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

malinheader

NIMAN wrote: »

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.

I always thought that was a damning statement to the way this country operates. "Stronger blocks have to be supplied in the north as they have a HIGHER standard. "

Says it all really.

10000maniacs

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

I haven't been banned...yet.

But yes you are right, it started with one person and when they got a holiday for a week a few others appeared who continued in a similar vein, its like they were recruited as they all had the exact same line of thought. Maybe they're all the same person posting from different accounts???

I just find it strange how people are so insistent that families pay for this themselves. The country has spent €9billion on the pandemic which we will have to pay for. I worked every day throughout it, no working from home or PUP and I accept that my taxes will have to help repay it. These families took out mortgages to build their homes, VAT was payable on all the materials used to build, workers paid tax on their wages etc the government and banks have profited hugely from each one of those houses built and its only fair that they now give back to the people.

They're estimating that the MICA crisis could cost over €2 billion however that will be over the next 5-10years and not a one off payment this or next year. I have no issue that my tax will also go towards repaying this.

I think this thread has somehow just attracted a number of mean spirited begrudgers who somehow think that if this never happened and that the government weren't going to spend €2billion or whatever it costs, that they would somehow be better off and happier in their lives. :rolleyes:

The taxpayer is not meant to be a last stop insurance broker for everything that goes wrong. People don't want €5 billion of their hard earned tax blown on stuff like this. We will go bankrupt as a country if we continue down this path.

overshoot

10000maniacs wrote: »

The taxpayer is not meant to be a last stop insurance broker for everything that goes wrong. People don't want €5 billion of their hard earned tax blown on stuff like this. We will go bankrupt as a country if we continue down this path.

Considering you're going to bankrupt a lot of these people if you don't... Do you think it's going to come in above/below 5000 social/affordable homes? I've near 1000 social/affordable homes in Dublin on my desk as it is. At least the people this happened to went out and built their own house of their own back as a start.

Plus we already went down this path with redress and pyrite in Dublin/Leinster, had you an issue there?

10000maniacs

overshoot wrote: »

Considering you're going to bankrupt a lot of these people if you don't... Do you think it's going to come in above/below 5000 social/affordable homes? I've near 1000 social/affordable homes in Dublin on my desk as it is. At least the people this happened to went out and built their own house of their own back as a start.

Plus we already went down this path with redress and pyrite in Dublin/Leinster, had you an issue there?

I had an issue with taxpayers coughing up for pyrite too. We don't pay tax to be last stop building insurance for everyone, sad as it may be for them.

overshoot

10000maniacs wrote: »

I had an issue with taxpayers coughing up for pyrite too. We don't pay tax to be last stop building insurance for everyone, sad as it may be for them.

Yes we pay our taxes so the state can create bodies to create and enforce standards so as to avoid these situations

So you'd prefer footing the costs of a lot of new build social homes over this scheme?

jj880

malinheader wrote: »

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.

From the Business post article:

The agency would be responsible for processing applications from homeowners and selecting and paying for the consultants and building contractors required to carry out the remedial works. This would be different from the existing compensation scheme, where householders have to get quotes from builders themselves and then are given a council grant to cover the cost.

Sounds promising if they get it sorted quickly.

If companies like Cassidy are not required to have insurance for something like this and the taxpayer has to continue to pay for it the next company won't bother with insurance either because why would they lower their profits? It's the exact same as the banks lending irresponsibly when they know if things go bad the taxpayer will bail them out.

Why does it cost €8,000 to test for mica?

boombang

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.

I wouldn't be too sure of that. Remember when sterling was trading at €1.40?

10000maniacs wrote: »

The taxpayer is not meant to be a last stop insurance broker for everything that goes wrong. People don't want €5 billion of their hard earned tax blown on stuff like this. We will go bankrupt as a country if we continue down this path.

True. The taxpayer shouldn't have to repeatedly pay up.


Here's the question, though.


Should Government ensure adequate legislation, and enforcement of regulations for building materials - or should we just pay for social housing for all of these people? Bear in mind, these people already paid for their homes. None of this is their fault...
Now they find themselves in a horrendous position, facing homelessness.


So, who should be held accountable? Surely you are not going to suggest it's the victims of this whole debacle?

JCJCJC

whatnow! wrote: »

If companies like Cassidy are not required to have insurance for something like this and the taxpayer has to continue to pay for it the next company won't bother with insurance either because why would they lower their profits? It's the exact same as the banks lending irresponsibly when they know if things go bad the taxpayer will bail them out.

Why does it cost €8,000 to test for mica?

Nobody would bother with insurance if they didn’t have a risk of being sued and having to meet the cost personally. From what I’ve read here, the suppliers are still trading because they claim to have no insurance, and people are not pursuing the company or it’s members, shareholders and directors any further.

Thargor

JCJCJC wrote: »

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.

Bizarre attitude.

JCJCJC

Thargor wrote: »

Bizarre attitude.

Go on then... explain why it is relevant to know whether the relatives of the quarry owners used the defective blocks to build their houses, in circumstances where the claims are being made against Paddy the Taxpayer and the quarry owners are not being pursued to the extent of their assets? That’s what’s bizarre. And while you’re at it, how do you propose to establish if the quarry owners’s family used the bad blocks? Surely if they did, a drive-by of their houses should tell you?

muffler

NIMAN wrote: »

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.

There is every chance the blocks came from Cassidys. Christopher Gallagher supplied blocks to lots of people / contractors within a 10 mile radius of Lifford and beyond. Gallagher got his blocks from Cassidys - fact.

Penfailed

10000maniacs wrote: »

I had an issue with taxpayers coughing up for pyrite too. We don't pay tax to be last stop building insurance for everyone, sad as it may be for them.

What do you pay tax for?

10000maniacs

Deleted User wrote: »

True. The taxpayer shouldn't have to repeatedly pay up.


Here's the question, though.


Should Government ensure adequate legislation, and enforcement of regulations for building materials - or should we just pay for social housing for all of these people? Bear in mind, these people already paid for their homes. None of this is their fault...
Now they find themselves in a horrendous position, facing homelessness.
So, who should be held accountable? Surely you are not going to suggest it's the victims of this whole debacle?

In this order

1: The Builder
2: The surveyor
3: The clients solicitor
4: The client
(I placed the client at 4 only because the assumption is they hired trained professionals to do his work, but others would place them higher. I wouldn't have allowed this to happen to me)

Penfailed

whatnow! wrote: »

Why does it cost €8,000 to test for mica?

It doesn't.

Penfailed

10000maniacs wrote: »

In this order

1: The Builder
2: The surveyor
3: The clients solicitor
4: The client
(I placed the client at 4 only because the assumption is they hired trained professionals to do his work, but others would place them higher. I wouldn't have allowed this to happen to me)

How would you have ensured this didn't happen to you?

10000maniacs

Penfailed wrote: »

What do you pay tax for?

Certainly not for pyrite and mica issues.
Basically the government implement laws, pay people to ensure the law is upheld, and taxpayers’ money pays for these services and other government services of all kinds. The government is comprised of a few parts: the legislators (those who make laws), executives (those who enforce laws), judges (those who decipher laws), and many others. The money received from taxes pays individuals who work for the government, as well as for public programs like education and infrastructure like roads.

10000maniacs

Penfailed wrote: »

How would you have ensured this didn't happen to you?

I would have asked the surveyor to test the bricks. Which is part of his job.

Dempo1

10000maniacs wrote: »

I would have asked the surveyor to test the bricks. Which is part of his job.

Do surveyors actually test Block's? Just curious, as I wouldn't have thought so

10000maniacs

Dempo1 wrote: »

Do surveyors actually test Block's? Just curious, as I wouldn't have thought so

I asked my surveyors to test the bricks when I bought my properties over the years. They tested them.
I also asked them to check the separation material between adjacent apartments to ensure it was concrete brick separating the floors and walls.

muffler

10000maniacs wrote: »

I would have asked the surveyor to test the bricks. Which is part of his job.

100% wrong.

Penfailed

10000maniacs wrote: »

I would have asked the surveyor to test the bricks. Which is part of his job.

Would you? Really? Considering that this issue only came to light after houses were built and bought and sold and thousands of unsuspecting people are left with crumbling homes...but you would've had the foresight to get the 'bricks' tested?

muffler

Dempo1 wrote: »

Do surveyors actually test Block's? Just curious, as I wouldn't have thought so

Nope!. Like any product used in building the supplier and / or the manufacturer is responsible for all certification relating to its compliance with all statutory regulations.

10000maniacs

muffler wrote: »

Nope!. Like any product used in building the supplier and / or the manufacturer is responsible for all certification relating to its compliance with all statutory regulations.

Mine did it on request. Whether they do it if not requested to do so is another matter.

Penfailed

10000maniacs wrote: »

Certainly not for pyrite and mica issues.
Basically the government implement laws, pay people to ensure the law is upheld, and taxpayers’ money pays for these services and other government services of all kinds. The government is comprised of a few parts: the legislators (those who make laws), executives (those who enforce laws), judges (those who decipher laws), and many others. The money received from taxes pays individuals who work for the government, as well as for public programs like education and infrastructure like roads.

Your taxes are spent on so much more than government workers, education and infrastructure. It would cost less than 2% of the tax spend to sort this issue.

10000maniacs

Penfailed wrote: »

Your taxes are spent on so much more than government workers, education and infrastructure. It would cost less than 2% of the tax spend to sort this issue.

That's why I used the sentence:
The money received from taxes pays individuals who work for the government, as well as for public programs like education and infrastructure like roads.
I could have added more, but its a long list.

Also tax revenue last year was €50 billion. Fixing the Mica problem which is estimated at €5 billion is 10% of the total tax revenue for a whole year.

Penfailed

10000maniacs wrote: »

That's why I used the sentence:
The money received from taxes pays individuals who work for the government, as well as for public programs like education and infrastructure like roads.
I could have added more, but its a long list.

Also tax revenue last year was €50 billion. Fixing the Mica problem which is estimated at €5 billion is 10% of the total tax revenue for a whole year.

https://whereyourmoneygoes.gov.ie/en/

€90 billion spent. Not sure where you are getting the €5 billion figure from?

muffler

10000maniacs wrote: »

I asked my surveyors to test the bricks when I bought my properties over the years. They tested them.

Now you're just spoofing which leads to anything else you have to say being put in the "unbelievable" bracket.

muffler

10000maniacs wrote: »

Fixing the Mica problem which is estimated at €5 billion is 10% of the total tax revenue for a whole year.

Unbelievable!

10000maniacs

muffler wrote: »

Unbelievable!

If all the houses with this issue needed to be torn down and rebuilt, the figure is closer to €5 billion. That was a figure mentioned on the Morning Ireland last week.