House does not need planning?

well24

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121634356#Comment_121634356

Ya like you long posts!

so yeah cudnt be arsed replying to all.. here goes my long post lol

In relation to food, there are such checks to a certain extent, hse check all restaurants etc for cleanliness and food stored / prepared properly and adheres to regulations!

houses rectified at a cost to the state, which is ultimately you and me :)

how much do ya think pyrite and mica cost us? I mean if you are doing a self build aren’t their checks that you are meeting standards/ regulations, these should be extended to builders, as they knowingly cut corners!

“A benchmark to proportion liability” so who was held liable for pyrite/mica?

aren’t cars recalled for issues at no cost to owners or state for that matter :)

anyway, I think I’ve made my point.. we will have to agree to disagree..

well24

Oh yeah and if you think pyrite didn’t cost the owner anything.. of course it did, I’m my case a couple k.. and the inconvenience / stress of packing up your entire house and unpacking after 2-3 months

and then of course having to find accommodation for 2-3 months in this climate!

I don’t have kids, but relocating your kids (schooling/friends), bloody nightmare

loads more I could say but I’ll leave it at that!

so yeah…

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121635092#Comment_121635092

The only point you’ve made is highlighting your misconceptions.

The standards that apply to self builds also apply to contractors, higher standards do infact. suggesting they dint is odd.

Self builds were not checking for pyrite. Any more than builders were pre-2007..

Yes the state is ultimately the whole country. Why did everyone else have to pay for your issue? You really can’t get that it was because of the existence of standards site regulations.

When cars are recalled the person liable pays. Same as in building. If builders or developers were liable, the claim would be against them. They were not, for the reasons I explained.

If it were to happen again in future. The liability would not be the same.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121635129#Comment_121635129

I never said it didn’t cost the home owners anything. I said the costs were largely, and considerably to the state.

I’m not belittling the issue or what you went through. Im sure it was a massive pain in the ass for you during the process.

I’m simply explaining that the reason that the state stepped in was precisely because the standards and regulations exist. The ones you called pointless.

well24

This was part of our discussion:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just so all are clear, I think it is a very good idea to have regulations and all that lark, as long as they are enforced and strict checks are made... this obviously did not happen with pyrite / mica... my understanding of having these is to ensure that things like this dont happen, but they did - that is where I am getting my 'pointless' opinion about!

As I said above. How do you think that was suppose to happen? Are you really saying the state or somebody should have been testing or mineral that causes a defect that we didn't know exists.

You "understanding" in bold is basically incorrect. Standards and regulations do not magically prevent issues. They reduce issues, and when issues occur, they established a benchmark to proportion liability.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kinda proves my point, my understanding that any regulation etc needs to be enforced, otherwise people take liberties...I find the regulations pointless if they aint enforced. Im sure you agree laws of society would be pretty meaningless if their was no police force / court system to enforce them? And who pays for this?

Pyrite was first discovered in 1432? so why would we not know it exists?

Would it not be feasible to get quarries to check for minerals in what they output, to make sure they are fit for purpose? and an agency to monitor this?

"When cars are recalled the person liable pays. " yes which is the car manufacturer because they produced a defective product, just like the product mined in the quarries..

Sorry, but I really do fail to see accept what you are saying..

muffler

Yawn!

well24

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121637813#Comment_121637813

Very helpful, you should know better :)

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121637660#Comment_121637660

As I pointed out, as you quoted above. Your understanding is not correct. Enforcement of the regs did not extend to agent testing of quarries.

You’ve claim that the quarries developers knew of the pyrite issue. That a pretty serious accusation. Do you have evidence?

Knowing pyrite existed, and knowing it existed in hardcore that could lead to issues in 10 years time are not the same thing. We only became aware of the construction issue in Ireland in 2007.

Would it not be feasible to get quarries to check for minerals in what they output, to make sure they are fit for purpose?

Now it’s a known issue, quarries do their own testing to prevent the issue. To ensure hardcore is fit for purpose. If they fail to do that, they would be liable for defective material. Dallas sue to the “pointless” regs and standards.

It would not have been fair to apply that liability retroactively to the years prior to 2007 when we didn’t know it existed. It obvious what fair to let the homeowner pay, the state stepped it to foot the bill.

As you put it, everyone else paid for your house - because the regs and standards existed. I’m truly baffled that you’d call these regs pointless, when they saved you personally a lot of money.

well24

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121646810#Comment_121646810

Tbh I doubt the regs played much of a part, sure the state would have had to step in anyway…. Regs or no regs it is obvious the houses were not fit for purpose ffs! Ya don’t need regs to point that out :)

well24

To be clear I never mentioned that the quarries knew abt it, my whole argument is that the regs are pretty pointless unless enforced.

if they were enforced maybe quarries would test their product to ensure it is fit for purpose!

anyway as I said we can agree to disagree, I doubt their is anything I can say to change your mind and vice versa!

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121647398#Comment_121647398

The reason that buildings need to legally be fit for purpose is literally due the building regs.

The state is not there to insure the whole country. You’re literally complaining about the regs that provided you a massive hand out.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121647579#Comment_121647579

The regs are enforced. Quarries do test the products to meet standards. They were not testing for pyrite then because they didn’t know the issue existed. This should not be that hard to follow.

well24

The state did insure the pyrite, so there’s that…and only for 1 house per person, anybody with another hse it a case big case of touch ****! tbh anything you buy shud be fit for purpose.. ya don’t think that?

as I mentioned pyrite was first discovered in1432 so it was know, whether it was known here or not is the reason for the tests! This shud not be that hard to follow!

as I’ve said were. Nothing is going to change each other minds so that’s the last I’m gonna say as it’s getting pretty pointless now and a waste of time!

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121648380#Comment_121648380

I’m aware the state stepped in as an “insurer”. That’s the point lol. That’s not the function of the state. But they did so in due to the extraordinary circumstances.

tbh anything you buy shud be fit for purpose.. ya don’t think that?

Of course I think anything should be fit for purpose. The expected level of fitness is established via regulations and standards. I’ve no idea how you’re still not getting that.

Without the regs, any cow shed will keep you dry, “shur dat’d do”.

As I mentioned pyrite was first discovered in1432 so it was know, whether it was known here or not is the reason for the tests! This shud not be that hard to follow

That say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. I think you’ve proven that.

Pyrite the mineral was discovered centuries ago, it was (ironically) know as fool’s gold. The concrete defect caused by the oxidation of pyrite was not discovered in 1432. Lmfao.

as I’ve said were. Nothing is going to change each other minds so that’s the last I’m gonna say as it’s getting pretty pointless now and a waste of time!

You’re free to continue thinking building regs are pointless. I’m not trying to convince you. I’m simply correcting misinformation for other users, who are mostly laypeople looking for advice..