>It requires the building to be built back to what it was prior to the fire.
Should be interesting…
It’s one of those things where it’s blatant what they did…shockingly, they’ve been held to account.
Thing is, will this cost them money? The fire was an insurance job. Will it cost more than the payout to rebuild?
Sadly, I guess that insolvency will get them off the hook
It’s basically undoable but gives the council the power to prosecute.
This seems really weird to me. The whole point of it was that it was weird because the ground had subsided, so everything was crooked. But a rebuild is just going to be a modern building that’s designed to *look* crooked, surely? They’ll have to give it proper foundations that mean that it’s safe and meets modern building standards, and then just put everything on top of that at an angle.
I have a friend who was really passionate about this, because he got married there about 5 years ago. But I just don’t see the point, personally. The owners should be prosecuted for fraud and arson, obviously; but the building itself is gone.
Will obviously never be rebuilt as a crooked pub, but then what happens?
What comes next?
Say the owners rebuild as the order forces them to do so, but they’re not obligated to open is a working pub again, so they just build an empty shell of a building closed off from the public?
I understand the need to punish people who break the law, but if the owners don’t want to use it as a pub, they can’t be forced to.
Interesting decision, of course the council are in no position to decide in criminal liability.
>Staffordshire Police is treating the blaze as arson, five men and one woman were arrested in connection with the fire and remain on bail.
I wonder what the outcome with be on the criminal side of this, even if they didn’t have permission to demolish, a burned out building surely isn’t something that would be left to stand. So it implies they did burn it down
I’ll hold my breath on that one, I’d be surprised to see it built again like for like. I can imagine a long convoluted process, companies going bankrupt to get out of it, and then the whole thing eventually running out of steam and gets forgotten
I imagine that would be a nightmare to construct. I would love to see it but doubt it actually will happen
10 comments
>It requires the building to be built back to what it was prior to the fire.
Should be interesting…
It’s one of those things where it’s blatant what they did…shockingly, they’ve been held to account.
Thing is, will this cost them money? The fire was an insurance job. Will it cost more than the payout to rebuild?
Sadly, I guess that insolvency will get them off the hook
It’s basically undoable but gives the council the power to prosecute.
This seems really weird to me. The whole point of it was that it was weird because the ground had subsided, so everything was crooked. But a rebuild is just going to be a modern building that’s designed to *look* crooked, surely? They’ll have to give it proper foundations that mean that it’s safe and meets modern building standards, and then just put everything on top of that at an angle.
I have a friend who was really passionate about this, because he got married there about 5 years ago. But I just don’t see the point, personally. The owners should be prosecuted for fraud and arson, obviously; but the building itself is gone.
Will obviously never be rebuilt as a crooked pub, but then what happens?
What comes next?
Say the owners rebuild as the order forces them to do so, but they’re not obligated to open is a working pub again, so they just build an empty shell of a building closed off from the public?
I understand the need to punish people who break the law, but if the owners don’t want to use it as a pub, they can’t be forced to.
Interesting decision, of course the council are in no position to decide in criminal liability.
>Staffordshire Police is treating the blaze as arson, five men and one woman were arrested in connection with the fire and remain on bail.
I wonder what the outcome with be on the criminal side of this, even if they didn’t have permission to demolish, a burned out building surely isn’t something that would be left to stand. So it implies they did burn it down
I’ll hold my breath on that one, I’d be surprised to see it built again like for like. I can imagine a long convoluted process, companies going bankrupt to get out of it, and then the whole thing eventually running out of steam and gets forgotten
I imagine that would be a nightmare to construct. I would love to see it but doubt it actually will happen