Maghull Town Council has denied rumours that £1m has gone missing from a large insurance settlement for the fire-damaged town hall, while a local councillor has called for transparency and insists the correct figures should be shared.
Fire and insurance options
Maghull Town Hall on Hall Lane has been closed since a major fire broke out in February 2025. The town council initially had two options for rebuilding: the insurance company could contract a builder to manage the renovation, or the insurer could pay the council a settlement to manage the project itself. In March 2025, the council chose the second option, receiving funds directly from the insurer.
A spokesperson for Maghull Town Council told the ECHO at the time that a public consultation in August and September 2025 showed support for a newly built replacement town hall.
Claims of missing money
However, the ECHO has been told that the final insurance settlement is substantially less than the original estimate needed for the rebuild. Lydiate & Maghull Community Independent parish councillor Andy Wilson claimed the figure had been reduced by £1m, and that this amount had “gone missing”. Maghull Town Council rejected this, saying it is “not accurate” and “no money has ‘gone missing’”. Cllr Wilson stands by his figure and believes it could be as high as £1.3m.
Exactly how much is needed for the rebuild and the settlement amount are not publicly available because discussions were held in private council meetings excluding the press and public.
Council update on works
In a June update, the town council said recovery works “continue to move forward”. “Adaptations to the rooftop scaffold are currently underway to facilitate the next stage of demolition and structural works, while electrical rewiring and gas supply works have also commenced. Heating system installations are scheduled as part of this ongoing programme of essential infrastructure works.” Architects are progressing with designs for the hall’s future, with further details to be shared in coming weeks.
Councillor calls for transparency
Independent councillor David Leatherbarrow, who brought two rejected motions calling for “transparency” over the settlement negotiations, told the ECHO the information was initially commercially sensitive but now that the deal is made, it should be shared. The council has agreed to commission an independent report setting out a chronology of events, including key decisions and the evolution of the insurance claim, but Cllr Leatherbarrow said he does not know when it will be published or who will write it.
Cllr Leatherbarrow said he thought the “backstop” option of letting the insurer rebuild was “safest”, and that councillors understood it would remain on the table. “In September 2025, we saw some architectural drawings of a proposed new building. We carried out some surveys with the public to see what they’d like, and we had an amount we were working off which had been determined by a surveyor. We agreed that if we came back after Christmas and we couldn’t achieve anywhere close to that figure, we would just allow the insurers to rebuild as a safe option, or at least that we would go back to a vote.”
He added: “When we came back in March, we were told that the safe option to allow the insurers to rebuild was now off the table. I asked why it was off the table, there was no answer. I asked when the deadline was and what we’d missed, and was told there was no deadline. I asked if there was anything in writing I could read, and was told it was negotiated verbally over the phone with no deadline and nothing in writing. So we only had one option left which was to accept the settlement figure. The settlement that had been offered was significantly lower than we’d previously agreed would be enough.”
Concerns over project management
Cllr Leatherbarrow also expressed concern that the rebuild does not currently have a project manager in place. “We’ve been asked to make some extremely large decisions on the building. I don’t feel comfortable making some decisions, and have asked repeatedly since the fire if we can hire a project manager. If you’ve got an architectural drawing and a figure to work to, then all of a sudden you’re working off a figure that’s significantly lower, then you’d expect to see new architectural drawings, new project management, and none of that has happened.”
He warned that if the rebuild fails, “it brings into question the usefulness of a town council at all. The only reason we’ve got such well-maintained parks and green space in Maghull is because we’ve got a town council and a precept paid as part of council tax. If that all goes away and we have to rely on Sefton to maintain the parks, I’m not confident that they’d be kept in the same manner, or that we’d even keep the parks.”
Cllr Leatherbarrow added: “I personally feel as though there’s a massive divide between councillors and it would be nice to get back to a group of volunteers working together on a common aim. But at the moment, I can’t just be silent on not being confident with what’s going on. It does worry me.”
Council's response
A spokesperson for Maghull Town Council said: “Maghull Town Council is aware of public comments and social media speculation suggesting a ‘missing £1m’ in relation to the Town Hall insurance settlement. That characterisation is not accurate. No money is ‘missing’. Early in the process, we had a variety of advisory figures from the loss assessor and a counter figure from the loss adjuster. The final settlement figure we agreed was between these two. It is disappointing when rumours and partial information are presented as fact in a way that risks causing unnecessary concern in the community. We are committed to ensuring the rebuild is carried out within this settlement amount. In the meantime, despite this catastrophic event, Maghull Town Council continues to deliver well-maintained parks and green spaces for residents and has an ambitious plan for the future of Maghull, including developing a Youth Club and enhancing the value of parks and community spaces for local people.”
