Pollution incident on the Anker

[Pete Marshall]

Report here

 

[Colin Gordon]

Great opportunity to see the A.T flex its muscle, yeah right, we'll see!!

 

[Pete Marshall]

Great opportunity to see the A.T flex its muscle, yeah right, we'll see!!

Can't see myself what the AT can do here. Fish Legal may be able to fund a compensation claim for any club or Riparian owner that is a member and can show a loss, in the same way as the late much lamented ACA could have done.
What is required is an investigation into the reasons this company has had two serious incidents in the last ten years. On the surface it seems that the guarantees given about run off to control incidents either were not kept or have failed Prosecution is required and hopefully not just for the leak (as the fines for that are pitiful) but for potential breeches of their licenses and H&S legislation.
A chemical spill of this nature occurring twice should be serious enough to threaten the future of the company itself.
As I said lawyers crawling around at present, so I would not want to make any allegation about the company at present..but we shall see.

 

[Colin Gordon]

Pete, I'd also say they are the wrong type of fish for the A.T to bother getting involved. Chub and roach, no chance of action.... Trout and grayling, a limited chance of action.

A white Elephant, Toothless Tiger take your pick as to which best describes the A.T, IMO.

 

[Pete Marshall]

As I am no longer a AT member I wouldn't want to comment on their effectiveness. But it is a full investigation (which is on going) is required. And if the company failed tio forfill its licences prosecution under the European Legislation as this has some teeth in that the fines can be large and the licenses the company operate to can be withdrawn. The need to be prosectuted for putting people at risk, rather than for just the damage they have done to the river. That usually makes them pay attention as the fines and costs can be very high..
The company have gone to ground at the moment. The phone calls are being screened by an agency and the MD doesn't seem to want to talk about it..unsurprisingly.

 

[Pete Marshall]

Latest on the Anker incident

Latest from the EA

I apologise for the late response. I was away for a few days. In case my colleagues did not pick up on your enquiry here is the latest information..

"The Environment Agency has been monitoring the affected stretch of the River Anker over the weekend. Latest test results show that the chemicals and pollutants have now diluted. We have also had no new reported incidents of dead fish downstream of the affected area. Normal activities can now resume on the river. Over the next few weeks we will be monitoring and assessing the long term impact of the pollution on the river environment and fish."

I am sure you will understand that we cannot discuss the investigation for legal reasons.

I have asked the following initial questions

I understand the legal implications of any investigation, but would be keen to hear about what is happening.
I understand that the company concerned in this gave certain guarantees that work would be done to prevent any leakages due to further fires. They also operate according to strict licensed conditions. Is there a prima facia case against them for breeching any conditions of their license? Who is conducting any investigation into this incident at present? When will that investigation be complete and will its results be made public.

and a instant reply

Hello Pete. I'm afraid I have no more information for you at the moment. It is far too early. However I will add you to the list of people who have asked to be kept informed if we do have anything further to add.

Our investigation is ongoing and will take as long as it takes, possibly even weeks or months. When we have completed it, the results will be considered in line with our published Enforcement and Prosecution Policy and we will consider what action, if any, to take.

You can find our Enforcement and Prosecution Policy here...
http://intranet.ea.gov/policies/48560.aspx

Best wishes

Which unfortunately contains a link to the EA Intranet..much as I would love to have access to that..I haven't ..so have asked where the document is on their main site. The document is http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/business/regulation/31851.aspx

 

[Pete Marshall]

and the company say

The company statement

Announcement Following Factory Fire​

Saturday 24th April 2010​

Abbey Metal Finishers Company Ltd Directors and Management regret to announce that, following a major factory fire during the early hours Thursday 22nd April 2010, operations for the immediate future have ceased. We are working with the emergency services and forensic investigators to gain access to the factory and assess the level of damage. Until the emergency services are satisfied that the offices and factory space are safe we are unable to assess the level of damage to customer components.
Initial site inspection on Friday 23rd April 2010 of the paintshop indicates this area has suffered little fire or smoke damage. We will review our WIP list and check all parts in this department and contact you to discuss how you wish to proceed.
At this early stage we wish to offer our genuine thanks and appreciation to the emergency services, their prompt action and professionalism contained the fire from damaging neighbouring properties.
As we develop our recovery plans and confirm time lines for action we will post news to our Amfin website: www.amfin.co.uk. We are working with our telephone provider and hope to have a new telephone switch board by Monday 26th April 2010, please note the only number available to this switch board will be: 02476 350444.
We assure you the entire Amfin team is focused on working cohesively with our OEMs and you, our customers to recover our services as quickly as time will allow.

Mike Beirns
Business Development / General Manager
Weddington Road,
Nuneaton, Warwickshire,
CV10 0AJ
Telephone 02476 350444
Mobile 07790 892320

www.amfin.co.uk