 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Is it any coincidence that the government are stumping up £200 million to help tenants of privately owned properties to have their dangerous cladding removed at this time? Is there any connection between this, the local elections and forthcoming european elections I wonder? Perhaps if Chris Grayling had not wasted at least £80 million of public money on brexit ferries and the subsequent eurotunnel court case this could have been agreed to three years ago rather than causing stress and anxiety to the general public?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
And as a taxpayer, do I like to see my taxes having to do this work, when these are private dwellings with the legal obligation on the Landlords?
As stated by some of the Grenfell families, there's an awful lot of amnesia out there on what some of the legal obligations were and are. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It is standard Tory ideology - privatise the profit and nationalise the risk.
"
You beat me to the answer Sara.
Can't have Tory slumlords or Russian party contributors paying when the 'magic money tree' can be given a good shake. (Costs plus extra to fund more tax cuts for Tory contributors to be recovered out of the NHS and DSS welfare budgets.) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Is it any coincidence that the government are stumping up £200 million to help tenants of privately owned properties to have their dangerous cladding removed at this time? Is there any connection between this, the local elections and forthcoming european elections I wonder? Perhaps if Chris Grayling had not wasted at least £80 million of public money on brexit ferries and the subsequent eurotunnel court case this could have been agreed to three years ago rather than causing stress and anxiety to the general public? "
These are from completely different budgets so it is difficult to see how one correlates to the other .
Chris Gayling had no option but to make contingency plans for a no deal Brexit .
The government are already collecting a lot more in revenues for landlords. The As a which was a standard 10 % relief on fixtures and fittings has been withdrawn and tax relief on interest will be removed completely by 2021 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Is it any coincidence that the government are stumping up £200 million to help tenants of privately owned properties to have their dangerous cladding removed at this time? Is there any connection between this, the local elections and forthcoming european elections I wonder? Perhaps if Chris Grayling had not wasted at least £80 million of public money on brexit ferries and the subsequent eurotunnel court case this could have been agreed to three years ago rather than causing stress and anxiety to the general public? These are from completely different budgets so it is difficult to see how one correlates to the other .
Chris Gayling had no option but to make contingency plans for a no deal Brexit .
The government are already collecting a lot more in revenues for landlords. The As a which was a standard 10 % relief on fixtures and fittings has been withdrawn and tax relief on interest will be removed completely by 2021 "
I think some would call it a pr exercise, others vote rigging, and possibly even a cover up to divert attention away from a government that is so absolutely inept and has no regard for parliament. Do you honestly believe that the government is not in the middle of a good will pr exercise because they are in such deep shit? You really must be completely blinkered to the reality of what is happening!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Is it any coincidence that the government are stumping up £200 million to help tenants of privately owned properties to have their dangerous cladding removed at this time? Is there any connection between this, the local elections and forthcoming european elections I wonder? Perhaps if Chris Grayling had not wasted at least £80 million of public money on brexit ferries and the subsequent eurotunnel court case this could have been agreed to three years ago rather than causing stress and anxiety to the general public? These are from completely different budgets so it is difficult to see how one correlates to the other .
Chris Gayling had no option but to make contingency plans for a no deal Brexit .
The government are already collecting a lot more in revenues for landlords. The As a which was a standard 10 % relief on fixtures and fittings has been withdrawn and tax relief on interest will be removed completely by 2021
I think some would call it a pr exercise, others vote rigging, and possibly even a cover up to divert attention away from a government that is so absolutely inept and has no regard for parliament. Do you honestly believe that the government is not in the middle of a good will pr exercise because they are in such deep shit? You really must be completely blinkered to the reality of. what is happening! "
There is no legal requirement to remove cladding. All the government are doing is encouraging landlords to remove it. Public authorities have already received grants to remove there's . Are you saying that you would prefer tenants to pay for the removal.
It is an open and transparent offer . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"Is it any coincidence that the government are stumping up £200 million to help tenants of privately owned properties to have their dangerous cladding removed at this time? Is there any connection between this, the local elections and forthcoming european elections I wonder? Perhaps if Chris Grayling had not wasted at least £80 million of public money on brexit ferries and the subsequent eurotunnel court case this could have been agreed to three years ago rather than causing stress and anxiety to the general public? These are from completely different budgets so it is difficult to see how one correlates to the other .
Chris Gayling had no option but to make contingency plans for a no deal Brexit .
The government are already collecting a lot more in revenues for landlords. The As a which was a standard 10 % relief on fixtures and fittings has been withdrawn and tax relief on interest will be removed completely by 2021
I think some would call it a pr exercise, others vote rigging, and possibly even a cover up to divert attention away from a government that is so absolutely inept and has no regard for parliament. Do you honestly believe that the government is not in the middle of a good will pr exercise because they are in such deep shit? You really must be completely blinkered to the reality of what is happening! "
It appears that many of these private dwellings do have the legal obligation on the tenant to pay. Whether right or wrong, it does form part of the lease agreement.
Obviously many tenants don't have the large sums needed, and it's further compounded by some having freehold and leasehold in the same block. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"It is standard Tory ideology - privatise the profit and nationalise the risk.
You beat me to the answer Sara.
Can't have Tory slumlords or Russian party contributors paying when the 'magic money tree' can be given a good shake. (Costs plus extra to fund more tax cuts for Tory contributors to be recovered out of the NHS and DSS welfare budgets.)"
What a load of crap it is totally different finaning |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What a load of crap it is totally different finaning"
Oh. I did not know that, being I thought all government spending came from the public purse. But I bow to your superior knowledge. Now having admitted my mistake can you tell us all where this different financing comes from? Is it the 'magic money tree' you tories go on about or have you a hidden well or stream of cash? and can we all have a little out of it or is it only used to help the tories (like when it was raided to buy DUP votes) and their rich foreign mates. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Is it any coincidence that the government are stumping up £200 million to help tenants of privately owned properties to have their dangerous cladding removed at this time? Is there any connection between this, the local elections and forthcoming european elections I wonder? Perhaps if Chris Grayling had not wasted at least £80 million of public money on brexit ferries and the subsequent eurotunnel court case this could have been agreed to three years ago rather than causing stress and anxiety to the general public? "
A condition of the grant to which you refer is that landlords must take reasonable steps to recover the costs . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Is it any coincidence that the government are stumping up £200 million to help tenants of privately owned properties to have their dangerous cladding removed at this time? Is there any connection between this, the local elections and forthcoming european elections I wonder? Perhaps if Chris Grayling had not wasted at least £80 million of public money on brexit ferries and the subsequent eurotunnel court case this could have been agreed to three years ago rather than causing stress and anxiety to the general public? A condition of the grant to which you refer is that landlords must take reasonable steps to recover the costs ."
Perhaps the tenants would have been better off taking out a class action against the manufacturers of the cladding or the specifiers or the architects? The point being that the circumstances have not substantially changed in the last year so the only reason this grant (which is inadequate for the work required btw) is being made is to try and make the tory party look good after the drubbing it received in the local elections - the same goes for the increased Nhs funding! Its all about the timing not the content |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Is it any coincidence that the government are stumping up £200 million to help tenants of privately owned properties to have their dangerous cladding removed at this time? Is there any connection between this, the local elections and forthcoming european elections I wonder? Perhaps if Chris Grayling had not wasted at least £80 million of public money on brexit ferries and the subsequent eurotunnel court case this could have been agreed to three years ago rather than causing stress and anxiety to the general public? A condition of the grant to which you refer is that landlords must take reasonable steps to recover the costs .
Perhaps the tenants would have been better off taking out a class action against the manufacturers of the cladding or the specifiers or the architects? The point being that the circumstances have not substantially changed in the last year so the only reason this grant (which is inadequate for the work required btw) is being made is to try and make the tory party look good after the drubbing it received in the local elections - the same goes for the increased Nhs funding! Its all about the timing not the content "
The private owners of any hi rise building should pay for the cladding removal especially if they agreed the cladding specification,or the principal contractor.
Just to be clear the problem was the rain screen facade was not fire rated and as we saw went inferno in seconds
Also no fire breaks had been installed so allowed a chimney type affect.
The PIR cladding behind actually carried out it's fire resistant duty so to speak,it charred and did not go on fire which is what it is meant to do. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
From having seen Theresa May's and the government's response after the fire until now, this action shrieks of it being done for PR purposes, rather than compassion and humanitarian reasons.
As others note, with austerity measures forced to continue for a few more years for many, it's likely that the less well-off in society will be made to feel deeper cuts. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I feel sorry for lease holders who live in blocs of flats that are not maintained by the landlords (freeholders). I’ve seen it a lot in downtown accommodation in Brighton. It doesn’t matter how much they spend doing up their property, the price will be affected by the state of the exterior.
So why is it that privately owned high rise buildings are to be made safe at the expense of the tax payer? Someone owns these buildings, and should be paying for it out of the ground rent that is charged to tenants and lease holders alike.
£2000000 is enough to find shelter for a lot of homeless people for some time. In fact there are many more deserving things that could have been done with it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
