Contractor says it could have resolved problems 鈥測ears ago鈥� instead of ending up in court

Laing O鈥橰ourke has written to clients telling them that one of its dormant companies has been put into liquidation.

Chief executive Cathal O鈥橰ourke sent the letter nearly three weeks ago saying Laing O鈥橰ouke Construction South was about to be shut. Companies House records show the firm went into liquidation on 28 February.

In his letter, dated 21 February, O鈥橰ourke writes: 鈥淟aing O鈥橰ourke Construction South was recently the subject of a legal claim relating to a historic development and, despite our best efforts to reach an amicable solution on this matter, our counterparty did not engage fully with us in order to reach an agreement.鈥�

one hyde

Source: Shutterstock

The One Hyde Park development features a penthouse worth a reported 拢175m

He added: 鈥淲e routinely shut legacy subsidiary companies and have undertaken similar actions at 14 subsidiaries since 2022 in order to simplify our corporate structure.鈥�

The job at the centre of the dispute is the One Hyde Park luxury flats scheme in London designed by RSHP for Candy & Candy and which was completed in 2009 with the scheme opening its doors in 2011.

>> See also: One Hyde Park: Heart鈥檚 desire

Residents have claimed the complex has been marred by several faults, including pipework corrosion and leaking soldered joints, and have gone to court over the issues to claim 拢35m in compensation.

O鈥橰ourke said it had tried 鈥渢o resolve this matter amicably鈥� which included 鈥渙ffering compensation and voluntarily committing to remedial works that would have resolved this issue years ago鈥�.

But it added the development鈥檚 management company failed 鈥渢o engage constructively on this matter鈥�.

Explaining the reason why it sent the letter on 21 February, Laing O鈥橰ourke said: 鈥淕iven the high-profile nature of the court case, we simply wanted to keep our customers, partners and suppliers in the loop, as we do regularly on many matters.

鈥淟aing O鈥橰ourke Construction South had not traded since 2011, had no assets and was a dormant subsidiary of Laing O鈥橰ourke. Its liquidation has no impact on the wider business.鈥�

A spokesperson for One Hyde Park said Laing O鈥橰ourke鈥檚 鈥渙ffers to carry out the remediation works came with unacceptable caveats and the compensation offered by LOR was insufficient to fund such works by a third party鈥�.

They added: 鈥淚t is extremely disappointing that after 10 years of our attempting to secure resolution to this case, Laing O鈥橰ourke, a business with revenue of 拢4bn, stepped away from its subsidiary days before trial. Laing O鈥橰ourke has contested the claim throughout, at huge legal cost, but just as our case and demand for 拢35m compensation was about to face the scrutiny of the court room, it walked away from its responsibilities.

鈥淭his case has been the subject of extensive investigations by the appointed experts. These clearly show defective installations which are covered by the collateral warranty provided to OHP in 2010. Defects were discovered from 2014 onwards and for the past decade Laing O鈥橰ourke has carried out ad hoc remedial work whilst refusing to agree to an appropriate settlement. On 27 February, we applied to the court for a judgment to support our ongoing quest for redress. We look forward to receiving the Judge鈥檚 decision in the near future.鈥�

One Hyde Park is considered one of the most expensive apartment buildings in the world with the scheme鈥檚 penthouse valued at around 拢175m.

Topics