Calton couple awarded sink hole compensation

A couple whose home was demolished after a sinkhole appeared in their garden have been awarded £220,000 in compensation.

David O'Connor and Susan Docherty have received the sum after suing Scottish Water at the Court of Session in Edinburgh.

The pair claimed the company didn't do enough to prevent the void from opening at their property in December 2013 in Calton, Glasgow,.

The couple claimed that Scottish Water should have done more to ensure the structural integrity of a manhole close to their house.

Lawyers for Mr O'Connor and Ms Docherty argued that a water mains near to their home burst in December 2008.

Their legal team argued that the liquid which escaped from the pipe damaged the structural support for a nearby sewer and a manhole, causing the sinkhole to appear five years later.

The court heard that the couple believed Scottish Water needed to do more to ensure the structure was sound and wouldn't have caused the manhole.

Lawyers for Scottish Water claimed that the water main leak didn't contribute to the appearance of the manhole and that they had done everything in their power.

But in a judgement published at the court on Friday, judge Lady Wolffe in favour of the couple.

She wrote: "The pursuers succeed in this case."

The judgement tells of how the couple were forced to move after the presence of the sinkhole made their property uninhabitable.

Investigators who tried to establish what caused the sinkhole found that a nearby manhole had collapsed. This manhole, which was connected to a sewer, was the responsibility of Scottish Water.

This caused the couple to sue Scottish Water in the Court of Session.

In the judgement, Lady Wolffe writes of how the parties in the case had agreed that if Scottish Water had been found liable, the compensation should be set at £220,000.

She wrote: "In advancing their case, the pursuers relied principally on the 2008 event, which created two sinkholes; one in the immediate vicinity of the manhole and a second further away across a nearby railway bridge.

"They also rely on evidence of a sinkhole in the immediate vicinity of the manhole noted in November 2013.

"It was also suggested that the property was on the site of a former public house (which was likely to have had a cellar) and the possible build up of water in this cellar may have also contributed to the collapse in December 2013.

"The defenders resist the pursuers' analysis. They contend that the 2008 event was unrelated to, and had no causal connection, with the 2013 collapse.

"They advance alternative explanations for the 2013 collapse, including heavy rainfall in the month or so preceding the 2013 collapse and it is said, the poor quality generally of the land in this area."

The judgement tells of how the pursuers in the case led evidence from an expert called Neil Smith.

He concluded that water which had escaped from the mains caused the structure around the manhole and sewer to be undermined.

Lawyers for Scottish Water argued that there was large amounts of rain fall in the area in the month leading up to the appearance of the sinkhole.

They argued that they had done everything in their power to ensure that the sinkhole didn't materialise.

However, Lady Wolffe said that after examining all the evidence available in the case, she preferred the arguments advanced by the pursuers.

She wrote that the evidence showed that the leak in 2008 contributed to the appearance of the sinkhole in 2013.

She wrote: "The two incidents occurred in very close proximity to each other. The 2008 water main burst caused settlement in precisely the same location that the initial settlement in November 2013 occurred.

"The obvious explanation for this is that the two incidents were related. Mr Smith considered the coincidence between these two locations to be highly significant in demonstrating a connection between the two incidents.

"I agree. I also accept Mr Smith's evidence that it would be a remarkable coincidence indeed for the first sinkhole in November 2013 to appear in precisely the same location as the sinkhole in 2008 but that there was no causal connection.