Upload a photo Upload a video Upload an mp3 Upload an event

News


Shopkeeper Will Not Receive Compensation

Wednesday May 15 2013


We Are Barnsley We Are Barnsley


A SHOPKEEPER whose business lost £4,500 because roadworks cut off his shop has found out that he will not be entitled to compensation.

Stephen Roebuck, who owns the Paws 'n' Fins pet shop on Hill Street in Elsecar, has been told by Network Rail that his claim for compensation was unsuccessful.

According to Network Rail - which closed Hill Street for nine weeks last year while work was done on the railway bridge - compensation can only be paid out if property damage or personal injury has occurred.

Stephen said that he had only been told about the road closure a week before it took place.

He said his yearly profits had gone down by 26 per cent - losing roughly £4,500.

Stephen said 95 per cent of his customers come to the shop in cars, and with the roadworks it meant cars would have to travel an extra three miles there and back.

He said: "If I had fallen down a hole then yes, they would give me compensation, but they're not going to.

"Four out of the nine weeks it was closed they didn't even work on the bridge."

Stephen was sent a letter from Network Rail, explaining the reason for the decision not to compensate him but he's not going to appeal it.

A spokesman for Network Rail, said: "Mr Roebuck's loss is wholly financial and he hasn't suffered any injury or damages, therefore on this occasion we have no offer to make.

"We can only compensate if a contract is in place between the company and Network Rail and as there was not this time, the claim was repudiated."

Leave a comment
comments powered by Disqus
3 Showing 3 comments

Reply Posted by Rothschild on Wednesday May 15 2013 at 10:50
Thanks network rail, I would assume then that I can get on any train and not pay, and as the loss would be purely financial i owe no recompense...?

Reply Posted by Mick on Wednesday May 15 2013 at 14:43
The closure was advertised for a long time before it happened. And while I am sympathetic to people affected of course it isn't possible to pay compo in situations like this. It would be a legal minefield & create an army of accountants & lawyers paid for by higher customer costs & the taxpayer.

-unless the shops takings are the same every week & detailed weekly accounts kept then it would be hard to show how much loss of earnings was down to the closure.
- how do you define who can claim compensation? How close to the closure does a business have to be, to be affected?
- can private individuals claim the extra fuel costs and cost of there time for following the diversion several times a day or week?
- do we really expect a compensation culture where you can claim every time a road is closed? What would be the qualifying criteria? - a day, a week, a month? When you purchase or rent a property (business or residential) it doesn't come with a guarantee that the roads around it will never change. A one-way system or a by-pass can change a place dramatically, some will win, some will lose.


Reply Posted by les on Thursday May 16 2013 at 17:43
This is why you have to have money put by
for a rainy day .
A shop is like any investment it has good times and it has bad .
If the owner lost 26% of his annual turnover in 9 weeks i think as there are 52 weeks in a year there is a mathematical
difference.
Not just of the bridge closure.
How much do shops and stores lose through a motorway closure through an accident or one of hundreds of reasons.
At least you should be gratefull that pets werent starving cos there are 2 more pet suppliers within a mile