Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Corrupted zoning of land ? . .

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,326 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Cookie_Monster wrote: »
    who spends several hundred thousand euro on anything without basic checks?
    An engineering report by an independent contractor would have flagged it, or even checking about since it had clearly flooded previously and had several planning issues highlight by nearby businesses...
    most surveyors will only check the structural integrity of the property itself, and will not check for any issues related to history of flooding, etc.
    i once had a survey done on a house with a flat roof and in the report, the surveyor commented more on the state of the decor in the house than he did on the condition of the flat roof, which i was obviously much more interested in.
    i was told this was standard practice when i queried it.

    you cannot expect someone buying their first house to know all the ins and outs of buying - and it can be an intimidating experience - and the difference between a good solicitor and a bad solicitor can be a world of difference - and a house purchase is often the first contact people have with a solicitor, so they've no previous experience of choosing one.

    the high and mighty 'it's your own fault' line being peddled by many in this thread is intensely smug.


  • Options
    #33
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    the high and mighty 'it's your own fault' line being peddled by many in this thread is intensely smug.

    This is really sticking out to me as well. This thread isn't about 1 sap who got conned through some obvious folly. It's about an entire residential community being allowed to be built in an area unfit for purpose. This has happened in a crazy amount of places through out the country and is a valid issue of concern.


  • Options
    #34
    Valetta
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,611 ✭✭✭Valetta


    If people didn't buy houses in these estates, then builders wouldn't build them.

    That's not being smug- it's just common sense.

    The OP has admitted that they were wrong and should have done basic checks before making their decision.

    They are also making a huge leap to suggest that the zoning of the land was corrupt.


  • Options
    #35
    westendgirlie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,125 ✭✭✭westendgirlie


    I really don't get why people are blaming the homeowners.

    If I buy a brand new car, should I employ the services of a mechanic to check it over before I purchase it? Or, should the manufacturers ensure that the car is safe for the road?

    The same principal should apply to all purchases. If houses are given the go ahead by a government department to be built on a certain plot of land, Mr & Mrs Joe Soap would have trusted their decision that it was safe to do so. Otherwise, what is the point in a planning/zoning department?


  • Options
    #36
    secman
    Registered Users Posts: 6,228 ✭✭✭secman


    I have huge sympathy for people who bought in good faith and assumed that County Council planners were in fact suitably qualified to make good planning decisions. the same people who are now guarded and have their salaries protected by the "Croke Park Agreement" which at this stage should be renamed "South Park Agreement" as its pure comical now especially with the recent climdown on "Allowances" by Howlin.

    Quite close to where i work there is a remarkable bit of "planning" lunacy. Right on the junction where the canal meets the beginning of the Naas Road and where the Luas cuts across this junction and heads down the canal. Literally, right on this junction a "tower block of appartments was built, with parking ! It really has to be seen to be believed, how it ever got planning ! Needless to say the developer went "belly up".

    Scandalous decisions were made and we the taxpayers will be footing the bill for many years to come, in the meantime Noonan's head must be sore from all the patting on it everytime to goes to Europe to "get our bailout " sorted............ grat little man..... doing a super job........irish are great .....but fcuck off !

    gets coat and leaves the room................



    Secman


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,326 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    secman wrote: »
    I have huge sympathy for people who bought in good faith and assumed that County Council planners were in fact suitably qualified to make good planning decisions. the same people who are now guarded and have their salaries protected by the "Croke Park Agreement" which at this stage should be renamed "South Park Agreement" as its pure comical now especially with the recent climdown on "Allowances" by Howlin.
    to be fair to the council planners, a lot of them would have left their jobs as their recommendations would have been overruled hand over fist by local gombeen politicians, to make sure developments went ahead.

    'chaos at the crossroads' by frank mcdonald and james nix is a highly recommended read - if your blood pressure can stand it.


  • Options
    #38
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,326 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Valetta wrote: »
    If people didn't buy houses in these estates, then builders wouldn't build them.
    i remember talking to people who were afraid *not* to buy. they weren't economists, they didn't know that house prices would not continue to rise, and they needed to get in on the bottom rung while the bottom rung was still affordable. what other option did they have? continue to pay spiralling rents?
    hindsight is 20/20.


  • Options
    #39
    starbelgrade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    most surveyors will only check the structural integrity of the property itself, and will not check for any issues related to history of flooding, etc.
    i once had a survey done on a house with a flat roof and in the report, the surveyor commented more on the state of the decor in the house than he did on the condition of the flat roof, which i was obviously much more interested in.
    i was told this was standard practice when i queried it.

    A surveyor's report is generally a visual superficial inspection only and doesn't include any inspection of the structural integrity of the house. In order to check the structural integrity, you would need to employ the services of a structural engineer to carry out the inspection and can entail uncovering work such as removing roof coverings, plasterboard and more.

    This is why it is always important to check with your surveyor what is and isn't included in their inspection & report. It's also equally important to ensure that they are suitably qualified and insured to carry out such work, otherwise you will have little or no comeback.

    magicbastarder wrote: »
    the high and mighty 'it's your own fault' line being peddled by many in this thread is intensely smug.

    It is a little smug, but the reality is that when you purchase a house, the responsibility to ensure that you have employed the right people - be it architects, solicitors, engineers or surveyors is entirely your own.

    This applies also to people building new houses. They often assume that ultimately the builder or architect is responsible to ensure that their house is built to the correct standards, however legally, it is the building owner who bears this responsibility.

    It is, I'm afraid, not only a case of "buyer beware" but also one of "buyer's liability".


  • Options
    #40
    Drumpot
    Registered Users Posts: 19,306 ✭✭✭✭Drumpot



    http://utv.vo.llnwd.net/o16/LMFM/2012/09/26/Loosetalk260912.mp3



    http://2fm.rte.ie/colmhayes/



    On first link, that’s me on LMFM, give it a minute and clickforward to about 3 quarters way through . .


    For the 2fm one click on “listen” and the “floodinginterview”.


    This is my life, while I accept responsibility for buying my house, I make no apologies for doing what I can for my family to get the problem fixed . . Maybe when some of the less empathetic posters have their own family, they might understand my motives for using as many mediums as possible to get our government to fix a problem they ultlimatley caused . .


  • Options
    #41
    Valetta
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,611 ✭✭✭Valetta


    Drumpot wrote: »

    http://utv.vo.llnwd.net/o16/LMFM/2012/09/26/Loosetalk260912.mp3



    http://2fm.rte.ie/colmhayes/



    On first link, that’s me on LMFM, give it a minute and clickforward to about 3 quarters way through . .


    For the 2fm one click on “listen” and the “floodinginterview”.


    This is my life, while I accept responsibility for buying my house, I make no apologies for doing what I can for my family to get the problem fixed . . Maybe when some of the less empathetic posters have their own family, they might understand my motives for using as many mediums as possible to get our government to fix a problem they ultlimatley caused . .

    I'm genuinely sorry for your plight, but it wasn't caused by the government.

    Builders built the houses and the people, including yourself bought them.

    It is not as if the problems were not evident beforehand.

    You still have not come up with any evidence of corruption in the process.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Drumpot
    Registered Users Posts: 19,306 ✭✭✭✭Drumpot


    Valetta wrote: »
    I'm genuinely sorry for your plight, but it wasn't caused by the government.

    Builders built the houses and the people, including yourself bought them.

    It is not as if the problems were not evident beforehand.

    You still have not come up with any evidence of corruption in the process.

    With all due respect, if the land is not zoned for building houses cant be built . . Problem solved before anybody is hurt . .

    Did you read the clip and quote from a local counceller in the Irish Independent paper before our estate was built?

    I provided evidence that the OPW warned and raised grave concerns of flood plains in bettystown .. You can try and argue semantics and push the whole "technically its not corruption, could be just incompetency" lame bullsh*t excuse , but at the end of the day, if there is no logical reason for the zoning of our estate, then you have to look at the probable motives for it happening. I cant quote people (other councellors/tds/OPW/County Council officials) who dont want to be publically quoted but my thread assumptions and suspicians are even shared by people prominent in the current government . .

    I spoke with a junior engineer from the OPW yesterday and they said that there is no reasonable explanation as to why this land was zoned for building. They said you dont have to be a qualifed engineer to see it was always going to be a bad idea, epecially with the planned expansion that was always on the cards in Bettystown.

    That aside, if our councels have nothing to fear (ie corrupted actions) , then they wouldnt mind sharing why councellors voted against professional advice . . I think people in this country think the word corruption is extreme simply because many wouldnt know what the word means because its so prominent in politics . . Im not trying to insult anybody, I think we have gotten used to being screwed so much we dont even realise it when we are letting the F**kers away with all sorts of dodgy dealings . .

    Edit: Changed the thread name by adding a question mark . . There you go, you can draw your own conclusions as to the logic of why the land was zoned . .


  • Options
    #43
    Zab
    Registered Users Posts: 1,931 ✭✭✭Zab


    Drumpot wrote: »
    I honestly dont know much about the zoning of land but in attached piece, the Councellors were warned about the possible/probable issues arising - http://www.independent.ie/unsorted/features/heard-the-one-about-building-houses-in-a-marsh-its-no-joke-243217.html

    Okay, that wasn't how I thought it worked. Even if it wasn't "supposed" to be addressed at zoning you'd still think it should be addressed at some stage prior to them being built, so perhaps my point wouldn't have mattered even if it was correct.


  • Options
    #44
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,326 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Valetta wrote: »
    It is not as if the problems were not evident beforehand.
    you do know that many, many people were unable to afford houses in the area they grew up in, thus resulting in them buying houses in areas they had no previous connection with?
    the only thing that would have brought the buyers to these areas would have been the fact that there were houses they could afford. so the suggestion that they would have known what the area was like beforehand doesn't stack up.


Advertisement