The Curse of Defective Concrete (Mica, Pyrrhotite, etc.) in Donegal homes - Read Mod warning Post 1

malinheader

Ace2007 wrote: »

And it could be 15k homes.... and/or €300,000 each home

And then what about any houses that get flooded because of poor flood controls when they were built - should they be able to claim off government in the future?

Future crisis: house rentals in Donegal are sky high due to lack of available and high demand as locals have no where to live while their houses getting rebuilt.

I wonder would you be so worried about floods and rent prices if it was your home crumbling and worrying if it will make another winter without collapsing.
You are the perfect example of I'm alright Jack reading your posts. Just sit back and put yourself in a person's position who will find themselves homeless shortly but still be paying a mortgage and having to provide for a family, how would you digest your constant negative remarks on the situation. And there is plenty more on here who should have a think of the real families affected by this.

Fann Linn

The problem is its Donegal and not Dublin. If there were 5, 10 or 15,000 homes affected in Atha Cliatha it would be sorted.

Ace2007

[Deleted User] wrote: »

SF? Where did that come from? I certainly never said I believed SF would deliver - nor do I intend to vote for them, though I will say Pearse Doherty is a good TD. Unfortunately, I don't like some of their policies, so, I wont be voting for him.


Let's be realistic here, instead of playing the SF card.
Which political parties were in power for every single one of the scandals you mentioned? That's right, either FF or FG, or both.


Mica doesn't need to be the straw that breaks the camels back. Based on the results of the last election, the camels back is already fractured. Badly.

SF are the only alternative if your not voting FF/FG for the next GE. That’s the choice right there. So that’s why I mentioned them.

I’ve been very consistent in my posts - Some people seem to think that I’m upsetting folk with posts when trying to be realistic.

At this moment in time there are two maybe even three groups - some meeting with Taoiseach and sending submissions to the housing minister. What happens if the minister agrees to one of these submissions but 20% of those protesting don’t think it does fair enough - what then? Is there a vote between these group members? All I’m hearing is that it’s 100% and nothing less.

Any person who takes a step back will realise that the chances of getting 100% redress that covers all costs is very very slim without tax increases etc. But yet it’s shouted from the roof tops with threats being made to block the M50 and the ports etc. That could turn very ugly very quickley as seen in Dublin in recent protests.

Maybe I’ll stop posting here and hopefully you get what you want but be prepared not to.

listermint

Fann Linn wrote: »

The problem is its Donegal and not Dublin. If there were 5, 10 or 15,000 homes affected in Atha Cliatha it would be sorted.

Once again this has been highlighted time and time again. There's plenty of pyrite issues and literal hazardous fire issues in apartments and houses all over the east coast and not a peep of redress 90% or otherwise.

Suffice to say where does redress from state coffers stop ? Where is the line ? If the result of this was harsh tough legislation to prevent and or go after companies for poor testing of their products and the homeowners got 80% redress would that be ok ? There's so many conflicting arguments of what people want from this that its hard to know. I don't think anyone really thinks 100% costs should be payed by the state myself included. And seemingly if you point that out you are called a troll.

What would actually make people happy here . What is the real end goal of satisfaction?

listermint

listermint wrote: »

Once again this has been highlighted time and time again. There's plenty of pyrite issues and literal hazardous fire issues in apartments and houses all over the east coast and not a peep of redress 90% or otherwise.

Suffice to say where does redress from state coffers stop ? Where is the line ? If the result of this was harsh tough legislation to prevent and or go after companies for poor testing of their products and the homeowners got 80% redress would that be ok ? There's so many conflicting arguments of what people want from this that its hard to know. I don't think anyone really thinks 100% costs should be payed by the state myself included. And seemingly if you point that out you are called a troll.

What would actually make people happy here . What is the real end goal of satisfaction?

To be fair, I can understand the homeowners wanting 100%. Of course they would want that. But were there not issues with apartments in Dublin not too long ago, that meant they didn't comply with fire safety regs? and people living in the apartments had to pool money together to get it sorted?


It seems unusual to me that the govt. are being so easily pushed into a corner on this. Sets a precedent of "just protest and you'll get what you want".


At the same time, i can also see that nobody could be held responsible, either. If there is a chap in Donegal that is a qualified Mica-checker for blocks supplied to every house, and he has given them all the green light, even though he could be in the wrong entirely, he's not going to have insurance that'll cover €1bn worth of rebuilding. So there's really no avenue to go in that regard.

Cee-Jay-Cee

Ace2007 wrote: »

What would be considered fair in your eyes?

I can’t say as I’m not affected and so I don’t know the full ins and outs of the scheme.

At present the scheme does not cover 90% of the costs. I believe no one should be out of pocket hugely by trying to fix their home. Obviously there will be some costs that won’t be covered but they should run into tens of thousands.

Leo varadkar had the neck to come out and almost criticise people for having large homes and expect them to be rebuilt by the government however the pompous prick didn’t take into consideration that the cost of a large build in Donegal wouldn’t have bought a semi-detached house is his beloved Dublin and that the upper limit on the scheme is still considerably less than what a new semi detached house goes for in Dublin.

listermint

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

I can’t say as I’m not affected and so I don’t know the full ins and outs of the scheme.

At present the scheme does not cover 90% of the costs. I believe no one should be out of pocket hugely by trying to fix their home. Obviously there will be some costs that won’t be covered but they should run into tens of thousands.

Leo varadkar had the neck to come out and almost criticise people for having large homes and expect them to be rebuilt by the government however the pompous prick didn’t take into consideration that the cost of a large build in Donegal wouldn’t have bought a semi-detached house is his beloved Dublin and that the upper limit on the scheme is still considerably less than what a new semi detached house goes for in Dublin.

I'm afraid calling people names and comparing prices of houses in a capital city to exterior wall rebuild costs in Donegal will get you no where.

As asked already what is the ask here? 100% rebuild costs is not a fair ask frankly and respecing the entirety of twenty year old homes is also not on without the homeowners chipping in. There's reasonable and there is unreasonable.

If the scheme covered solely the costs of fixing the block work and nothing else restating the blocks and render to how they should be conditions would that suit ?

Cee-Jay-Cee

Feisar wrote: »

And the owners of Stardust got £700,000 from the state:(

100% remuneration, the problem is 5K homes at €200,000 each is 1 Billion.

The government came up with €9 billion in the last year for the PUP/grants/PPE etc

The cost of the scheme might be €2 billion but spread out over many many years not just a one off payment so in reality it’s not that much.

listermint

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

The government came up with €9 billion in the last year for the PUP/grants/PPE etc

The cost of the scheme might be €2 billion but spread out over many many years not just a one off payment so in reality it’s not that much.

The government kept the economy going . It was just handouts for the sake of it. We would be in recession if the PUP wasn't done.

There's plenty of false equivalence in this thread and very little of detail of what is acceptable it's all strawmem arguments.

NIMAN

listermint wrote: »

If the scheme covered solely the costs of fixing the block work and nothing else restating the blocks and render to how they should be conditions would that suit ?

What if there is mica in the foundations?

I have seen outer leaf replaced and it looks like a simple take out and replace job. But how do you replace an inner leaf of blocks? Aren't the roof and everything sitting on that? And what if you have bison slabs sitting on the inner leaf?

Cee-Jay-Cee

listermint wrote: »

I'm afraid calling people names and comparing prices of houses in a capital city to exterior wall rebuild costs in Donegal will get you no where.

As asked already what is the ask here? 100% rebuild costs is not a fair ask frankly and respecing the entirety of twenty year old homes is also not on without the homeowners chipping in. There's reasonable and there is unreasonable.

If the scheme covered solely the costs of fixing the block work and nothing else restating the blocks and render to how they should be conditions would that suit ?

My comment on Leo was purely because he basically said people shouldn’t be building such large houses and my point still stands, the size of it is irrelevant as it’s the cost that matters and that cost is less than what a new semi-D costs in Dublin. We all live in the one country, we all pay the same taxes, we’re all ruled by the same government so the comparison is entirely justified.

listermint

NIMAN wrote: »

What if there is mica in the foundations?

What if the sun went behind the moon never to appear again.

You are talking about hypotheticals here. I'm asking what people would be happy with. All that comes back in return is strawman arguments about pandemic welfare payments. If it was in Dublin... Pompous this pompous that.


There's too much anger and too little articulation. If you can't put your requests in words and context then you get nothing.

Cee-Jay-Cee

NIMAN wrote: »

What if there is mica in the foundations?

I have seen outer leaf replaced and it looks like a simple take out and replace job. But how do you replace an inner leaf of blocks? Aren't the roof and everything sitting on that? And what if you have bison slabs sitting on the inner leaf?

The same as outer leaf, one wall at a time with bracing for bison floors while each wall is being rebuilt.

listermint

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

My comment on Leo was purely because he basically said people shouldn’t be building such large houses and my point still stands, the size of it is irrelevant as it’s the cost that matters and that cost is less than what a new semi-D costs in Dublin. We all live in the one country, we all pay the same taxes, we’re all ruled by the same government so the comparison is entirely justified.

Note we don't all pay the same taxes. I pay more LPT than folks in Dublin and less tax spend per head. Than Dublin and Donegal.

NIMAN

listermint wrote: »

What if the sun went behind the moon never to appear again.

You are talking about hypotheticals here. I'm asking what people would be happy with. All that comes back in return is strawman arguments about pandemic welfare payments. If it was in Dublin... Pompous this pompous that.


There's too much anger and too little articulation. If you can't put your requests in words and context then you get nothing.

Well ok then.

I would like to think that the core testing would get a sample out of my foundations as well as my 2 leafs. Then it would know if my house is sitting on weak founds.

If it is, is there any point replacing any leafs when the damp and wet conditions in the ground could turn my founds to something you can crush with your hand.

Afaik up to now, those houses marked for demolition is because both their leafs are mica ridden. So if it's possible to replace both leafs on a house, why demolish? Would it be quicker? Cheaper?

jj880

malinheader wrote: »

Just watched him on six one, he has avoiding questions down to a tee.was asked at the end if 100% redress was not passed would he still stay in his seat, even the newsreader challenged him on how he never answered the question. Another example of when you're job is more about money, position or just power instead of the people in your own community who you should be supporting and representing.

Talks about Inishowen being the epicentre of this crisis only days after he takes the Taoiseach to a house nowhere near Inishowen. A FF mercenary in a suit. Charlie McHaugheylogue.

listermint

NIMAN wrote: »

Well ok then.

I would like to think that the core testing would get a sample out of my foundations as well as my 2 leafs. Then it would know if my house is sitting on weak founds.

If it is, is there any point replacing any leafs when the damp and wet conditions in the ground could turn my founds to something you can crush with your hand.

Afaik up to now, those houses marked for demolition is because both their leafs are mica ridden. So if it's possible to replace both leafs on a house, why demolish? Would it be quicker? Cheaper?

And once again in terms of costs. Who pays for all that testing would you like to see a fair equitable split of that or just 100% test 100% redress on top.

NIMAN

I've said before that the 90/10 scheme might have got a lot of traction if it had been a 90/10, and not a 70/30 Or 60/40.

MrMusician18

NIMAN wrote: »

Well ok then.

I would like to think that the core testing would get a sample out of my foundations as well as my 2 leafs. Then it would know if my house is sitting on weak founds.

If it is, is there any point replacing any leafs when the damp and wet conditions in the ground could turn my founds to something you can crush with your hand.

Afaik up to now, those houses marked for demolition is because both their leafs are mica ridden. So if it's possible to replace both leafs on a house, why demolish? Would it be quicker? Cheaper?

It's possible to replace both leafs but the amount of temporary works required makes it slow and expensive.

It's far easier and quicker to flatten the whole lot and start again

Frozen Veg

Does product liability insurance not apply here? Why would the government be liable for the costs.

trixi001

Frozen Veg wrote: »

Does product liability insurance not apply here? Why would the government be liable for the costs.

Supposedly not, as its over 10 years old.

Any scheme that doesn't provide a full 100% plus 100%testing fee, plus accommodation & storage costs need to make sure that everyone has access to low cost loans for anything not funded so that everyone can have a safe liveable home

There should be a scheme already whereby people can borrow the €6000 required for the testing at a very low, not for profit interest rate, with no affordability tests, no age exclusions etc.

NIMAN

trixi001 wrote: »

Supposedly not, as its over 10 years old.

Any scheme that doesn't provide a full 100% plus 100%testing fee, plus accommodation & storage costs need to make sure that everyone has access to low cost loans for anything not funded so that everyone can have a safe liveable home

There should be a scheme already whereby people can borrow the €6000 required for the testing at a very low, not for profit interest rate, with no affordability tests, no age exclusions etc.

Has the Irish state not got the ability to do the block testing themselves?
Why must the samples go to England for several months?

And why is it costing homeowners up to 7k? It's not that complicated a test surely?

Ish66

Nobody answered my Question 3 pages back ?
How is the State liable for this ? It was not a state company like B N Mona made the blocks is it ?
Anyone ?

NIMAN

Ish66 wrote: »

Nobody answered my Question 3 pages back ?
How is the State liable for this ? It was not a state company like B N Mona made the blocks is it ?
Anyone ?

I think technically it isn't liable, unless their failure to regulate the industry is what is being pinned on them.

But we live in a republic where the government has to try to look after the best interests of its citizens. Why should they have paid pup? They didn't cause the covid crisis?

Why did they fix the pyrite homes in Dublin?

Jinglejangle69

NIMAN wrote: »

I think technically it isn't liable, unless their failure to regulate the industry is what is being pinned on them.

But we live in a republic where the government has to try to look after the best interests of its citizens. Why should they have paid pup? They didn't cause the covid crisis?

Why did thru fix the pyrite homes in Dublin?

They shut down businesses and put people out of work.

jackboy

Ish66 wrote: »

Nobody answered my Question 3 pages back ?
How is the State liable for this ? It was not a state company like B N Mona made the blocks is it ?
Anyone ?

They don’t have to pay for it but they should pay for it. It’s the right thing to do.

Beechwoodspark

Can someone clearly explain why joe taxpayer is on the hook to pay for the reimbursement???

intellectual dosser

Ish66 wrote: »

Nobody answered my Question 3 pages back ?
How is the State liable for this ? It was not a state company like B N Mona made the blocks is it ?
Anyone ?

I haven't read this thread, but I can see responsibility with the councils and government that license the quarries and regulate the industry.

JupiterKid

The mica scandal is yet another enduring legacy of the 2001-2007 property bubble and light touch to zero regulation of the construction sector. Who was in power at the time? Ah yes, Fianna Fail...

Hundreds, if not thousands of homes will have to be completely demolished and rebuilt. It is a catastrophe for counties Dinegal and Mayo.

I fully support the protestors in their seeking full redress for a living nightmare for them and their families. It is right and just.

Imagine living in a dwelling where the walls are literally crumbling and being told it is no longer safe to live in a home you have worked hard to pay for.

jj880

https://twitter.com/thegarydoyle/status/1404805445118828557?s=19