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

Cee-Jay-Cee

Swindled wrote: »

Leo Vradker and his current partner have just bought their "first home" for 820k
https://extra.ie/2021/06/27/property/leo-varadkar-matt-barrett-new-home.

That is particularly galling considering he had the brass neck to suggest the people in Donegal shouldn’t have built such large homes (which still would t have cost half of what he paid for his) He’s a despicable human being and I hope the electorate show him that in the next election.

MrMusician18

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

That is particularly galling considering he had the brass neck to suggest the people in Donegal shouldn’t have built such large homes (which still would t have cost half of what he paid for his) He’s a despicable human being and I hope the electorate show him that in the next election.

There's no need for that, and that's not what he said. He asked why taxpayers should fund the rebuilding of large houses. It's a legitimate concern.

Swindled

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

That is particularly galling considering he had the brass neck to suggest the people in Donegal shouldn’t have built such large homes (which still would t have cost half of what he paid for his) He’s a despicable human being and I hope the electorate show him that in the next election.

Leaving Leo out of it (play the ball not the man) the same state granted planning permission in the first place for these houses, and was happy to take the all the taxes, VAT, and development charges it cost to build them from the homeowner, and the property tax off them, and the PAYE off all the labour and professionals involved, and the stamp duty off them when they came to sell again. The state, the banks, the media, the estate agents, and the construction industry, were all encouraging larger houses and doing very very nicely out of it.

Swindled

MrMusician18 wrote: »

There's no need for that, and that's not what he said. He asked why taxpayers should fund the rebuilding of large houses. It's a legitimate concern.

The taxpayer shouldn't, but as the state has already accepted, that's where it's ended up for now until the state sort this emergency out, and hopefully recoup it for all us taxpayers somehow, just like they have attempted to do in other state scandals.

I'm a taxpayer, and so are all the victims, who bought and paid for their house without any state help, and paid huge amounts of tax in the process.
Why should my taxes go to anything I don't directly benefit from ?
Why should taxpayers help fund Leo's 820k house ?
Why should my taxes go on humane prison care for criminals at a cost of over 100k per year for each and every one of them ?
Why should my taxes go to Pyrite claims in Leinster ?
Why should my taxes go towards the cervical cancer scandal or hospital negligence cases ?
Why do you not go on other threads and complain to the victims about taxpayers having to pay, demand to know from the victims why taxpayers should, and demand the victims there accept less ? Why don't you continually harass and interrogate those actually responsible ?
Why don't you make accusations about blank cheques to them ? Why don't you make snide remarks about their counties roads and accident rates there?
Why don't you make false technical claims there ?
Answer each of those questions please, don't think about skipping any of them, and then I will have lots more questions for you.

MrMusician18

Swindled wrote: »

The taxpayer shouldn't, but as the state has already accepted, that's where it's ended up for now until the state sort this emergency out, and hopefully recoup it for all us taxpayers somehow, just like they have attempted to do in other state scandals.

I'm a taxpayer, and so are all the victims, who bought and paid for their house without any state help, and paid huge amounts of tax in the process.
Why should my taxes go to anything I don't directly benefit from ?
Why should taxpayers help fund Leo's 820k house ?
Why should my taxes go on humane prison care for criminals at a cost of over 100k per year for each and every one of them ?
Why do you not go on other threads and complain to the victims about taxpayers having to pay, demand to know from the victims why taxpayers should, and demand the victims there accept less ? Why don't you continually harass and interrogate those actually responsible ?
Why don't you make accusations about blank cheques to them ? Why don't you make snide remarks about their counties roads and accident rates there?
Why don't you make false technical claims there ?
Answer each of those questions please, don't think about skipping any of them, and then I will have lots more questions for you.

I'll get to your other questions in due course, but could you point out where I've been incorrect on the technical details. Misinformation is something I detest so if I've gotten something technical wrong, please tell me and I will correct.

Swindled

Yet again you refuse to answer any questions you are asked, but expect yours to be answered, and even when they are, you disappear, pop up again a few days later, and pretend all over again they have not been, and spam the same questions to the victims again.

MrMusician18 wrote: »

I don't think many people here have read the expert groups report. There are two issues mica causes: high water demand during manufacture leading to low cement content

Ok, let's go :

Utterly false.
Mica does not lead to low cement content. Not adding enough cement in the first place leads to low cement content. Cement content does not change.
Don't even think about attempting a reply to this btw, until you demonstrate the common courtesy of answering in return the questions you have been asked instead of disappearing and popping back up

You think you can interrogate victims here, fine interrogate away, as has already been demonstrated we have nothing to hide, but you're also going to answer every single question put to you from now on as well.

You claimed to be a former building control professional, what county, why did you leave and who or what are you trying to protect here ?

What's your interest now ? Journalism, Political ? Or just a "concerned taxpayer" who wasn't interested in asking any questions about Pyrite compensation or any other taxpayer scandal ?

Swindled

A wee breakdown of how the taxpayer supports the victims :

71% Nationwide do

https://twitter.com/MicaRedress/status/1409456952816570371


We have long memories in Donegal for who helped us and who didn't.
The folk memory of the famine evictions in Donegal is extremely strong. We remember for generations.
The April 1861 evictions in Derryveagh are well remembered in particular.

Irish peasant's houses are too large according to Leo Eric Varadkar

Look at these peasants and their large house, that'll teach those uppity peasants some manners eh ?

MrMusician18

[PHP][/PHP]

Swindled wrote: »

Yet again you refuse to answer any questions you are asked, but expect yours to be answered, and even when they are, you disappear, pop up again a few days later, and pretend all over again they have not been, and spam the same questions to the victims again.


Ok, let's go :

Utterly false.
Mica does not lead to low cement content. Not adding enough cement in the first place leads to low cement content. Cement content does not change.
Don't even think about attempting a reply to this btw, until you demonstrate the common courtesy of answering in return the questions you have been asked instead of disappearing and popping back up

You think you can interrogate victims here, fine interrogate away, as has already been demonstrated we have nothing to hide, but you're also going to answer every single question put to you from now on as well.

You claimed to be a former building control professional, what county, why did you leave and who or what are you trying to protect here ?

What's your interest now ? Journalism, Political ? Or just a "concerned taxpayer" who wasn't interested in asking any questions about Pyrite compensation or any other taxpayer scandal ?

I never claimed to be a former building control inspector, just that I used to be involved professionally in construction.

Just on the above technical point - one of the mechanisms of action, from what I understand from the technical report on blocks is that the mica absorbs water making it less available for the cement. This makes the concrete going into the moulds less workable (a stiff mix) consequently there is then a tendency to add water to improve workability but this skews the water cement ratio.

So yes, fair point, I should have been more precise with my language, I should have said cement ratio, not content.

As for why I'm posting - I saw it on the front page and it's a topic I'm interested in. Nothing more, or less.

It's interesting that the campaigners have 71% support (I'd have expected it to be 10-15% higher), given that the campaigners wants have not been scrutinized at all by the media. That said, outside of the affected areas that support is likely to be quite soft, so I wouldn't depend on it.

muffler

MrMusician18 wrote: »

It's interesting that the campaigners have 71% support (I'd have expected it to be 10-15% higher), given that the campaigners wants have not been scrutinized at all by the media. That said, outside of the affected areas that support is likely to be quite soft, so I wouldn't depend on it.

So you think the survey was conducted in Donegal?

Swindled

muffler wrote: »

So you think the survey was conducted in Donegal?

More like he was hoping to pretend/portray/slander it as a local poll in the hope that no one will notice.

It was a RedC national poll conducted on behalf of the Sunday Business post, that asked people on a whole range of other issues as well.

MrMusician18

muffler wrote: »

So you think the survey was conducted in Donegal?

Looks like the survey was nationwide, so no. But if the choice is between funding for projects in somewhere local area Vs funding for house repairs in North Donegal and Mayo, support wont be as strong in the rest of the country.

A more reasonable question to poll is do you support 100% even though that will likely mean projects in your area never get off the ground. Polling without contextualising is next to useless, you see this in environmental matters all the time. Polling shows strong support for green measures and green taxation in theory, but where rubber meets the road, people do not like that extra 5c on diesel, or stopping turf cutting, or fewer cows or whatever.

These are the real tradeoffs that are not expressed in a simple poll that are coming as the government has signaled it's ending it's expansionist policy

Swindled

MrMusician18 wrote: »

[PHP][/PHP]

Just on the above technical point - one of the mechanisms of action, from what I understand from the technical report on blocks is that the mica absorbs water making it less available for the cement. This makes the concrete going into the moulds less workable (a stiff mix) consequently there is then a tendency to add water to improve workability but this skews the water cement ratio.

So yes, fair point, I should have been more precise with my language, I should have said cement ratio, not content.

I never claimed to be a former building control inspector, just that I used to be involved professionally in construction.

In what role and what counties did you work in ?


You have repeatedly interrogated the victims in this thread with the same questions, despite them being answered over and over.

From now on you will be extending us the same courtesy and can start by answering the questions above and the other questions you have tried to skip / avoid.

MrMusician18 wrote: »

It's interesting that the campaigners have 71% support (I'd have expected it to be 10-15% higher), given that the campaigners wants have not been scrutinized at all by the media. That said, outside of the affected areas that support is likely to be quite soft, so I wouldn't depend on it.

Many national referendums have been passed on far thinner margins in Ireland and been lauded as landslides by the Irish media. 71% national support for any such policy is in fact massive.

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Looks like the survey was nationwide, so no. But if the choice is between funding for projects in somewhere local area Vs funding for house repairs in North Donegal and Mayo, support wont be as strong in the rest of the country.

A more reasonable question to poll is do you support 100% even though that will likely mean projects in your area never get off the ground. Polling without contextualising is next to useless, you see this in environmental matters all the time. Polling shows strong support for green measures and green taxation in theory, but where rubber meets the road, people do not like that extra 5c on diesel, or stopping turf cutting, or fewer cows or whatever.

These are the real tradeoffs that are not expressed in a simple poll that are coming as the government has signaled it's ending it's expansionist policy

This isn't about the price of diesel, turf cutting or cows as you like to portray.

You even complained about the Gardaí who praised the conduct of the Donegal and Mayo protestors.

The fact remains, as the national poll from the Sunday Business Post and RedC proves, your view is a total minority, no matter how much you have tried to skew, twist and slant the situation.

NIMAN

The Greens will be chased when they come to my door next election!

Swindled

NIMAN wrote: »

The Greens will be chased when they come to my door next election!

They are largely a Leinster party comprised of people who despise anyone in the rest of Ireland, so it's no surprise there.

Also they are not the brightest when it comes to the big picture, as this is a massive opportunity to put in place and promote better more energy efficient homes and a much more efficient and environmentally friendly building technology and systems, and spread these methods experience and technology from Donegal / Mayo to rest of Ireland. It was also their perfect opportunity to crack down on the ongoing environmental shenanigans of the quarries and construction industry nationwide. They haven't event the sense to incorporate the deep retrofit scheme into the process. Just as well perhaps, as they would be certain to make a balls of it.

jj880

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Looks like the survey was nationwide, so no. But if the choice is between funding for projects in somewhere local area Vs funding for house repairs in North Donegal and Mayo, support wont be as strong in the rest of the country.

A more reasonable question to poll is do you support 100% even though that will likely mean projects in your area never get off the ground. Polling without contextualising is next to useless, you see this in environmental matters all the time. Polling shows strong support for green measures and green taxation in theory, but where rubber meets the road, people do not like that extra 5c on diesel, or stopping turf cutting, or fewer cows or whatever.

These are the real tradeoffs that are not expressed in a simple poll that are coming as the government has signaled it's ending it's expansionist policy

So implying that home owners should have known blocks were defective isnt bad enough. You are now needlessly pointing out what everyone knows. That tax payer funding for projects is always a trade off. Why? Why bother?

Your presence in this thread is completely played out. You are here now purely to antagonise. Nothing more.

I'm not trolling because I don't agree with 100% redress in the form that campaigners want and I guarantee you that if people were asked if they were willing to forgo certain things that directly impact upon their lives or pay higher taxes or pay USC at current rates for longer the percentage of people that would agree would be less than 71% once they are fully informed.

If it is framed as poor Donegal homeowners against the government you are on to a winner especially if you throw in that the government saved the bankers every now and again;)

Being aggressive towards people and calling them trolls because they are proposing something other than exactly what you want is not the best strategy.

Swindled

^^^^ Same **** again, that has already been dealt with, and no matter how much you hate it, Victims are going to have a say in what is acceptable and just and what is not. Given many of us personally know of families whose lives have been destroyed, and even some that have taken their life over this, I'm surprised there is not much more anger . . . yet. To you it's another thread on boards, to us it's our lives.

71% people nationwide don't agree with you, so moving on.


Trying to get back to the actual topic . . . .

One of the problems we are going to hit is the numbers of contractors and trades are just not available in Donegal / Mayo to cope with a rebuild of this scale.

The whole way houses are constructed in Ireland needs to be looked at.
The factory production line system done away with this in other forms of manufacturing years ago.
At the moment housing in Ireland is an extremely long labour intensive process, especially blockwork/roof work/fitting out.

Maybe its time some effort and research was put out there to see if there are better systems and supply options that could be introduced ?

I know timber frame is risky, I've seen concerning cowboy jobs on that and it's only a partial / hybrid solution, but I'm sure there is other modular turnkey / better regulated systems. Conversely, now is also not the time to be trying anything other than proven tried and tested technology, so perhaps we have to think bigger and look further afield ?

Ideally new units could be made in factories and finished with everything from paint to bathroom fittings, transported to site, dropped into place and connected up, with only a few weeks site prep and finishing required.

I haven't seen anything out there yet that can be done at scale in Ireland, is mortgage friendly, long life, insurable and saleable / market value as traditional building technology, and it needs to be, or it's a total non runner from a restorative justice point of view. Factory module based houses can (should) can come in enough variations and configurations to look individual and suit their site / location.

Surely the government could also negotiate large scale deals and discount for a factory line process to save the taxpayer ?

We also have one of the most challenging (in terms of constant damp wind and rain) climates in Europe.

We're going to have to look outside our current experience to solve this in an acceptable manner.

Donegalforever

whatnow! wrote: »

I'm not trolling because I don't agree with 100% redress in the form that campaigners want and I guarantee you that if people were asked if they were willing to forgo certain things that directly impact upon their lives or pay higher taxes or pay USC at current rates for longer the percentage of people that would agree would be less than 71% once they are fully informed.

If it is framed as poor Donegal homeowners against the government you are on to a winner especially if you throw in that the government saved the bankers every now and again;)

Being aggressive towards people and calling them trolls because they are proposing something other than exactly what you want is not the best strategy.

OK...I understand you have little or no sympathy for those caught up in the Mica catastrophe; presumably it does not affect you.
It would turn into a terrible selfish world if everyone adopted "I'm all right Jack" attitude.

Swindled

Donegalforever wrote: »

OK...I understand you have little or no sympathy for those caught up in the Mica catastrophe; presumably it does not affect you.
It would turn into a terrible selfish world if everyone adopted "I'm all right Jack" attitude.

They seem curiously attracted to this thread, and don't get to blame, interrogate, and dictate to victims regarding taxpayer costs on other such threads, and spam the same questions over and over, despite being answered, so it's a curious state of affairs. Perhaps it's because it's Donegal / Mayo that are effected, who knows. Perhaps a question for the psychology forum.

I agree 100% with you that is not an Ireland I want to live in.

I've already expressed my sympathy.

I'm just concerned about the cost and wondering if the solution is to be funded by taxpayers is there a way to solve the issue without the costs exploding.

I guarantee you if those houses are to be rebuilt with taxpayer money in a short period of time the costs are going to be much more than what people originally paid for them or would be able to resell on the open market.

Swindled

No matter how many times we answer the questions and make the points it's the same.

Is there any point in trying to provide latest news and discuss solutions on this thread for victims ? it's proving to be a waste of time.

How long should we give it ?

Swindled

Swindled wrote: »

Even if she was in such a position, in terms of justice, why should your sister, a victim through no fault of her own, be forced by the state to demolish a house that she spent / was worth 300k, and replace it with something worth 150k?

You made your position clear. You want exactly like for like.

Someone else wanted to discuss a solution that involved 3 types of houses to help control costs and speed things up as it offered a degree of certainty in costing and planning of resources. You called them a troll.

Anyone that pays taxes in Ireland has a right to have their opinion on this if they will be paying for it.

Swindled

whatnow! wrote: »

You made your position clear. You want exactly like for like.

Someone else wanted to discuss a solution that involved 3 types of houses to help control costs and speed things up as it offered a degree of certainty in costing and planning of resources. You called them a troll.

Anyone that pays taxes in Ireland has a right to have their opinion on this if they will be paying for it.

I said no such thing, we want something that will result in market value for market value, proper full restorative justice as would anyone.


It's high time you and some others stopped mispresenting the victims position.

The victims have paid, and will pay a huge amount in taxes for their houses and are taxpayers just as much as you.

Your opinion is in a small minority.

muffler

Calm down folks. Less aggression please and I wont be repeating myself. Thanks.

MrMusician18

jj880 wrote: »

So implying that home owners should have known blocks were defective isnt bad enough. You are now needlessly pointing out what everyone knows. That tax payer funding for projects is always a trade off. Why? Why bother?

Your presence in this thread is completely played out. You are here now purely to antagonise. Nothing more.

Please don't attribute opinions or arguments to me that I never made. It was poster Cee-jay-cee that claimed that people knew long ago that the blocks were no good, not me.

Swindled

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Please don't attribute opinions or arguments to me that I never made. It was poster Cee-jay-cee that claimed that people knew long ago that the blocks were no good, not me.

Where's the answers to the questions you were asked ?, we answered all your questions (over and over several times), we would like the same basic courtesy in return.

Some minor layout adjustments are not going to make or break any discussion.

The cost to build these houses will be more than their market value if the government is paying the developers an uncapped amount which concerns me as we are currently the most indebted country in Europe per capita.

Swindled

whatnow! wrote: »

Some minor layout adjustments are not going to make or break any discussion.

The cost to build these houses will be more than their market value if the government is paying the developers an uncapped amount.

Where are you getting this allegation of "uncapped amounts".
Like for like is not "uncapped".

Swindled

Swindled wrote: »

Where are you getting this allegation of "uncapped amounts".
Like for like is not "uncapped".

Ah come on now, let's be realistic. These houses will cost more when the bill is going to the government versus an individual paying for it themselves and keeping an eye on things and holding builders accountable during a period of time where there is not excessive demand for builders.

Swindled

whatnow! wrote: »

Ah come on now, let's be realistic. These houses will cost more when the bill is going to the government versus an individual paying for it themselves and keeping an eye on things and holding builders accountable during a period of time where there is not excessive demand for builders.

This is more of the "bank cheque" slander.
The current realistic market rates of what a house costs per sq m are well known in each area, and Donegal has one of the lower rates in Ireland.
The floor area should be capped at like for like.
The government should ensure there is enough competition and supply to build these houses at realistic market rates instead of blaming the victims.