" Hounslow Council asked them to cancel but they refused."I'm sorry but that's simply back-covering PR.Hounslow Council as well as anyone else who looked into the matterm would realise that having paid all for all the artists, and the extensive infrastructure installed over the previous week, canceling the concert would not only have cost Waterworks money - it would most likely have bankrupted them, possibly costing people their homes had they been used as loan collateral. The CIC couldn't order then to cancel as Waterworks could then sue the CIC; who would then need to be bailed out by the Councils. Which would then end up on next years Council Tax bills.What they *could* and *should* have done, either the Councils or the CIC IMO, is *order* Waterfworks to turn down the volume - the punters would have to lump it, out of respect and everyone would end up happy.The fact that Waterworks PR and website is truly nauseating probably goes with the territory, and has no real bearing on this IMO . That's what ponytails do. As it is, its hard to see how those attending at full volume dom't end up with eventual hearing loss for which they could presumably sue someone - the CIC, the Councils, in years to come; Waterworks having gone bankrupt in the meantime. Possibly they already pay higher rates of public liability insurance to cover such eventualties; as they must do already presumably, given the danger of any one of those trees falling on people michael adams
Michael Adams ● 1464d