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

timmyntc

Ace2007 wrote: »

I have no problem with anyone getting it really - i just know that there will be absolute uproar if this was an investment fund looking for redress, or if one comes looking in 5 years time and we have to pay them billions to fix.

The mere question of it and this was the reply i got by a poster - people will react very different depending on who owns the property - even if the basis is the exact same.



I've said it many times on this thread that i hope that those affected get a good deal from the government, but writing a blank cheque and covering all costs will open the state up to claims from all angles in the future.

At the end of the day its the states fault for allowing this to transpire.
EU rules state that government must observe & regulate construction suppliers - our govt decided to let them all "self-regulate" and when first alerted of the issues refused to tackle it.

Even today there are quarries all over the country operating illegally, and not a thing is done.

Ace2007

muffler wrote: »

There have been no blank cheques nor will there be imo so please refrain from using this phrase.

But nobody can put a figure on how much this will all cost nor how many houses are affected. Those action groups are demanding 100% redress no less, but can't put a figure on how much that is. Even government sources are throwing round random numbers

Earlier, Mr Martin told the Dáil that the final bill would exceed €1 billion, while, speaking on RTÉ's Prime Time, Minister for Housing Darragh O'Brien said that it could cost as much as €1.5 billion to remediate the affected homes.

As the redress scheme was being planned, Government sources suggested to Prime Time that, in a worst-case scenario, the cost of redress could rise to as much as €2.4bn.

But even that worst-case scenario may have been optimistic.

So it's gone from 1 billion, to 1.5 billion (50% increase), to 2.4 billion (240% increase) all in the last few days. And the 2.4bn figure is optimistic.

This could end up at 5bn for all we know. To me that's definition of a blank cheque.

timmyntc

Ace2007 wrote: »

But nobody can put a figure on how much this will all cost nor how many houses are affected. Those action groups are demanding 100% redress no less, but can't put a figure on how much that is. Even government sources are throwing round random numbers





So it's gone from 1 billion, to 1.5 billion (50% increase), to 2.4 billion (240% increase) all in the last few days. And the 2.4bn figure is optimistic.

This could end up at 5bn for all we know. To me that's definition of a blank cheque.

You know well that is not a "blank cheque" - the varying figures are due to the fact that
1) We dont know the extent of all houses affected by defective blocks
and
2) We dont have an estimate of which houses will just need walls replaced and which need full demolition. And as time goes on, more houses will go from the former to the latter category.

There has and is no indication anywhere from anyone, that there will be a blank cheque offered to any homeowner to remedy or replace their house. It will cost what it costs and not a euro more - there is no "free money" being looked for - just redress to bring peoples houses back to the state they should have been.

Ace2007

We'll agree to disagree on the matter and may pick it up when the government recommendations come out and see who agrees with them and where we go from there.

NIMAN

I think when its all sorted (if it ever is) will cost closer to 5bn than 1bn to be honest.

And that doesn't include farm buildings, of which I know there are a lot affected too.

I'd say the farmers will have to accept being at the back of the queue, as homeowners will be priority for many years.

listermint

NIMAN wrote: »

I think when its all sorted (if it ever is) will cost closer to 5bn than 1bn to be honest.

And that doesn't include farm buildings, of which I know there are a lot affected too.

I'd say the farmers will have to accept being at the back of the queue, as homeowners will be priority for many years.

If that's the case then it's a hard no from me. This whole thing needs scrutiny in full before anything is agreed and any claimant has to meet strict criteria.

jimmycrackcorm

Deleted User wrote: »

What is the basis for limiting it to private primary residence, then?


Investment funds should have done their own due diligence on their investment. If that investment loses money - that's business.


So far, the precedent has been set only to protect primary private residence for major structural defects. Accordingly, there is currently no precedent set that investment funds could use - unless you know of a legal requirement that states otherwise?

There is no real "precedent". A precedent is what is determined legally. My point is that an investment fund could take legal action to force the government to treat its properties the exact same.

The reason is that people are arguing that the justification for the redress scheme is a lack of government action on ensuring build standards. Why has no one or collectively as a Mica group not taken the government to court over this? If it was an investment fund affected, then they would have the monetary power to do so. The most likely reason is that anyone who has asked for legal advice will be told it's going to be a non-runner.

Stating the pyrite scheme as a precedent does not automatically imply that 100% redress is the actual precedent, it applies within a budgetary constraint. There's no such thing as an unlimited precedent.

jimmycrackcorm

timmyntc wrote: »

At the end of the day its the states fault for allowing this to transpire.
EU rules state that government must observe & regulate construction suppliers - our govt decided to let them all "self-regulate" and when first alerted of the issues refused to tackle it.

If this is true then the action groups should take a court case to force the government to provide the appropriate redress. Band together to pay the costs if necessary and take a sample case. I think this would be a good idea.

Certainly, when individuals took the HSE to court over the cervical smear fiasco, compensation was awarded.

section4

timmyntc wrote: »

At the end of the day its the states fault for allowing this to transpire.
EU rules state that government must observe & regulate construction suppliers - our govt decided to let them all "self-regulate" and when first alerted of the issues refused to tackle it.

Even today there are quarries all over the country operating illegally, and not a thing is done.

Correct, and supplying councils all over the country
And if Cassidy had no insurance is that still the case
As they have another quarry operating in falcarragh

But you only have to look at the flooding letterkenny hospital some years ago to wonder is there any accountability at all

kippy

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

If this is true then the action groups should take a court case to force the government to provide the appropriate redress. Band together to pay the costs if necessary and take a sample case. I think this would be a good idea.

Certainly, when individuals took the HSE to court over the cervical smear fiasco, compensation was awarded.

Lets just go down the logical route here.
What happens if these people take a sample case and lose?

Ace2007

kippy wrote: »

Lets just go down the logical route here.
What happens if these people take a sample case and lose?

Then the state isn't liable, and they don't have to pay out to every property owner, be it private home owners, institutional investors, non PPR owners, farmers, business owners etc. The state should then do the right thing for the private home owner and set up a fund to help assist them.

By not taking a case, it opens up the government having to pay out the institutional investors, farmers, business owners and non PPR owners (which some in the campaign are already looking for).

And while we pay out for all these homes to be built other public services will suffer and that's the sad reality of the situation. As the OP says he reckons could be closer to 5 billion before it's all said and done

NIMAN

Ace2007 wrote: »

Then the state isn't liable, and they don't have to pay out to every property owner, be it private home owners, institutional investors, non PPR owners, farmers, business owners etc. The state should then do the right thing for the private home owner and set up a fund to help assist them.

By not taking a case, it opens up the government having to pay out the institutional investors, farmers, business owners and non PPR owners (which some in the campaign are already looking for).

And while we pay out for all these homes to be built other public services will suffer and that's the sad reality of the situation. As the OP says he reckons could be closer to 5 billion before it's all said and done

I'm no expert, I'm only guessing because I know the extent of the issue up here. Plus based on the fact that 15k was the cost of a team of men to replace an outer leaf 3 or 4 years ago, now I have heard 125k quoted.

Only in the last 6 months do I think I'm now affected by Mica, yet I have been in the house for 10, and its built 20. I would say there are plenty of other homeowners out there now who think they are fine, but give it another year, 2, 5 and they might not be.
If you check out MicaMap.com, you will see each property tagged by owners, if they think they have Mica issues. The other day they suspected that perhaps 10% of those affected had tagged their home. To think that map could get another multiple of 9 times the pins is scary.

The thing that baffles me about all this, and which I don't think would happen in many other countries, is that when it was first tagged in 2013 or whenever, immediately the authorities, be it Government or the local CoCo, should have shut down the supplier until checks were done. Instead they let them continue on for years, churning out poor quality blocks. Thats the hard thing to stomach, that so many more properties could have been halted until it was sure the blocks were good. Instead they have probably added 7 years worth of buildings on to the list.

Why did alarm bells not ring in 2013 when huge cracks were first highlighted in homes? (it may have been actually earlier than 2013).

Cee-Jay-Cee

Ace2007 wrote: »

Let's hope he has the same to say when they block the M50 and the ports on their next visit to Dublin

No one is blocking the M50, your like a petulant child telling stories. Some angry person effected mentioned blocking the M50 but none of the organisers or groups involved so why not try and add something constructive to the topic or better still go away and annoy people in some other county forum.

Ace2007

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

No one is blocking the M50, your like a petulant child telling stories. Some angry person effected mentioned blocking the M50 but none of the organisers or groups involved so why not try and add something constructive to the topic or better still go away and annoy people in some other county forum.

Excuse me? Paddy Diver is one of the main drivers of the whole campaign and he said it at the protest

Paddy Diver, campaigner and member of the MAG committee, said that if the Taoiseach does not accept the letters from MAG then they will be back.

“The next time we won’t be as peaceful,” he said. “We’ll block the M50 and we’ll block the port.”

So maybe less of the personal abuse when it's a factual statement - i look forward to your apology

DrPhilG

Ace2007 wrote: »

Excuse me? Paddy Diver is one of the main drivers of the whole campaign and he said it at the protest



So maybe less of the personal abuse when it's a factual statement - i look forward to your apology

At the risk of being pedantic, he said that they would block the port and the M50 if the letters from MAG were not accepted.

The letters accepted, he handed them to the housing minister in person didn't he?

Ace2007

DrPhilG wrote: »

At the risk of being pedantic, he said that they would block the port and the M50 if the letters from MAG were not accepted.

The letters accepted, he handed them to the housing minister in person didn't he?

He as in Paddy Diver, the main lead and probably reason why the protest happened at all in Dublin?

And not some random person as stated by Cee-Jay? Glad we cleared that up.

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

Some angry person effected mentioned blocking the M50 but none of the organisers or groups involved

DrPhilG

Ace2007 wrote: »

He as in Paddy Diver, the main lead and probably reason why the protest happened at all in Dublin?

You quoted Paddy Diver and said that he was planning a blockade.

I corrected you by pointing out that Diver's demand had been met, therefore his blockade threat was presumably no longer active.

I've seen various folk claiming all sorts on Facebook, any of whom may be the random person referred to by Cee-Jay.

NIMAN

Sky News report

muffler

Settle down lads. No point squabbling over who said what. Thanks.

NIMAN

@muffler

Perhaps add Mayo (and Clare) into the title? Don't want to be forgetting about them.

And any way to link this thread to their county subforums?

muffler

NIMAN wrote: »

@muffler

Perhaps add Mayo (and Clare) into the title? Don't want to be forgetting about them.

Good idea in a way but unfortunately we have to stick with Donegal issues. Such is the nature of the beast.

NIMAN wrote: »

And any way to link this thread to their county subforums?

Im having bother enough handling all the blow-ins


Nah, seriously I dont think its possible to link other county forums bar posting an announcement in those forums and then you need to be careful in case you get accused of spamming


Someone did suggest earlier in thread that maybe the discussion should be in the Current Affairs Forum. Id be forever grateful to anyone who wanted to start a debate there

jj880

Big questions for Donegal County Council to answer here.

How were tenders awarded to companies without suitable insurance to cover products purchased by the tax payer?

And then why wasnt the quarry immediately prevented from producing any more defective blocks?

https://merrionstreet.ie/en/news-room/releases/minister_obrien_appoints_mr_seamus_neely_to_chair_independent_working_group_on_defective_housing.html

The Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage Darragh O’Brien TD has appointed Seamus Neely, former Chief Executive of Donegal County Council to the position of Chair of the newly established Independent Working Group on Defective Housing.

Well let's hear from Mr Neely as it seems to be a perfect fit for his current job description. As I understand it he was head of DCC for 10 years from 2010 - 2020.

This has to be got to the bottom of. People have to be held to account here. Redress is one thing but this cannot be allowed to happen again.

malinheader

jj880 wrote: »

Big questions for Donegal County Council to answer here.

How were tenders awarded to companies without suitable insurance to cover products purchased by the tax payer?

And then why wasnt the quarry immediately prevented from producing any more defective blocks?

https://merrionstreet.ie/en/news-room/releases/minister_obrien_appoints_mr_seamus_neely_to_chair_independent_working_group_on_defective_housing.html



Well let's hear from Mr Neely as it seems to be a perfect fit for his current job description. As I understand it he was head of DCC for 10 years from 2010 - 2020.

This has to be got to the bottom of. People have to be held to account here. Redress is one thing but this cannot be allowed to happen again.

Is it me or does anyone think this is totally wrong that anyone who had a big part in Donegal CC should have nothing to do with the defective housing group until it's established how much and when the Donegal CC knew of the defective material coming out of the said quarry and also why they were still using the quarry even when they knew the blocks were not fit for purpose.

NIMAN

It does certainly appear strange to be appointing a man who was in charge of the council who continued to buy bad blocks off the supplier when issues were known about.

I can't really see any findings which will point the finger at Donegal CC. It would be admitting he was wrong?

Surely an outside, totally independent person to head the Working Group would make more sense?

jimmycrackcorm

NIMAN wrote: »

Sky News report

Makes a startling point when she started pulling at the wall and almost took off a whole section, followed by the nervous laugh after.

jj880

When I say lets here from him I mean he should be forced to give the answers we need.

Agreed it is a complete conflict of interest that he is on that board. He should be nowhere near it.

NIMAN

I notice that press release is from January this year.
So its been known for several months that the ex-head of Donegal CC would chair the group?

jj880

NIMAN wrote: »

I notice that press release is from January this year.
So its been known for several months that the ex-head of Donegal CC would chair the group?

Seems that way. There is a history of political appointments or "retirements" in this country to prevent the awkward questions being answered (allegedly).

Maybe the working group will surprise us all. They'll break up and reform every council in the country and their findings will be the basis for a new fully regulated quarry industry. Lol.

section4

malinheader wrote: »

Is it me or does anyone think this is totally wrong that anyone who had a big part in Donegal CC should have nothing to do with the defective housing group until it's established how much and when the Donegal CC knew of the defective material coming out of the said quarry and also why they were still using the quarry even when they knew the blocks were not fit for purpose.

This is like the golden circle, jobs for the boys.
Michael mcloone was county manager then became head of Donegal airport , what experience if airport he had I don't know.

And I understand the former head of uduras na gaeltacht is now head of Donegal airport .what experience of the aviation industry he has I don't know.


Now the former head of Donegal county council is in charge of the mica scandal.

malinheader

This country needs a serious shake up from the ordinary citizens to end this jobs for the boys when it comes to forming groups like this. Shows how disasters like this can happen really.
Should be a total independent task force with no tyes to Council or quarry in Donegal to get to the truth of the matter.
Questions need to be seriously asked here first.

NIMAN

I wonder do the groups campaigning for redress know this fact about the head of the Working Group?
I'd be surprised if they do, as I'm sure it wouldn't sit well with them.

Dempo1

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Makes a startling point when she started pulling at the wall and almost took off a whole section, followed by the nervous laugh after.

I noticed that but perhaps predictably it's almost vanished off the Irish Media Radar, not a mention on the main sites over the past two days, let alone main news bulletins.

malinheader

I'm not on Facebook, but has no one on the mica action group flagged his appointment as being odd or strange

NIMAN

malinheader wrote: »

I'm not on Facebook, but has no one on the mica action group flagged his appointment as being odd or strange

He was appointed 5 months ago or more.

jj880

NIMAN wrote: »

I wonder do the groups campaigning for redress know this fact about the head of the Working Group?
I'd be surprised if they do, as I'm sure it wouldn't sit well with them.

A lot of posters in the 100% redress group are already asking the question: how do we trust the blocks that will be used for redress?

You would think this working group would have some input and homeowners wont be happy. Like hiring the big bad wolf to rebuild the little piggy's houses after he's blown them down.

Mcdock

https://www.facebook.com/groups/297785338568131/permalink/321847536161911/

Just to show that there is more than cassidys at it

malinheader

Mcdock wrote: »

https://www.facebook.com/groups/297785338568131/permalink/321847536161911/

Just to show that there is more than cassidys at it

From what I can make of this is some people are saying that the blocks supplied by mc daids could of come from Cassidys.
I haven't a clue if this is correct or not.
Surely after what has happened in the Last month or so these quarries would of had a thorough inspection and produce tested.

Mcdock

malinheader wrote: »

From what I can make of this is some people are saying that the blocks supplied by mc daids could of come from Cassidys.
I haven't a clue if this is correct or not.
Surely after what has happened in the Last month or so these quarries would of had a thorough inspection and produce tested.

Yeah I have heard that also,
But they do use a different stone to cassidys, more of a brown stone, were cassidys is like a crushed lime stone,

malinheader

Mcdock wrote: »

Yeah I have heard that also,
But they do use a different stone to cassidys, more of a brown stone, were cassidys is like a crushed lime stone,

If Mcdaids had put out blocks that had come from Cassidys you think it would be in there interest to admit to this for their own sake.

Mcdock

malinheader wrote: »

If Mcdaids had put out blocks that had come from Cassidys you think it would be in there interest to admit to this for their own sake.

They have admitted to this, they say that they couldn't keep up with supply,
But I have worked on few houses that used there blocks, replacing outer skin, that they say are ones that came from Cassidys, but there not cassidys blocks, compeatly different colour,

And now I see they have started making blocks again since cassidys stopped,

malinheader

Mcdock wrote: »

They have admitted to this, they say that they couldn't keep up with supply,
But I have worked on few houses that used there blocks, replacing outer skin, that they say are ones that came from Cassidys, but there not cassidys blocks, compeatly different colour,

And now I see they have started making blocks again since cassidys stopped,

Surely to jesus someone from council or government is checking the blocks leaving the quarries now.
Surely it's still not self certification after all that has happened here.

Mcdock

malinheader wrote: »

Surely to jesus someone from council or government is checking the blocks leaving the quarries now.
Surely it's still not self certification after all that has happened here.

Not sure but have not heard of a rule change yet
Alot of people starting to use Robinson blocks now,

muffler

Seriously folks, would you really believe anything you read on Facebook?

Cee-Jay-Cee

jj880 wrote: »

Big questions for Donegal County Council to answer here.

How were tenders awarded to companies without suitable insurance to cover products purchased by the tax payer?

And then why wasnt the quarry immediately prevented from producing any more defective blocks?

https://merrionstreet.ie/en/news-room/releases/minister_obrien_appoints_mr_seamus_neely_to_chair_independent_working_group_on_defective_housing.html


Well let's hear from Mr Neely as it seems to be a perfect fit for his current job description. As I understand it he was head of DCC for 10 years from 2010 - 2020.

This has to be got to the bottom of. People have to be held to account here. Redress is one thing but this cannot be allowed to happen again.

What an absolute joke, Seamus Neely being made head of a group to look into the councils affairs while he himself was in charge of the council! You couldn’t make this shiit up if you tried!

If he had an ounce of morals or decency he’d excuse himself from the job due to the absolutely screaming CONFLICT OF INTEREST!!!!

Mcdock

muffler wrote: »

Seriously folks, would you really believe anything you read on Facebook?

Regarding what

There are rumours going around that because Cassidys was making blocks so cheap they were supplying all over the country. Of course this is conjecture, but it could be true I guess. I’ve said it before but this is only the tip or the iceberg. I’ve seen houses built in Donegal in 2018 and the chimneys are cracking already. Scary stuff.

10000maniacs

It's pretty sad and unlucky, but Remind me again why it should be a taxpayer issue?

Cee-Jay-Cee

10000maniacs wrote: »

It's pretty sad and unlucky, but Remind me again why it should be a taxpayer issue?

No we won’t remind you. Why don’t you start at the beginning of the thread and read for yourself or is that beyond your capabilities?

Mcdock

10000maniacs wrote: »

It's pretty sad and unlucky, but Remind me again why it should be a taxpayer issue?

Well as someone who is in the cassidys block house, I have been told by my qs I will need at least 70,000 euro, along with the grant to fix my house,
I can put up some money for it, but not a hope of anyone giving me that kind of money

muffler

Mcdock wrote: »

Regarding what

Regarding anything