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

Yurt2

Only came across this story in the last week or so. Bonkers and an outrageous scandal. You'd feel for the people who thought they had their dream home. Hope the company responsible get absolutely rinsed in the courts at some stage.

JustAThought

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

I drove around every single housing estate in letterkenny on Saturday. All but two of them are affected. Every estate in glencar except glenoughty looks to have the problem. Same as you head up towards mountain top. All the estates behind Hegarty’s and further up towards the top have the problem as does Lisnenan court. On the other side of town the Maples is riddled with it, not sure on Rowan park though but think it’s ok. I’m estimating close to 2000 houses between them all.

That map is shocking. what is the significance of the different colour coding - pink/blue etc. Heartstopping to see.

Is the protest going ahead? Where is the meeting point in Dublin & at what time?

Should also really be stuck into current affairs - its kinda hidden here

NIMAN

Meeting at the Convention centre at 1pm.

Ace2007

NIMAN wrote: »

Meeting at the Convention centre at 1pm.

Pre paid coffee available at coffee angle in the IFSC beforehand

schmoo2k

Late to the thread - my house has the issue (not as bad as some folks have) and is "bonded" can I go down that route?

jj880

JustAThought wrote: »

That map is shocking. what is the significance of the different colour coding - pink/blue etc. Heartstopping to see.

Is the protest going ahead? Where is the meeting point in Dublin & at what time?

Should also really be stuck into current affairs - its kinda hidden here

A great resource - 1 mica house marked in my own estate but there are more that are not marked yet.

red = mica
purple/blue = pyrite
pink = unsure

From the 100% Redress group:
"
We will demonstrate at 2 locations. Firstly The Convention Centre from 1.30-2.30,pm. We will then walk the approx 25 min walk to Leinster House. We will then demonstrate from 3.00-4.00pm there. We look forward to seeing you all
"

pryingEyes999

I am confused as to why the tax payer has to provide redress here. Were these state run developments? It is terrible what has happened but how is this any different to a company/business failing or someone getting scammed by a company - the government don't step in then.

DrPhilG

MrMusician18 wrote: »

I don't live, work or play in Donegal

But you figured you'd come to the Donegal forum to rattle the cages of some devastated people whose houses are falling down around their ears and putting both their physical and mental health at risk?

Good man yourself.

If that gets me a card, grand so.

DrPhilG

pryingEyes999 wrote: »

I am confused as to why the tax payer has to provide redress here. Were these state run developments? It is terrible what has happened but how is this any different to a company/business failing or someone getting scammed by a company - the government don't step in then.

My dad got scammed a few years back, someone accessed his bank accounts and robbed a few grand.

It wasn't his fault, it was a failing of the bank's security system. So the bank made him whole.

The government and council failed in their duty to ensure that the materials being sold to the public and signed off in construction were up to standard.

Dempo1

Glad there is apparently a push to resolve this issue, albeit I remain concerned no accountability remains with the suppliers of these blocks, insurance providers and whomever signed off on building completions.

I wasn't aware the previous Pyrite redress covered 100% of repair costs which seems odd.

Honestly, I think in reality the cost of this will far exceed €1 billion but there's also going to be serious legacy issues, regardless of redress.

I appreciate not every home owner built to sell but the harsh reality is these properties and there value is forever impacted. Who, honestly would consider purchasing one of these properties in the future, no matter what remedial work is done. Disclosures would be a legal obligation by vendors, there's also the Irony that it's highly unlikely these properties would ever be considered by financial institutions for a new mortgage, it's equally likely that either insurance will be refused or so excessive, completely unsustainable. I've not heard any mention of these potential issues but they are real sadly. It then begs the question is remedial work even logical, obviously this would depend on the damage but I believe, rightly or wrongly, nothing short of a complete demolition and rebuild is required, perhaps not on every property, but certainly on quite a few.

pryingEyes999

DrPhilG wrote: »

My dad got scammed a few years back, someone accessed his bank accounts and robbed a few grand.

It wasn't his fault, it was a failing of the bank's security system. So the bank made him whole.

The government and council failed in their duty to ensure that the materials being sold to the public and signed off in construction were up to standard.

There were chartered engineers here that signed off on the work. Its on them and the company, not on the government. Surely this is what insurance is for? Where have the insurance claims gone?

I have the same question regarding the previous Leinster pyrite stuff. Surely this is all on the companies and engineers that signed off on this work? If I get food poisoning from a restaurant in the morning, im hardly going to sue the government for it because they didn't check them 24/7. I'm sure I am missing something here as to the governments culpability.

Reading this article: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/q-a-what-is-mica-and-why-are-people-protesting-over-it-1.4593301

"Who polices this and has the testing or inspection regime on building supplies changed since these problems emerged?

The Department of Housing said since 2013, on foot of an EU regulation, there is “a suite of harmonised standards covering most construction products including aggregates, and concrete blocks”. This is called the the Construction Products Regulation.

However the department said: “It should be noted that primary responsibility for demonstrating a construction product’s compliance with the requirements of the Construction Products Regulation rests with the manufacturer of the product.”

I just don't see how we justify this bailing out of the engineers and companies involved.

Ace2007

DrPhilG wrote: »

My dad got scammed a few years back, someone accessed his bank accounts and robbed a few grand.

It wasn't his fault, it was a failing of the bank's security system. So the bank made him whole.

The government and council failed in their duty to ensure that the materials being sold to the public and signed off in construction were up to standard.

No but the bank's not taking the hit - they have insurance for that, so while they pay out - they claim back from their insurance.

If the bank didn't make your dad whole, could he claim it off the government?

Dempo1

pryingEyes999 wrote: »

There were chartered engineers here that signed off on the work. Its on them and the company, not on the government. Surely this is what insurance is for? Where have the insurance claims gone?

I have the same question regarding the previous Leinster pyrite stuff. Surely this is all on the companies and engineers that signed off on this work? If I get food poisoning from a restaurant in the morning, im hardly going to sue the government for it because they didn't check them 24/7. I'm sure I am missing something here as to the governments culpability.

I tend to agree and I'm completely perplexed about the points you raise, I've said it earlier the only people saddled with this debacle are the home owners and whilst I fundsmentally disagree that the state should foot the bill, I don't see any other options. I noticed the Taoiseach is consulting AG but sense this this more about the future, at the very least Government should us any and all means to chase those responsible for reimbursement for
Whatever needs to be paid out. But I remain sceptical that remedial work pointless, these properties forever damaged from a legacy point of view and whilst extreme, nothing but full demolition and rebuild is likely to be required on a lot of these properties and my God, €1 billion won't even scratch the surface regarding costs

Furze99

pryingEyes999 wrote: »

I am confused as to why the tax payer has to provide redress here. Were these state run developments? It is terrible what has happened but how is this any different to a company/business failing or someone getting scammed by a company - the government don't step in then.

Don't worry, you're not alone. Many people are wondering the exact same. The rest of the public need clarity on a number of issues:

- who made these building materials, their political connections and why aren't they or their insurers covering the costs.

- who built these houses, their political connections and why aren't they or their insurers covering the costs.

- who surveyed and supervised their construction, their political connections and why aren't they or their insurers covering the costs.

- why is the state offering 'redress', as if it's at fault.

- why are people looking for 100% like for like reconstruction of what are very substantial houses in some case. If they must be rehoused, and the state must pay, modest 125 sq metre dwellings should be maximum.

- who stands to gain politically from all this campaign.

MrMusician18

DrPhilG wrote: »

But you figured you'd come to the Donegal forum to rattle the cages of some devastated people whose houses are falling down around their ears and putting both their physical and mental health at risk?

Good man yourself.

If that gets me a card, grand so.

No, I came to give an alternative view. Not to rattle cages or upset anyone. And my view is that the State is not responsible here and it's unreasonable to expect a blank cheque from the rest of us to resolve it.

Such huge demands ought to be challenged. All we've gotten from the traditional media so far is softball interviews and "ara it's terrible" coverage.

Those suffering through this have my sympathy of course. Sympathy doesn't mean unlimited support though.

Northernlily

pryingEyes999 wrote: »

I am confused as to why the tax payer has to provide redress here. Were these state run developments? It is terrible what has happened but how is this any different to a company/business failing or someone getting scammed by a company - the government don't step in then.

To me it seems a clear cut case of a failure to uphold standards by the regulatory and compliance bodies.

The book stops at government enforcement of these standards in my opinion, therefore they are ultimately responsible at the top of the tree. It was only a matter if time before they got walloped by something this big. Govt bodies have been far too nonchalant in enforcing minimum standards over the years and all we see is scandal after scandal with no accountability at the end. Lessons learned are not being enforced resulting in a repeat of mistakes.

Best luck to all marching today. Solidarity from Dublin. We all have an interest here that, our children could face the same issues in their futures if not dealt with properly.

MrMusician18

Furze99 wrote: »

Don't worry, you're not alone. Many people are wondering the exact same. The rest of the public need clarity on a number of issues:

- who made these building materials, their political connections and why aren't they or their insurers covering the costs.

We do, the suppliers and quarries are known

Furze99 wrote: »

- who built these houses, their political connections and why aren't they or their insurers covering the costs.

These were largely self build houses, constructed by the homeowner.

Furze99 wrote: »

- who surveyed and supervised their construction, their political connections and why aren't they or their insurers covering the costs.

The owners themselves. Self builds are exempt from a lot of monitoring.

Furze99 wrote: »

- why is the state offering 'redress', as if it's at fault.

No one else can afford to pay basically

Furze99 wrote: »

- why are people looking for 100% like for like reconstruction of what are very substantial houses in some case. If they must be rehoused, and the state must pay, modest 125 sq metre dwellings should be maximum.

that's not what the protestors want

Furze99 wrote: »

- who stands to gain politically from all this campaign.

Anyone who stands with the protestors, no matter how costly the wants are.Local populists.

Ace2007

MrMusician18 wrote: »

These were largely self build houses, constructed by the homeowner.

The owners themselves. Self builds are exempt from a lot of monitoring.
.

One thing to come from all this is the likely increase in the cost of self builds - increased monitoring requirement etc.

Technique

MrMusician18 wrote: »

And my view is that the State is not responsible here and it's unreasonable to expect a blank cheque from the rest of us to resolve it.

I think that it's hugely disrespectful to state that people affected by Mica are looking for blank cheques. No matter what the outcome, we'll be out of pocket. Maybe by a large amount. All we want is our homes to be left as they should have been.

timmyntc

MrMusician18 wrote: »

We do, the suppliers and quarries are known

These were largely self build houses, constructed by the homeowner.

Ace2007 wrote: »

One thing to come from all this is the likely increase in the cost of self builds - increased monitoring requirement etc.

Nope. So many of the houses are in housing estates, some are even council owned. Others are office buildings. But dont let that get in the way of your preconceived notions.

Ace2007

timmyntc wrote: »

Nope. So many of the houses are in housing estates, some are even council owned. Others are office buildings. But dont let that get in the way of your preconceived notions.

Wow, why you are attacking me there.

Is it factual what the poster said about self builds and monitoring? If true, then something like this will ensure that tighter regulations are brought in, which will subsequently push up the price of self builds, and rightly so if there is no monitoring in place.

As for the estates - why not go after the developers for building/selling sub standard houses.

You attack anyone who gives are realistic view point of what is likely to happen. And i've said it before unless everyone is on the same page there will be disappointment at the end.

jj880

DrPhilG wrote: »

But you figured you'd come to the Donegal forum to rattle the cages of some devastated people whose houses are falling down around their ears and putting both their physical and mental health at risk?

Good man yourself.

If that gets me a card, grand so.

He's been warned by mods already in this thread for baiting.

Why he hasnt been banned yet I'm not sure.

Now the latest is, according to him, mica home owners are looking for a blank cheque.

No. Mica home owners are looking for a redress scheme that means they dont have to find up to and above 100k to restore their houses. The vast majority dont have it. They will end up homeless or in a caravan beside a pile of rubble that used to be their home.

90% of half the costs involved in restoring a building is not 90% of the total bill. This is the biggest misconception about the current scheme.

CastorTroy

Rte actually have an article today
https://www.rte.ie/news/2021/0614/1228091-mica-protest-latest/

MrMusician18

timmyntc wrote: »

Nope. So many of the houses are in housing estates, some are even council owned. Others are office buildings. But dont let that get in the way of your preconceived notions.

The expert group on blocks said that they were largely self build. It's one of the reasons why homebond aren't involved much.

I was responding to direct questions on constructors and oversight. The fact that they were self build or didn't adhere to the TGDs in parts is not the cause of the issues here. Perfectly built homes with the same blocks would've suffered the same fate.

Furze99

Northernlily wrote: »

Best luck to all marching today. Solidarity from Dublin.

Donegal brings Delta to Dublin - let's hope for all our sakes that this is not the story in a couple of weeks time............

At best this march and all the travel involved on buses etc is ill conceived. At worst it's reckless and will we see the organisers jailed if it turns out bad?

muffler

pryingEyes999 wrote: »

I am confused as to why the tax payer has to provide redress here.

Hopefully you never have to live in a house affected by mica.

muffler

Furze99 wrote: »

Don't worry, you're not alone. Many people are wondering the exact same. The rest of the public need clarity on a number of issues:

- who made these building materials, their political connections and why aren't they or their insurers covering the costs.

- who built these houses, their political connections and why aren't they or their insurers covering the costs.

- who surveyed and supervised their construction, their political connections and why aren't they or their insurers covering the costs.

- why is the state offering 'redress', as if it's at fault.

- why are people looking for 100% like for like reconstruction of what are very substantial houses in some case. If they must be rehoused, and the state must pay, modest 125 sq metre dwellings should be maximum.

- who stands to gain politically from all this campaign.

You're new to the thread and you ask a lot of questions with your first post. Read this post before posting again.

muffler

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Not to rattle cages or upset anyone.

You're making a pretty good job of it.

timmyntc

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The expert group on blocks said that they were largely self build. It's one of the reasons why homebond aren't involved much.

I was responding to direct questions on constructors and oversight. The fact that they were self build or didn't adhere to the TGDs in parts is not the cause of the issues here. Perfectly built homes with the same blocks would've suffered the same fate.

Self-builds have MICA more than estate builds as a % of all builds - but in terms of absolute numbers its not a vast majority self-builds if that makes sense.

Self-builds are overrepresented in MICA/defective block cases relative to estate builds, but are not the numerical majority. There are plenty of housing estates and some commercial buildings affected. I agree with you on that about self-build oversight, but plenty of estates got stung also.

malinheader

Furze99 wrote: »

Donegal brings Delta to Dublin - let's hope for all our sakes that this is not the story in a couple of weeks time............

At best this march and all the travel involved on buses etc is ill conceived. At worst it's reckless and will we see the organisers jailed if it turns out bad?

Think we should be more worried about Donegal taking Delta from Dublin. Do you not think.