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

jj880

Testing definitely needs an overhaul.

As you say the obvious and worst houses straight into the redress scheme. To the front of the queue also.

Any borderline get the cores drilled and tested. It was pointed out earlier in the thread that the test for people selling a house is for the presence of mica only. That should be enough at this stage. None of this bloated test with all the reports and big money. For the number of houses involved it needs simplified as much as possible. Get the lab setup in Donegal too. Itd be madness to send all these samples to the UK.

Edit: just to point out re the inner/outer leaf debate and associated reports - in the media now engineers are calling for demolition of all houses with mica. Evidence is also being posted in the redress group that insurers will NOT cover a house with outer leaf replacement only.

JCJCJC

NIMAN wrote: »

The crazy thing about that piece is that people have to spend 8k for a test to tell them they have mica, when it's so patently obvious to anyone.

Surely some houses simply don't need the test? Could the government not appoint a team of engineers to spend a few months up here, going round all the houses and saying "yip you have mica", for the ones that are falling to pieces?

Ok, I accept some houses might have minor cracking and will need a test to get a mica content level, but some are so obvious Stevie Wonder could sign them off.

Would it not be even simpler to trace the sales records from the quarries and block makers?

FFVII

jj880 wrote: »

Testing definitely needs an overhaul.

As you say the obvious and worst houses straight into the redress scheme. To the front of the queue also.

Any borderline get the cores drilled and tested. It was pointed out earlier in the thread that the test for people selling a house is for the presence of mica only. That should be enough at this stage. None of this bloated test with all the reports and big money. For the number of houses involved it needs simplified as much as possible. Get the lab setup in Donegal too. Itd be madness to send all these samples to the UK.

Edit: just to point out re the inner/outer leaf debate and associated reports - in the media now engineers are calling for demolition of all houses with mica. Evidence is also being posted in the redress group that insurers will NOT cover a house with outer leaf replacement only.

it has to cost at least 3 billion at the end of this or no point. Don't be coming in here with money saving ideas. This is Ireland. We waste money. Always and everywhere we can.

FFVII

Are houses still being built with mica? If not when did it stop?

NIMAN

jj880 wrote: »

Testing definitely needs an overhaul.

As you say the obvious and worst houses straight into the redress scheme. To the front of the queue also.

Any borderline get the cores drilled and tested. It was pointed out earlier in the thread that the test for people selling a house is for the presence of mica only. That should be enough at this stage. None of this bloated test with all the reports and big money. For the number of houses involved it needs simplified as much as possible. Get the lab setup in Donegal too. Itd be madness to send all these samples to the UK.

Edit: just to point out re the inner/outer leaf debate and associated reports - in the media now engineers are calling for demolition of all houses with mica. Evidence is also being posted in the redress group that insurers will NOT cover a house with outer leaf replacement only.

Maybe if the government is going to ok outer leaf only, then they will have to supply some sort of guarantee?

jj880

NIMAN wrote: »

Maybe if the government is going to ok outer leaf only, then they will have to supply some sort of guarantee?

Yeah that could work but what about the home insurance issue? There is a letter from Allianz posted in the redress group stating they wont cover outer leaf replacement only.

NIMAN

jj880 wrote: »

Yeah that could work but what about the home insurance issue? There is a letter from Allianz posted in the redress group stating they wont cover outer leaf replacement only.

Didn't see that.

NIMAN

NIMAN wrote: »

Maybe if the government is going to ok outer leaf only, then they will have to supply some sort of guarantee?

I've a sneaking suspicion that the only thing they're going to guarantee is to pay as little redress as possible, Niman.


I hope I'm wrong, but, given how long they've been aware of the problem, and the lack of an adequate redress scheme to date - I'd be looking for cast-iron written guarantees before accepting any promises, tbh.

jj880

NIMAN wrote: »

Didn't see that.

Yeah it's a fair bit down in the redress group but there's a photo of the letter there.

In such cases you cant sell your house as a bank wont issue a mortgage on a house that cant be insured.

malinheader

FFVII wrote: »

Are houses still being built with mica? If not when did it stop?

This is the million or should I say billion dollar question.
Who knows, the council were taking outer leaves of blocks from council houses and replacing with blocks from same quarry. A contractor was starting a new block of 60 council houses with blocks from same quarry. The new health centre in Buncrana was built with concrete and blocks from same quarry. And this would still be happening today if it wasn't for paddy and his videos.
Some serious questions need to be asked here.

jj880

A poster in the redress group summed up this scandal best a few days ago.

She said people are not looking for a handout here. They want what they have already paid for.

It has taken a year since the current scheme was launched for the first home to be demolished.

At the end of July changing the redress percentages alone isnt going to cut it. This scheme needs binned and whatever replaces it needs to process applicants as quickly as possible. No more messing about.

NIMAN

FFVII wrote: »

Are houses still being built with mica? If not when did it stop?

The scandal here is that it didn't stop back in 2014 when it was first spotted. If not before.

That the authorities let another 6 or 7 years of building go ahead when hundreds of houses were showing the issue is shocking and something only an independent investigation can get to the bottom of.

malinheader

NIMAN wrote: »

The scandal here is that it didn't stop back in 2014 when it was first spotted. If not before.

That the authorities let another 6 or 7 years of building go ahead when hundreds of houses were showing the issue is shocking and something only an independent investigation can get to the bottom of.

Don't forget to mention an independent investigation with no one with a conflict of interest sitting in the group or committee, especially the chairman.

jj880

JCJCJC wrote: »

Would it not be even simpler to trace the sales records from the quarries and block makers?

Not sure about this. I think a % content of mica should be tested for to qualify for redress. For instance i had my developer in to look at my house. He couldn't tell me who my block supplier was for definite. Another resident knows the foreman personally who worked on our houses (built from 2005 to 2007). He said they got lorry loads of blocks from 3 suppliers. 1 of which has been confirmed for selling mica blocks.

Cee-Jay-Cee

The testing needs to be revisited and streamlined. There is no need to take samples from every wall. If two outer leaf walls and one inner leaf are found to contain mica that should be enough. Why the need to test every wall. I personally know someone who has been approved for a total demolition except for one inner wall! The CoCo engineer will not allow for it to be demolished too as it doesn’t contain the required amount of mica to make it unsafe. Obviously the person is going to toss it and rebuild it anyway and pay for it themselves but it just goes to show the level of stupidity and ignorance being applied to the scheme by idiotic CoCo desk jockies.

Donegal CoCo need to be removed from the process as they are part of the problem. They have frustrated the scheme since it started. Their engineers are desk jockies with no experience and they should not be allowed anywhere near it. They need to be investigated for their criminal behaviour in continuing to use defective blocks/concrete in public projects despite knowing for the last 8 years that there were serious problems with the quality of the products.

An independent test centre should be established and independent engineers assigned to the projects who are willing to sign off on the rebuilds. Costs for reports and paintwork for the process should be capped, if they don’t want the work, that’s fine, there are plenty of other companies that will.

Banks need to be instructed/ordered to suspend mortgages with no back interest or fees for the duration of the rebuild while the people are not living in the house.

Insurance companies need to be taken to task where people who have insurance are able to claim some of the costs back from them.

Homebond should be ordered to pay out on the hundreds of bonded homes. They should not be simply allowed to walk away from it. They made millions from builds in the boom times and so now is time to pay it back!

NIMAN

@Cee Jay Cee

What you're advocating all sounds like accountability.

Don't you know we don't worry about that sort of stuff in Ireland!

Thargor

Would be interesting to know if the quarry owners and brick suppliers and their kids/relations who built houses during this time are caught up in this aswell or if they mysteriously used blocks from a different source...

JCJCJC

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

<snipped>
Banks need to be instructed/ordered to suspend mortgages with no back interest or fees for the duration of the rebuild while the people are not living in the house.


Homebond should be ordered to pay out on the hundreds of bonded homes. They should not be simply allowed to walk away from it. They made millions from builds in the boom times and so now is time to pay it back!

Who has authority to give the orders you propose? I can’t see any legal basis for what you suggest.

The banks’ position is interesting. If a mica-affected house has a substantial mortgage, it seems reasonable to assume that it now has no market value except site value, less the considerable cost of demolition, site clearance and licensed waste removal. The homeowner therefore has no equity in the property - the mortgagor’s interest exceeds the value of the asset. If at the end of all this some sort of financial compensation becomes payable, who should get it? The homeowner, who has only bare legal title, or the bank, which has a legal interest exceeding the current value? I’m only throwing this out for debate and discussion, not offering any opinion.

If the houses have Homebond cover, or had when faults appeared, why are Homebond not paying out?

JCJCJC

Thargor wrote: »

Would be interesting to know if the quarry owners and brick suppliers and their kids/relations who built houses during this time are caught up in this aswell or if they mysteriously used blocks from a different source...

A classic Irish way of looking at things. Even if they did - so what? People contributing here seem to be saying that nobody is pursuing the quarries or block suppliers.

boombang

JCJCJC wrote: »

A classic Irish way of looking at things. Even if they did - so what? People contributing here seem to be saying that nobody is pursuing the quarries or block suppliers.

What's classically Irish about that perspective?

Thargor

JCJCJC wrote: »

A classic Irish way of looking at things. Even if they did - so what? People contributing here seem to be saying that nobody is pursuing the quarries or block suppliers.

So what? You cant see how it would be significant if those involved werent using the product they were supplying? You wouldn't think that would be suspicious in the slightest? Wow.

JCJCJC

Thargor wrote: »

So what? You cant see how it would be significant if those involved werent using the product they were supplying? You wouldn't think that would be suspicious in the slightest? Wow.

I can see how it would be significant if the quarry owners were taken to court for knowingly supplying bad blocks, then obviously they would be asked why they used somebody else’s blocks - assuming that could be established in the first place. But, since it seems they’re not being taken to court, it’s irrelevant whether they built their own houses and all their relations’s houses from their own blocks or Lego.

Cal4567

https://www.businesspost.ie/houses/obrien-to-put-housing-agency-in-charge-of-mica-redress-8859d4eb

O’Brien to put Housing Agency in charge of mica redress

The Housing Minister believes the revised €1.5 billion scheme would be too complex for Mayo and Donegal councils to administer

That bit in bold is the sub heading on the article. Yet another indictment for what we describe as 'local government'.

I think we should invent a thread entitled 'What do the Local Authorities actually do well?'

jj880

Cal4567 wrote: »

https://www.businesspost.ie/houses/obrien-to-put-housing-agency-in-charge-of-mica-redress-8859d4eb

O’Brien to put Housing Agency in charge of mica redress

The Housing Minister believes the revised €1.5 billion scheme would be too complex for Mayo and Donegal councils to administer

That bit in bold is the sub heading on the article. Yet another indictment for what we describe as 'local government'.

I think we should invent a thread entitled 'What do the Local Authorities actually do well?'

Interesting article.

Anyone know any history regarding the Housing Agency's track record?

boombang

Haven't read every post in the thread, but does anybody know the use of these blocks in the North? Geographically very close to Donegal. I know contractors would likely not buy in Ireland because of a currency difference, but it would be interesting to know if there's any difference from a regulatory perspective.

What is the expected cost to the taxpayer?

muffler

whatnow! wrote: »

What is the expected cost to the taxpayer?

3 posts above.

NIMAN

boombang wrote: »

Haven't read every post in the thread, but does anybody know the use of these blocks in the North? Geographically very close to Donegal. I know contractors would likely not buy in Ireland because of a currency difference, but it would be interesting to know if there's any difference from a regulatory perspective.

Afaik, Cassidys have said they supplied blocks to the north, but apparently they were supplying harder blocks as they have a different standard there to the south.

Derry city council have said they did a review and they do not have a mica issue.

But I always remember seeing a house on the way out of Strabane on the road to Derry that definitely had mica like cracking. So I would say there has to be some cases in the north of private homes built with Cassidys blocks. Time will tell.

Dempo1

jj880 wrote: »

Interesting article.

Anyone know any history regarding the Housing Agency's track record?

Honestly I don't know but I have an omnious feeling it's being kicked down another long road, All well in good getting the housing agency involved but if the current housing crisis is anything to go by as a metric of their success to date , I'd not be terribly inspired.

Their Mission statement reads

Our Mission is to promote the supply of housing to meet current and future needs and demand by being a centre of expert knowledge on housing, supporting housing policy development and implementing effective housing programmes in collaboration with key stakeholders.

In essence, gobbledegook or perhaps it should read, mission impossible?

Interesting however, they over saw the Pyrite scheme, but two very different problems.

Also the hapless housing minister further mentions going after those responsible, prosecutions, recoup some of the costs? Perhaps I'm wrong but a little late in the day for that course of action, this should have happened years ago. This is going to cost far more than is being suggested and nothing but full demolition and rebuild is necessary, I'd reckon, minimum of €2 billion

malinheader

Cal4567 wrote: »

https://www.businesspost.ie/houses/obrien-to-put-housing-agency-in-charge-of-mica-redress-8859d4eb

O’Brien to put Housing Agency in charge of mica redress

The Housing Minister believes the revised €1.5 billion scheme would be too complex for Mayo and Donegal councils to administer

That bit in bold is the sub heading on the article. Yet another indictment for what we describe as 'local government'.

I think we should invent a thread entitled 'What do the Local Authorities actually do well?'

In my eyes eyes Donegal CC should have nothing to do with with the mica redress scheme and anyone who had any input into the council until an investigation determines how much and when they knew they were using defective blocks, and more to the point why they kept on using them until they were pressurised from the public to stop. That's if they have stopped.