Doesn't seem to make alot of difference now if you do your own gas work. The risk of injury and destroying your house is small fry compared to that of Transco. Not a good example to set to the rest of us!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4184962.stm

[quote author=Timmo  link=1125096923/0#0 date=1125096923]Doesn't seem to make alot of difference now if you do your own gas work. The risk of injury and destroying your house is small fry compared to that of Transco. Not a good example to set to the rest of us!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4184962.stm [/quote]

Unless you know the facts Timmo,  

You have no idea of the size or scale of the gas network in this country, if they get it 90% right all the time then they have done well.

I hope they appeal and win.

whilst it is an emotive topic in Scotland, I do wonder if the Jury found Transco guilty on the Evidence or Guilty via some sense of "Stuff the big company, people died and someone is to blame".

I think that Transco cannot be held responsible for this though. There records would have been inherited from the old British Gas Distribution Arm, and unless they did up every foot of gas main in the nation, they have to trust that those records are accurate.

Further, with regards the leak, unless it is reported to them, they are not psychics as I understand Transco.

In my experience of the company, if you do report a leak they are round like a rocket, no messing about, and any leak so found is repaired without delay, however if they do not know about the leak, thay cannot repair it.

I too hope they appeal and win.

Well from that last Daily Record report it seems Transco did know this pipe was leaky in the past and was of a metal that was prone to failure.

It seems strange that AFTER the explosion, Transco replaced all 1500 miles of this type of pipe.

"The pipe involved was made of a type of cast iron known as ductile iron. It had leaked several times since it was laid in 1973 but had not been replaced.

Transco knew as far back as 1988 that ductile iron pipes could fail in certain types of soil. Bosses said they had a programme to replace such pipes.

But prosecutor Frank Mulholland QC said the amount of work the company actually did was "derisory".

He told the jury: "You might well think that the driving force behind Transco's approach was money rather than safety.

"This was an accident waiting to happen. Tragically and unnecessarily it was the Findlay family who ended up paying the price."

Transco made profits of £390million, on a turnover of £2.2billion, in the year to March 2005.

In the three years after the Findlays were killed, Transco replaced all known sections of ductile iron pipe in Britain - a total of some 1500miles.

But Lord Carloway said the company should have acted much earlier. He added: "Substantial sections of the public were exposed to significant danger from corroded and corroding ductile mains in close proximity to their homes and workplaces."

The court heard that before the explosion, Transco had no effective policies for the use, inspection or maintenance of ductile iron pipes."

I can't see how you can defend Transco on this one.  Another example of a big company looking at the balance sheet rather than the maintenance programme.

So you're saying that the Judge and Jury got it wrong?

After 24 weeks listening to evidence there was a unanimous vote by the jury.

What's the point of a court case then?

Scruff how f###### old are you?
Everyone who is called to jury service is automatically excused for the next 7 years.
By my calculation you must be at least 158 Years old - perhaps that's why you know so much about everything .

[quote author=JerryD  link=1125096923/0#6 date=1125166468]

 Another example of a big company looking at the balance sheet rather than the maintenance programme.

[/quote]

dont know if it applies in this case but big companys are known to do finacial risk assesments

as in if its cheaper to pay out neglegence claims than make things safer they take this road
this is why i think taking executives  to court is a good idea its amazing how much it focuses the mind and alters the priorities away from share holders and towards safety