
Water company leaves ‘asphalt scar' after digging up pavement
A water company left a 12ft-long black asphalt 'scar' after digging up part of a £14 million pavement.
Thames Water dug up the thin section of expensive granite blocks in St James's, London, to access pipework beneath - but then replaced them with a streak of black tarmac - two years ago.
Since then, the Labour-run City of Westminster Council has failed to force Thames Water to restore the paving, leaving the area tarnished by the black 'street scar' since July 2023.
The granite paving was laid as part of a £14 million pedestrianisation project in 2014, and utility firms are required to replace damaged areas with 'like-for-like' materials within six months if they dig up a road. But they only face a £2,500 one-off fine if they don't.
Nicholas Boys Smith, the director of Create Streets and a former director of the Office for Place quango, said the scar was a 'modest but meaningful' example of the 'failing British state'.
He told The Telegraph. 'We've all seen them: the freshly laid paving, the newly laid granite setts: within months, weeks or even days, a slice or a square of them is thoughtlessly pulled up, cracked, smashed or thrown away and replaced with a scar of tarmac which lingers for months or years.
''I am authority', the scar says. 'I don't care about you. Your neighbourhood, your home does not matter and by implication, YOU don't matter'.'
Call to increase fines
Mr Boys Smith previously called for the fine to be raised to £10,000 for every month that goes by before restoration.
Cllr Tim Mitchell, a Conservative councillor for St James's, said the authority faced a 'constant battle' with utilities to get them to return paving to its original condition after repairs were made.
'I would normally expect that it would be properly made good within 12 months,' he said. 'But it hasn't been.'
He added that he's now 'reluctant to approve really fancy schemes for high-quality paving' without first investigating 'what might be likely to be ripped up'.
'That said, the council should really keep tabs on the utilities and they have the powers to require them to go back,' he said. 'It is absolutely frustrating because the council has to spend a lot of time chasing utilities to come back and smarten things up.'
A spokesman for the council said Thames Water had agreed to install new paving in place of the 'street scar', but that it had not yet done so.
'The utility works were carried out by Thames Water,' the spokesman said. 'The council subsequently complained about the state of repair and Thames Water have now agreed to pay for the stone paving to be restored to its original condition.'
It is understood that the repair works are due to be carried out within the next two months.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
30 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Rachel Reeves to sign off funding for Sizewell C nuclear power plant - 43 years after it was proposed
will tomorrow sign off funding for the Sizewell C nuclear power plant – more than 40 years after it was proposed. The Chancellor will announce £14.2billion to pay for a new reactor at the site in Suffolk, with the plant eventually powering 6million homes. The funding will be included in her comprehensive spending review, which was finalised last night after a bitter row with Yvette Cooper over police funding ended with the Home Secretary having to accept the Treasury's terms. Sizewell C was first proposed in 1982 and, after years of paralysis, was given the green light by the Tories in 2022. Ms Reeves will also confirm a £2.5billion investment in nuclear fusion research, while government sources said ministers would press ahead with proposals for 'mini' nuclear plants around the country. The Treasury said the funding would help create 10,000 new jobs. The last time Britain completed a new nuclear plant was in 1987, which was Sizewell B. Hinkley Point C, in Somerset, is under construction but not expected to open until 2031. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said last night: 'We need new nuclear to deliver a golden age of clean energy.' But Alison Downes, of the Stop Sizewell C group, said the plant was a 'white elephant'. The Prime Minister's spokesman said: 'The review is settled. We will be focused on investing in Britain's renewal so that all working people are better off.'


Sky News
43 minutes ago
- Sky News
The five considerable problems with the chancellor's U-turn on winter fuel payments
There are considerable problems with the winter fuel payment U-turn, but perhaps the political argument in favour outweighs them all? First, Rachel Reeves has executed the plan without working out how to pay for it. This, for an iron chancellor, is a wound that opponents won't let her forget. A summer of speculation about tax rises is not a summer anyone looks forward to. Politics latest: Treasury minister challenged over reason for U-turn Second, the fig leaf that she and Treasury ministers are using is an improvement in economic conditions. If you were being polite, you'd say this is contested. The OBR halved growth this year and the OECD downgraded UK forecasts, albeit only by a little, last week. The claim that interest rates are coming down ignores that their descent is slower because of government decisions of the last six months. Third, the question immediately becomes, what next? Why not personal independent payments (PIP) and the two-child benefit cap? At this stage, it would feel like a climbdown if they did not back down over those. But then, what will the markets - already policing this closely - make of it, and could they punish the government? Fourth, this is aggravating divisions in the Parliamentary Labour Party: the soft left Compass group and ministers like Torsten Bell pushing bigger spending arguments. Those MPs in Tory-facing seats who rely on arguments that Labour can be trusted with the public finances are worried. 👉Listen to Politics at Sam and Anne's on your podcast app👈 Fifth, this has created a firm division between No 10 (the PM) and No 11 (the Chancellor). No 10 is now conscious that it does not have enough independent advice about the market reaction to economic policies and is seeking to correct. Others, I am told, are just critical of the chancellor's U-turn - for she wobbled first. Read more:UK to become 'AI maker not taker', says PMHow much cash will Reeves give each department? Given the litany of arguments against, why has it happened? Because the hope is this maxi U-turn lances the boil, removes a significant source of pensioners' anger and brings back Labour voters, a price they calculate worth paying, whatever the fiscal cost. We wait to see who is right.


The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Nigel Farage says Brits have ‘every right to be angry' about cost of hotels for migrants
BRITS struggling to live have 'every right to be angry' about illegal migrants getting cushy hotel rooms, Nigel Farage said yesterday. The Reform leader hailed The Sun's front page for laying bare the crippling cost of asylum accommodation. 1 We told the case of Stuart Whittaker - a former factory worker from Hull who is now homeless - feeling he had been 'shoved to the back of the queue'. Downing Street yesterday admitted it was 'absolutely not' fair that locals like him are sofa-surfing while taxpayers fork out for migrant hotels. Also addressing the story in Port Talbot, Mr Farage said: 'What I tell your man from Hull, is he has every right to be upset. 'Every right to be angry. 'Just don't say anything on social media or Keir Starmer will put you in prison.' He said that while legal migration has a bigger strain on public services, it is the 'sheer unfairness of these young men' coming across the Channel illegally that rubs people up. The cost of paying for asylum support has ballooned to around £4.7billion annually, and around 15,000 migrants have arrived from France this year already. Sir Keir Starmer's spokesman said: 'It's not fair that tens of thousands of people are stuck in an asylum backlog that's wasting billions of pounds of taxpayers money, and that's why we're focused on taking the action needed to reduce the number of asylum seekers and hotels.' Minister Chris Bryant yesterday insisted that the 'best deterrent' against small boats was processing asylum claims quicker. He was slammed by Tory Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp, who said: 'This is dangerous nonsense from a weak Labour Government. 'Giving illegal immigrants asylum faster is no deterrent - it will just attract even more to come here. 'A real deterrent would be removing every single illegal immigrant who arrives in the UK to somewhere like Rwanda.'