cheek to ask the parish council to pay.
Because they have replaced the drive with 20mm shingle, and it adjoins the highway, the parish council is not happy.
However, they claim that the contractor has put down terram, then 5" of mot, then the shingle, yet when i saw it being laid, it looked suspisciously like black plastic sheeting, not terram.
Why have they done this, and not used terram, and is it considered to be a cheap way out?
I feel that if the parish council simply removes the shingle, and tarmacs ontop of the mot, it may not be a proper job without first looking at this "terram"!