Room to Improve - Grants 😱

the worst thing about this program is that it has resulted in an influx of people into our nice forum that have no interest or experience in construction, the sooner this dies off and we can go back to talking about dpc detailing around window cills and airtightness around hollowcore the better 😀

Well, somebody did on page 1 of the thread and your posts among others, were edited by the mod @DOCARCH, who then posted this:

this thread really sums up how much of a cesspit boards is a lot of the time. I often wonder how people rack up 50k/60k posts. Then I read threads like this and laugh out loud. Some of you need to go outside 😁

You have repeatedly claimed that they invented structural problems that were not there, did not have properly qualified professionals signing off the work, and claimed the house was vacant when it was not, all so that they could claim grant money to which they were not entitled.

What is that if not an accusation of fraud?

As I said, Mr. Bannon and the show should clarify the matter. He is no stranger to the media ( he was on Tubrity's show over a dozen times ), so there should be more clarification from the programme over matters, and there appears to be lot of confusion over grants etc. Even Mr. Bannon himself I think on the first show this year (12 days ago) said the couple could be entitled to the first time buyers grant, as well as the other grants , on the house they inherited?

As someone else said ( post 31) there are "couples who bought genuine derelict, vacant properties and are struggling to qualify so questions do need to be asked about how these schemes are managed."

I would not say it was fraud but I agree questions need to be asked how these schemes are managed.

Because Mr. Bannon claimed in publicity "this series was all about grants" and yet there appears to be confusion over grants: very few people have, for example, succeeded in getting some of the grants. Anyway, I am not going to post in this thread again. Someone else a few posts ago wondered how people rack up 50k/60k posts ... you go ahead and rack up your post total more if you want.  

You never did back this claim up.

How is Bannon gonna clear up confusion about 'dereliction' for instance if people insist on using their own definition of it, even when it is explained multiple times.😁

You never asked me to back up ""the claim that very few people have succeeded in getting some of the grants". Anyway, a 2 second google shows the Examiner reported on 16th November last year " Just 21 vacant property refurbishment grants have been drawn down by homeowners since the scheme came into effect last year, new figures from the Department of Housing show. The figures show that 4,640 applications have been made for the grant, with 1,975 being approved since the scheme came into effect in July 2022."

As regards the dereliction definition, I and others have told you that, according to the government website on the grant " to get this top-up grant, you must confirm that the property is derelict. This means that the property is structurally unsound and dangerous. You must submit an independent report prepared by a qualified professional, along with the application confirming that the property is derelict." The dictionary definition of dereliction ( "a state of having been abandoned and become dilapidated" : "not being cared for" ) is not enough.

Someone else said last November in the article in the Examiner, the fact that just 21 grants have been drawn down shows that the scheme is “badly designed” and “beset with problems”. I would find it hard to disagree with that.

I said I would not post in this thread again but then you write "You never did back this claim up". I'm done with this thread now.

My spooky stalker arrives 😲😁