I would still be interested in WHO reported the fountain stolen. Was the report generated by local people who only 'assumed' it had been stolen simply because they observed that it was no longer in position? Where do the owners of the property, MMC Properties, stand in all this? I still maintain that the fountain could have been carefully removed by that company and not 'ripped off the wall' as reported.
This is only my theory and not something that could be upheld without the owners being questioned. I say again that the owners would have had every right to remove it for the purpose of restoration. If that were the case it is doubtful that the fountain would have been replaced before a full restoration had taken place in respect of the other prt of the Grade II listed building, i.e. The Offices.
Now that the Listed status has been removed (2014) there is no reason at all for the owners to remount it back on the wall and even less to declare that they removed it in the first place. If that were the case then we can rejoice in the knowledge that the fountain is still in one piece, even though we may never hear of or see it again.
Message Thread | This response ↓
« Back to index | View thread »