Riverside Centre: Arbitration Vs Mediation

BBC Radio Solent ran a couple of features on the Riverside Centre saga yesterday.

MazilliusAs readers will remember, the Riverside Centre Ltd (RCL), the body that provides services from the centre, is at loggerheads with the Isle of Wight council, who say RCL owe £250,000 in unpaid rent and other costs.

The Riverside Centre say the rent should have been written off against the transport costs RCL provides for its users and indeed VentnorBlog has seen an email from Steve Beynon back in October 2010 to Richard Priest, Manager for RCL stating that RCL should not have been invoiced for rent and that it would be rescinded. The council have since said they’re planning to increase the rental on the centre by possibly doubling it.

Mediation versus Arbitration
What seems to be the sticking point in this dispute at the moment is that the council are insisting on arbitration rather than mediation to resolve the issues.

The difference between the two methods of dispute resolution is that arbitration is a more expensive option and once a decision is ruled, it becomes legally binding.

Mediation on the other hand, is seen to be a more transparent and flexible approach and is the method preferred by RCL.

Cllr Mazillius threatens Riverside Centre Ltd
There are two segments on Julian Clegg’s programme, the second, which is one hour and 43 minutes in, hears Cllr Roger Mazillius make a very clear threat to the RCL.

He said, “Our dispute is with Riverside Centre Ltd, the company that provides services from the Riverside Centre, should this dispute not in fact be resolved, in our opinion there is every likelihood that these services which we do value highly, will be taken on and perhaps, even enhanced, by another voluntary or community sector partner.”

Listen again
Reporter Nicola Murray does a good job of simplifying the rather complicated dispute. Listen for yourselves on the BBC iPlayer and use the slider to skip to the preferred sections. First section is 43 minutes into the programme.

Advertisement
Subscribe
Email updates?
20 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Alan Mansell
25, October 2011 5:53 pm

I am now confused. I thought the Riverside Centre was run by “Riverside Ventures” and are the council now saying that it will remain but could be run by someone else if they manage to bully the current people enough? Surely the email from Mr Beynon carries some weight here, or what value does he have? Has the offices plan now gone away or just been hidden… Read more »

Asite2c
25, October 2011 6:22 pm

In my opinion, these Tory Council leaders are not abiding by acceptable standards or behaving in a manner elected councillors should abide to.

Instead of having any intelligent or sensible discussion with experts or members of the public, they have chosen to act like a bunch of bullies and thugs just to get their own way.

Barney McGrew
Reply to  Asite2c
25, October 2011 7:57 pm

Cllr. Mazillius, always the bombast, appears to have forgotten that as a trustee of Riverside he played a part in the present broughhaha.

What, as a businessman, I fail to comprehend is if Riverside maintain its not a viable business at £100,000 per year rental how can any other organisation make it stack up – unless, of course “smokey room” deals are being done.

adrian nicholas
25, October 2011 10:58 pm

threat and bullying by tory iwc to vulnerable over a deal they were implicit in advantage. seems familiar- there are apt colloquial private words to describe their duplicity and reversion to type- but not on this site. I would again remind V/.Blog over the handing over of the Quarts Arts Centre in 1999 to avoid maintenance costs and the various unprofitable asset sales for nominal pound figures.… Read more »

Wight Essence
25, October 2011 11:56 pm

It looks as if Mazillius has been promoted to chief bully of this vile council.

Asite2c
26, October 2011 12:53 am

Politicians who allow power go their head and develop dictatorial and bully like tendencies are usually the type of people responsible for creating an atmosphere of unhappiness, fear and anger within society.

Paul Miller
26, October 2011 10:16 am

Off-topic thought:

Well they behave like this, frankly, because they face so little real accountability through elections held every four years.

Why four years, and not a quarter elected every 12 months in rotation? That would keep the position of ‘councillor’ (4 year term) but take the political intriguing down a notch or three [I’d like to believe] The IWC are the Frank Abagnale of local government…

Wight Essence
26, October 2011 1:21 pm

Pugh, Benyon and most of the other Tory leaders give me the impression they don’t really know what they’re doing and think political power gives them a licence to bully.

They should learn the lesson taught in many school classrooms that bullying is a sign of weakness, not strength.

Ariadne Arbuthnot
Reply to  Wight Essence
26, October 2011 2:03 pm

Well now we see what their plan is. They really shouldn’t allow the egregious Mazillius near a microphone without a minder. This whole ferago has been orchestrated to enable the Tory gauleiter and his reprehensible henchmen to lay thir hands on: A) A valuable piece of real estate B) The capital money set aside for the ULO’s Independent Living Centre. No wonder they don’t want to settle.… Read more »

Jamie
26, October 2011 1:39 pm

Election does not give them licence to do whatever they please. It seems as though they are arbitrary in all decisions they make. What we have here is tyranny and there is only one answer to tyranny.

Mr J
26, October 2011 1:48 pm

Getting elected, gives councillor’s the feeling that they have become instant statesmen, burdened by responsibility. They think everything they do is ‘for the best’ or unavoidable. It’s classic Freudian self delusion.

I asked a psychiatrist friend, what the solution was? He told me the only hope was a long course of treatment.

Asite2c
Reply to  Mr J
26, October 2011 3:10 pm

When politicians abuse their power, become bullies and act dictatorial, it just exposes their lack of education and understanding of democracy and political issues.

Tanja Rebel
26, October 2011 3:01 pm

The decision to start preying on the Riverside Centre by this Council will prove to be their downfall. To bully is indeed a sign of weakness and I am sure that many many people will be beyond furious if the Council goes ahead with this. But we must not let them! It is time to stand up and say enough is enough! When the Public Meeting for… Read more »

playingthenumbers
26, October 2011 3:43 pm

I don’t get it either. Aren’t politicians elected to create policy, which is then enacted upon by the teams of officers etc of a council? If there has been some technical problems or errors in the calculations for the exchange of monies for rents, transport costs etc, surely the two accounting teams should be able to check the audit trail quickly. The sizeable sums being scheduled for… Read more »

Jess
26, October 2011 5:34 pm

“I am now confused. I thought the Riverside Centre was run by “Riverside Ventures” and are the council now saying that it will remain but could be run by someone else if they manage to bully the current people enough?” Riverside Centre Limited have the lease from IWC and are a registered charity running the centre Riverside Ventures are a trading subsidiary of Riverside Centre, running quasi… Read more »

john
Reply to  Jess
26, October 2011 8:12 pm

Don’t you find it strange that the Trustees of the Riverside Centre don’t want to go to arbitration which is legally binding and would much rather go for mediation which is not legally binding – what do they have to fear if what they are saying is true and the IW Council’s case isn’t? Seems like they fear what arbitration will bring – I wonder why? –… Read more »

Victor Meldrew
Reply to  john
26, October 2011 10:48 pm

Well John, having fully read the article I would imagine that Riverside wish mediation as arbitration would be as costly as court action. Far from hiding anything mediation would also be more open and transparent – something, evidently, your council are loth to enter into. Having been involved in similar things over the years it is more than likely that should this go to litigation the court… Read more »

john
Reply to  Victor Meldrew
27, October 2011 11:42 pm

Why would mediation be more transparent than arbitration? As Mediation is not legally binding it would allow the Trust to ignore the outcome if it didn’t suit them. Clearly the Trust are not confident of their position. So continue to bluster, continue to spread false allegations, continue to blame anybody else but themselves especially when the Council is available as an Aunt Sally to hurl accusations at.… Read more »

Barney McGrew
27, October 2011 12:20 pm

Well I think Ariane is on to something here.

According to the “fire sale” of property the Gang of Four and their lieutenant Mazillius are selling of Age UK in Pyle Street where the ULO is based.

I wonder where this bunch of no-hopers is planning on relocating them?

Hm! Answers on a postcard!

One less brain cell between them and they’d need Baby Bio and water.

goldie
Reply to  Barney McGrew
20, November 2012 8:21 am

these hooligans think that being elected gives them the right to do as they please, i thought it meant they were supposed to serve the people that elected them, they are after all merely servants and paid from public purses, that makes them employees and as such we, the tax payers are their employers we should have the right to sack them, and not have to wait… Read more »

reCaptcha Error: grecaptcha is not defined