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

malinheader

Holy fcuk. That statement by Cassidys is some joke.
Fair play to paddy on Highland, some crowd of people that last day for only 40 minutes notice. Can't wait to see the next one.

Penfailed

NIMAN wrote: »

No harm to Albert, listening to him now on Highland, he doesn't fill me with confidence as a guy who would be able to argue any point with government officials.

Who is Albert?

salonfire

Closing the old company and opening under a new names makes no difference. The company would never be able to repay the costs of damages even if they wanted to.

People would be well advised to stop targeting the company as it only deflects attention from the shortcomings of the redress scheme.

Is it the belief locally that Cassidys willingly and purposely sold defective products?

Other companies down the west coast have the same issue, did they all willingly and purposely sell defective products?

malinheader

Penfailed wrote: »

Who is Albert?

Albert Doherty Carndonagh. Sinn fein councillor

malinheader

salonfire wrote: »

Closing the old company and opening under a new names makes no difference. The company would never be able to repay the costs of damages even if they wanted to.

People would be well advised to stop targeting the company as it only deflects attention from the shortcomings of the redress scheme.

Is it the belief locally that Cassidys willingly and purposely sold defective products?

Other companies down the west coast have the same issue, did they all willingly and purposely sell defective products?

Is this not the problem, no one knows what really happened. Was it the lack of cement for instance.
Who's job was it to check the product, who signed off on the certification of their blocks.
There seems to be a lot of questions which nobody is willing to push to get answers.
Hard to sit back and watch a company that has left you with nothing carrying on as if nothing happened.

In my opinion Paddy and them people have highlighted the complete and utter disgraceful mess these people are left in more than any group or representatives yet.

Sure what did the peaceful quite and leave it to the government get them. A scheme that only a lucky few will be able to afford.

Penfailed

salonfire wrote: »

Closing the old company and opening under a new names makes no difference. The company would never be able to repay the costs of damages even if they wanted to.

People would be well advised to stop targeting the company as it only deflects attention from the shortcomings of the redress scheme.

Is it the belief locally that Cassidys willingly and purposely sold defective products?

Other companies down the west coast have the same issue, did they all willingly and purposely sell defective products?

So, just forget about it and move on? Meanwhile Cassidys continue to trade and make money with no comeback for all the failings? Yes, the redress scheme falls short of what is required...but should Cassidys get away scot-free?

salonfire

Penfailed wrote: »

So, just forget about it and move on? Meanwhile Cassidys continue to trade and make money with no comeback for all the failings? Yes, the redress scheme falls short of what is required...but should Cassidys get away scot-free?

Get away scot-free with what? What is it believed locally that they have done wrong? Not testing for mica? Was it industry regulations that it had to be tested for? If they went away and above the industry standard and tested for every potential eventuality, would their customers be willing to pay the extra costs at the time vs choosing their competitors products instead?

Not forget about it but keep it in the minds of the local representatives regarding the redress scheme.

I watched that video, if what your man was saying that they are still using the same quarry how are they removing the mica now needs to answered.

Also the Council can't just "boycott" suppliers. Tendering follows a predefined process and as far as know, history cannot be considered. This is at EU level. Calling on the Council to disgard EU rules is not going to go very far.

jj880

salonfire wrote: »

People would be well advised to stop targeting the company as it only deflects attention from the shortcomings of the redress scheme.

People would be well advised. Sounds like you need advised.

Is your house falling down around you? Have you moved your children to a caravan in the garden to sleep scared out of your mind that they will be crushed to death in their sleep? Going to bed looking out at the house they grew up in fall to pieces?

People have tried the political route. Got them nowhere. A useless redress scheme. You tell me how a company all of a sudden after decades in business starts selling blocks that crumble like weetabix. Did they wake up one morning and forget how to make bricks?

Also lets hear your alternative solution.

Give your head a good shake before you post it.

salonfire

jj880 wrote: »

People would be well advised. Sounds like you need advised.
.

What I mean is going after the company will leave people with nothing. They are never going to pay damages.

It was a failure of industry standards at the time and up to the Government to step up to the plate.

malinheader

salonfire wrote: »

What I mean is going after the company will leave people with nothing. They are never going to pay damages.

It was a failure of industry standards at the time and up to the Government to step up to the plate.

So you're 100% sure Cassidys are not at fault. It was the industry standards that were at fault and there was plenty of cement in the blocks. You know this.

Penfailed

salonfire wrote: »

Get away scot-free with what? What is it believed locally that they have done wrong? Not testing for mica? Was it industry regulations that it had to be tested for? If they went away and above the industry standard and tested for every potential eventuality, would their customers be willing to pay the extra costs at the time vs choosing their competitors products instead?

Not forget about it but keep it in the minds of the local representatives regarding the redress scheme.

I watched that video, if what your man was saying that they are still using the same quarry how are they removing the mica now needs to answered.

Also the Council can't just "boycott" suppliers. Tendering follows a predefined process and as far as know, history cannot be considered. This is at EU level. Calling on the Council to disgard EU rules is not going to go very far.

Are you a spokesperson for Cassidys? Are you an employee?
Mica is a naturally occurring mineral found in rock. If the mica content is above a certain percentage blocks can still be manufactured BUT more cement is required in the mixture to counteract any adverse effects from the mica. This is not a new thing. They were cutting corners in the boom times and putting blocks out that weren't fit for purpose.

Penfailed

salonfire wrote: »

It was a failure of industry standards at the time and up to the Government to step up to the plate.

It was a failure on Cassidys part not to follow industry standards.

salonfire

OK, fair enough. No, I have no connection to the industry. Just trying to get to know what the word on the ground was.

Didn't know the cement content played a factor in it as well.

RobMc59

Although an outsider I`ve followed this thread with interest for some time.After a couple of posters mentioned this might be discussed on Highland radio I was able listen to some of the discussion this morning online.Sounds to me like the government should take responsibility for this as the standards in place at the time were woefully inadequate.The block suppliers/manufacturers have a lot of soul searching to do also.
The lady who had to borrow six thousand euro to have her house assessed sounded at the end of her tether.

Penfailed

RobMc59 wrote: »

The lady who had to borrow six thousand euro to have her house assessed sounded at the end of her tether.

I've paid the same for the testing. Once you eventually get accepted on the redress scheme, you get 90% of that back. It's a long time to be out that amount of money. We haven't got it yet...

malinheader

RobMc59 wrote: »

Although an outsider I`ve followed this thread with interest for some time.After a couple of posters mentioned this might be discussed on Highland radio I was able listen to some of the discussion this morning online.Sounds to me like the government should take responsibility for this as the standards in place at the time were woefully inadequate.The block suppliers/manufacturers have a lot of soul searching to do also.
The lady who had to borrow six thousand euro to have her house assessed sounded at the end of her tether.

Government and council to blame for not testing or making sure that the blocks were fit for purpose. But Cassidys still as much to blame for the lack of cement. In my opinion all three have alot of questions to answer.

CastorTroy

Penfailed wrote: »

I've paid the same for the testing. Once you eventually get accepted on the redress scheme, you get 90% of that back. It's a long time to be out that amount of money. We haven't got it yet...

Was wondering how that worked. If you pay upfront and get reimbursed or you just pay 10% and they get the rest from the scheme.

I would hope it works the other way for the rebuild part, because no way would the majority of people be able to afford to get the money together and claim back after the house is finished.

NIMAN

Could someone clarify some things I heard about the redress scheme?

Apparently if your house is bad enough to need tumbled, you have to reapply for planning permission, even though you got it originally. Is that true?

Also, you can't use anything out of your old house, such as the windows. You have to get brand new ones?

And your house will have to meet all the latest energy standards, so will probably me much more expensive to rebuild than your house ever was.

Listening to some folk, instead of 90/10, the final cost is more likely to be 66/33, with owners paying close to a third of the rebuild cost?

It must be heart breaking for all those affected. And why do you need a 6k test for mica when the house is clearly falling apart and you can see it with your own eyes?

I get the feeling roadblocks are being put in the way of home owners to make taking part in the redress scheme as difficult as possible.

Technique

The first nine applications are reported to have been approved, with an average cost of €117,000 per property.

Penfailed

NIMAN wrote: »

Could someone clarify some things I heard about the redress scheme?

Apparently if your house is bad enough to need tumbled, you have to reapply for planning permission, even though you got it originally. Is that true?

Also, you can't use anything out of your old house, such as the windows. You have to get brand new ones?

And your house will have to meet all the latest energy standards, so will probably me much more expensive to rebuild than your house ever was.

Listening to some folk, instead of 90/10, the final cost is more likely to be 66/33, with owners paying close to a third of the rebuild cost?

It must be heart breaking for all those affected. And why do you need a 6k test for mica when the house is clearly falling apart and you can see it with your own eyes?

I get the feeling roadblocks are being put in the way of home owners to make taking part in the redress scheme as difficult as possible.

Roadblocks are definitely being put in the way to discourage people. If it's a second home, or you don't live in the house, it's not eligible for the scheme. If you've a detached garage, it's not covered. I'm not sure about the planning thing but I've heard similar. I think you can reuse the windows but if you want to upgrade to triple glazed, for example, you have to pay the difference. It can be done to the old standards but if you want it to the new ones, you pay the difference.

malinheader

Penfailed wrote: »

Roadblocks are definitely being put in the way to discourage people. If it's a second home, or you don't live in the house, it's not eligible for the scheme. If you've a detached garage, it's not covered. I'm not sure about the planning thing but I've heard similar. I think you can reuse the windows but if you want to upgrade to triple glazed, for example, you have to pay the difference. It can be done to the old standards but if you want it to the new ones, you pay the difference.

A relative of mine paid 5700 for block test. I know 90% you get back but where did this price come from. Sounds ludicrous to me.

Penfailed

malinheader wrote: »

A relative of mine paid 5700 for block test. I know 90% you get back but where did this price come from. Sounds ludicrous to me.

I paid in that region too. Cores taken and reinstated. Cores sent to a lab for testing. Test results back to engineer. Engineer compiles his report. Nothing is cheap these days and chartered engineers are always expensive!

muffler

Penfailed wrote: »

I paid in that region too. Cores taken and reinstated. Cores sent to a lab for testing. Test results back to engineer. Engineer compiles his report. Nothing is cheap these days and chartered engineers are always expensive!

Someone was making money out of this!

I have a relation who thought they might have mica in their walls and when they contacted the action group they were told by that group that they could only use a particular (named) engineer :eek:

malinheader

Penfailed wrote: »

I paid in that region too. Cores taken and reinstated. Cores sent to a lab for testing. Test results back to engineer. Engineer compiles his report. Nothing is cheap these days and chartered engineers are always expensive!

I think there is a whole lot of people and companies going to get very rich out of the scandalous way alot of people have been left. Disgusted at some of the prices I hear are being charged for reports and works.

babybuilder

malinheader wrote: »

I think there is a whole lot of people and companies going to get very rich out of the scandalous way alot of people have been left. Disgusted at some of the prices I hear are being charged for reports and works.

I've had my home cored and samples sent away. I don't have the machinery, expertise nor time to carry out such work. It will cost circa €5400 when the reports are done and applications made. However bitter this expensive pill has been to swallow my anger and annoyance is primarily directed at the system (and individuals) responsible for the mica scandal. I don't blame the testers or engineers. The cost of renovation/rebuilding will be considerably more expensive than this.
Anyone who has paid any attention to the building industry and planning will know of the level of corruption and malfeasance not only in Donegal but countrywide. The ICF and it's top man were cheerleaders for the type of building practices going on. The populace who had bought into this system and now are left high and dry. Scandalous but not surprising.

batman1

The manufacturers involved in this scandal knew full well the blocks being supplied were substandard. I worked on several large sites around the county between 2002 and 2007.
Trucks would arrive with bales of blocks and by the time they were unloaded the bottom row on each bale would be unusable. Crushed under their own weight. Truck after truck was sent back or half loads taken. So they were well aware something wasn't right because several complaints were made from our company alone. Any questions were met with vague answers about the blocks being given time to cure fully due to demand etc.
We now know the full truth.

There is an awful lot of anger about this and as the redress scheme gets going, people are seeing that it's going to cost a lot more than they were told. The industry have jumped on the bandwagon too with contractors quoting the maximum for work instead of what the cost should be. There's no oversight in this regard and that's a big issue.

To further compound things, the labs are finding pyrorite in the samples, resulting in further tests being needed. That's a different ball game and those that have been found with it are the ones having to be demolished because it can become unstable down the line and you're back to square one. Even if your inside leaf in sound currently.

A long road ahead. Mine included

salonfire

Was it because of increased demand during the building boom that suppliers were rushing the manufacture of the blocks?

Hard to understand how only a specific time frame is involved, some of manufacturers were in business for years prior to the boom.

Or were new quarries opened up during them years which contained more mica than old quarries?

NIMAN

The country is currently borrowing money hand over fist to pay for COVID.

And at a very low interest rate.

They could easily stick another couple of billion on to the borrowing and sort this out properly.

Penfailed

salonfire wrote: »

Was it because of increased demand during the building boom that suppliers were rushing the manufacture of the blocks?

Hard to understand how only a specific time frame is involved, some of manufacturers were in business for years prior to the boom.

Or were new quarries opened up during them years which contained more mica than old quarries?

They may have hit a seam of rock containing more mica than previously. Who knows. Lots of quarries have inconsistencies in the rock in different areas of the quarry.

NIMAN

I was driving from Derry to Carn today and passed a couple of Chambers lorries in the road heading towards Derry. Didn't think much of it, but I only took notice tabs I looked to see if they were Cassidys.

Then passing the infamous housing estate being built, the one with the graffiti, I'm nearly sure another Chambers lorry was in the site pouring concrete.

Interesting, if my eyes didn't deceive me.