0 0
Read Time:3 Minute, 25 Second

An overview of the issues Third Parties (drivers, fleets, hauliers or their insurers) need to be aware of when presented costs for damage (collisions, fires or spills) b Kier of BBMM (there are still matters outstanding):


Area 9


07/2014 onward, Kier were to use a simple process: ‘cost’ + percentage (25.29%) uplift = £maximum (Appendix A).  But both contractor and Authority kept the process secret.  Instead, they used their own methodology and whilst they claim it was contract compliant, it was not – £2,700 for 2 operatives in a van attending an incident for less than 4 hours … £675/hour!

    • The cost should have been less than £95/hour.  We put a stop to that.

10/2015, Kier charged £70+/hour for an operative.  The rate was to have been about £30/hour.  Additionally, after 5pm of a weekday, Kier added a 50% uplift to the rate i.e. over £100/hour, of a weekend the rate was double, over £140/hour.  Kier stated they paid operatives the uplift, operatives said not and even overtime was at flat rate.

For years we asked the National Highways for the rates Kier charged them.  Repeatedly the Authority said ‘HELD‘, but ‘sensitive’.

12/2018, we overcame the ‘sensitive’ obstruction and awaited the rates.  But …

01/2019, National Highways said ‘NOT HELD‘!

We demonstrated this was false, they were HELD and handed over.  Figures existed since 2015, were not sensitive but never used to bill a Third Party!  Why did National Highways:

  • allow Kier to bill the public (the Authority are to serve) using contract non-complaint, profiteering processes?
  • not tell Kier ‘abide by the contract’ but instead:
  • 2020, change the contract, remove the public-protective process (Appendix A) and watch Kier act oddly*; bill Third Parties more than they are charged?

*’It would be odd if a tortfeasor (Third Party) was liable to Highways England for diminution in value of a damaged chattel in one sum if sued by Highways England itself and in a different sum if sued by Highways England via BBMM (a contractor).’ para. 25 HHJ Godsmark

KPMG audited Kier in 2018 and reported, contrary to the Authority’s 2016 audit, bills were being inflated.  We had explained this to KPMG (transcript) .  In 2020, a judge recorded:

‘In summary, on this issue his (a Kier employee) evidence was to the effect that the costs calculated for the purposes of the claim did include uplifts for which he was unable to find authority within the contract’ para. 36 HHJ Harrison

Kier also apply their ‘schedule of rates’ (KSoR) in other Areas such as TfL (London) and Birmingham.  Rates are just one aspect of a claim that results in excess sums being demanded – for assistance with such matters, please email Claims Management & Adjusting Ltd.

A contractor manager recently stated Kier had reimbursed those affected in 2015.  We had them correct this statement’; they only re-priced outstanding matters. 1,000’s are owed £1,000’s.

The same manager also acknowledged they were responsible for the charging methodology.  What a short memory they have; in 2015 they sought to convince us the ‘bomb’ of a process was set by a ‘mathematical genius’, a manager who had left and joined a competitor!


Area 10


2012 to 04/2019 (end of contract), BBMM charged Third Parties using CECA rates (not designed for the environment) whilst billing the Authority using much lower figures. They were regularly challenged about this.

2018, BBMM convinced Courts their rates, charged to National Highways, should not be used to price claims against Third Parties because the figures were ‘subsidized’, ‘artificial’ and ‘preferential’.

‘… the £10,000 + repair rates are subsidised in part by the lump sum payment in the sense that I have set out above.
They are to that extent artificial in that they do not stand alone as representing the price of repair.
They are in effect preferential rates …’ para. 32 HHJ Godsmark

But this was untrue, Courts misled.  Furthermore, whilst the Authority state there is no schedule of rates, this too is false.


It is apparent Third Parties are owed £millions.

Happy
Happy
0 %
Sad
Sad
0 %
Excited
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
Angry
0 %
Surprise
Surprise
0 %

Average Rating

5 Star
0%
4 Star
0%
3 Star
0%
2 Star
0%
1 Star
0%

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.