From Adrian Walsh.
HAVING read the letter from Clive Jones, chairman of Jersey Heritage, I have a few discrepancies that I feel would be useful to iron out for myself and the Jersey residents with the ‘widely held view’ that purchase of the Elizabeth Castle ferries was not a necessity.

Firstly, and importantly, Heritage paid full price for second hand vessels which apparently included the shipping cost to bring them to the Island. Having the upper hand in negotiations, they should have given a fair price for used vehicles only and not the transport and/or setting up costs.

Secondly, he reports that Pure were not making enough money and creditors were at the door, so why pay in the region of £100,000 for lost profits? The company had obviously made no profits even with the money that Heritage was paying to Pure to run the service which he neglected to advise in his letter.

Therefore it is correct to assume that profits would have been zero over the coming years and this is the amount they should have paid for loss of profit.

Thirdly, I believe that the current vessels were produced for fresh water use and do not have the necessary seals in place to prevent the corrosion from sea water which has I believe, resulted in the high number of times that these vessels are in for repair.

Advising the general public that another States department has agreed that they can operate without a backup will give no confidence to the general public, especially in light of the number of times these vehicles are unable to work.

The decision to pay Pure the full purchase costs plus outlay is the most foolish action I have ever seen and shows us that Heritage has no business or money sense. Should Pure have defaulted on the payment, then Pure would also have been in default of the contract and unless written by Heritage should have had some sort of cost associated to it.

Heritage to my knowledge have no legal obligation at all to ensure a company adheres to its contract which is disingenuous in the heading and within the letter. Couple this with the fact that the creditors would have tried to sell the vehicles as quickly as possible to recoup costs which could then have been purchased at a much cheaper price by Heritage or another company who would provide a service and we start to see that the reply that Mr Jones has given is extremely misleading.

I have asked to see a full set of accounts dating from 2004 so that I can confirm the state of Heritage to my own satisfaction and to enable me to see fully the costs associated with this buyout, but it seems their accounting skills are as poor as their business and negotiation skills.