Mica Redress

Fair play.

I'm not sure you can describe it as "modest". Your typical 4-5 bed detached home is about 160 sq.m.

Like I said before, I am all for the government providing assistance here. There is a moral obligation on the state to ensure all citizens have reasonable access to appropriate housing. And I would include this in such an obligation, given how many people are completely out of pocket on it. But note the words "reasonable" and "appropriate" that I use.

Fair enough if someone has six young kids and is stuck raising them in a small house. But if you're a couple 50+ with no kids at home, looking to have your 5-bed, 6 bath 250sqm house rebuilt completely, then that's an unreasonable request. This is a request for assistance from the state. The state does not owe these people redress.

Yes, it's a sh1t and unfair situation to be in, but life's not fair. We all have to accept what comes our way and deal with it rather than expect to be completely bailed out.

Have to agree 100%. 350k is more than generous. There are very few properties for sale in Donegal for over 350k.

From a taxpayer point of view, it might be better to build a number of housing estates in villages and offer relocation to those. Would also enhance village life.

https://www.daft.ie/for-sale/detached-house-tirconail-house-ardgillew-ballyshannon-co-donegal/3265482

My point is that 250 sq.m. is a huge property whether it has five beds or two. It is not reasonable to expect assistance from the state to build a house that is far in excess of what you need.

As someone raising a family in a 100sq.m. house who would be over the moon to have 150sq.m., I have a pretty keen insight on how much space you actually need. I'm not saying the state should pay for all these people to move into tiny shoeboxes, but there has to be limit.

Who are you to dictate what people need? If I got the rumoured €350k, it would probably cover my demolition and reconstruction. It wouldn't cover rent (even though there's nowhere to rent), storage costs, continuing mortgage payments, etc., etc.

The proposal is for €350k as well as rent, storage and other ancillary cost.

It's actually pretty easy to work out what people need for a house to function as a home. The local authorities do it all the time.

Means and needs tests have always been part of the conditions of government assistance. The state isn't compensating here but providing grant aid assistance. It's an important distinction since one implies wrongdoing on the part of the state.

While a rare example, asking the state to reconstruct a 5 bed house that has only two people living in it in my opinion goes well beyond reasonable and places an unacceptable level burden on the State.

Wait, a minute. Why would you want funding to cover continuing mortgage payments? You borrowed money to buy a house, you are getting it rebuilt for free from the State, why should the State also cover your continuing mortgage payments?

That is some sense of entitlement.

Genuinely though if the houses are built to current standards and they obviously have to be for compliance purposes. Wouldn't that make them more valuable for one and far lower cost to own and run per year than what the replace. Meaning the net cost or so called unaffordability is negated.

There's somewhat a delusion here if anyone thinks 350k isn't a significant amount of money for home building. End result an A rated new build home which by all accounts will outlast the replacement.

Can someone explain to me why are the Government accountable to this redress?

Maybe I'm completely naive here but I want to know why is my tax money possible going this this redress, are the government at the time responsible for building these houses with mica?

The bottom line is you picked the wrong developer. You weren't done over by the Government, or the taxpayer.

You were done over by the builders and their suppliers who carried out construction on the cheap.

The Government aren't responsible for this.

If you do get compensated via taxpayers money, in my opinion this is the wrong decision. I don't pay out 50% of my income to fix builders shoddy work. Especially builders I haven't hired.

I need my PAYE to be spent in the correct manner. Not as a slush fund for correcting builders mistakes.

If you go onto the 100% redress page on Facebook you will learn more about this. Most of the houses were built using direct labour. The quarries and the overseeing of regulations are to blame.

They will be built to the old standards unless you pay for an upgrade to the new standards.