Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

CAMDEN OWES£1M AFTER DEAL COLLAPSES

  • Comment
A private finance initiative scheme has collapsed leaving Camden LBC with a£1 million bill. ...
A private finance initiative scheme has collapsed leaving Camden LBC with a £1 million bill.

The council says it was forced to pull out of the deal, designed to supply heating to 3,000 homes, because it was let down by its private partner, Utilicom.

The company argues it was not happy with the proposed penalty Camden was proposing if the combined heat and power system broke down.

Camden's losses stem from preliminary work done to upgrade the existing systems.

The failure of the deal is likely to raise major concerns among councils exploring the potential of private sector partnerships to upgrade heating systems for their tenants.

Camden began work on the scheme with another company, Citigen, in the early 1990s. It pulled out of the deal after a takeover and Camden asked Utilicom, Citigen's former parent company, to take on the deal.

Utilicom then changed the terms of the deal. This, according to a council report, 'made the package less attractive to the council'. The council says attempts to overcome differences were then 'hampered by Utilicom's unwillingness/inability to resolve them'.

Camden says there were several sticking points, including suspension of contractual rights in the first six months of the scheme, a cap on liabilities and an extension of the period under which the council should pay a fixed fee for heat supply from five to 10 years.

The council report points to a credit rating study by Dunn & Bradstreet which showed Utilicom to be a 'significant risk'. In addition, the council cites the uncertainty surrounding partnerships with the private sector thrown-up by the Allerdale judgment.

But Utilicom chief executive Simon Woodward said the problem boiled down to the company's proposal to put a cap on liquidated damages.

Under the proposals, Utilicom would lose revenue and also face a penalty if the heating system failed.

The company said the cap was a six-figure sum and was 'in excess of the largest failure the council had experienced'.

Mr Woodward said the cap was so high that if it had been reached the council would have been entitled to take court proceedings to terminate the contract.

He maintained that the company was 'financially robust' and pointed to a 10-year-old deal with Southampton City Council as proof of its ability to make projects work.

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.