Huge Fire In Block Of Flats
Discussion
kev1974 said:
How did 129 flats become 209 surviving households to be rehomed? Are the 80 extra households mostly from the adjoining accomodation, or did they have a very high number of flats that have now split into multiple separate households, or have they still got a lot of fraudsters making the most of it?
Both the articles seem to heavily rely on the claims of Emma Dent Coad MP for the numbers, in the latest Independent article it is "Ms Dent Coad’s office is dealing with the cases of around 100 households, comprising around 300 people, she said.", maybe she needs to make her mind up.
She is having maths lessons from Diane Abbott. It seems to be the way, thrown any figures out, momentum will run with them and every FB page will be full and it becomes factBoth the articles seem to heavily rely on the claims of Emma Dent Coad MP for the numbers, in the latest Independent article it is "Ms Dent Coad’s office is dealing with the cases of around 100 households, comprising around 300 people, she said.", maybe she needs to make her mind up.
spaximus said:
kev1974 said:
How did 129 flats become 209 surviving households to be rehomed? Are the 80 extra households mostly from the adjoining accomodation, or did they have a very high number of flats that have now split into multiple separate households, or have they still got a lot of fraudsters making the most of it?
Both the articles seem to heavily rely on the claims of Emma Dent Coad MP for the numbers, in the latest Independent article it is "Ms Dent Coad’s office is dealing with the cases of around 100 households, comprising around 300 people, she said.", maybe she needs to make her mind up.
She is having maths lessons from Diane Abbott. It seems to be the way, thrown any figures out, momentum will run with them and every FB page will be full and it becomes factBoth the articles seem to heavily rely on the claims of Emma Dent Coad MP for the numbers, in the latest Independent article it is "Ms Dent Coad’s office is dealing with the cases of around 100 households, comprising around 300 people, she said.", maybe she needs to make her mind up.
kev1974 said:
T6 vanman said:
From March 2018
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/20/gr...
Out of the 209 households that required new properties in the wake of the fire, 185 have accepted the offer of a temporary or permanent home and 126 have moved in, according to the latest council figures.
This leaves 24 families or individuals who are still in hotels.
How did 129 flats become 209 surviving households to be rehomed? Are the 80 extra households mostly from the adjoining accomodation, or did they have a very high number of flats that have now split into multiple separate households, or have they still got a lot of fraudsters making the most of it?https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/20/gr...
Out of the 209 households that required new properties in the wake of the fire, 185 have accepted the offer of a temporary or permanent home and 126 have moved in, according to the latest council figures.
This leaves 24 families or individuals who are still in hotels.
Both the articles seem to heavily rely on the claims of Emma Dent Coad MP for the numbers, in the latest Independent article it is "Ms Dent Coad’s office is dealing with the cases of around 100 households, comprising around 300 people, she said.", maybe she needs to make her mind up.
and 129 from the wider area around the tower were given the opportunity to apply to relocate. https://grenfellsupport.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/...
jdw100 said:
After the floods in Hull the council had people in temporary housing for years afterwards.
Also, after flooding in Cambridgeshire I had a colleague who spent 18 months or more in a suite in very nice hotel. Some issue with insurers refusing/unable to rent her a similar property to her flooded one (5 bedroom or more, she was single, no kids) within a commuting distance to work. I'm sure they did a good deal with hotel. Very nice it was!
There was a years wait to hire dehumidifiers at one point after the flooding there back in early 2000s.
Money being spent on your stereotypical Cambridge resident doesn't wind up NP&E quite as much as your stereotypical Grenfell resident. I wonder what the difference could be Also, after flooding in Cambridgeshire I had a colleague who spent 18 months or more in a suite in very nice hotel. Some issue with insurers refusing/unable to rent her a similar property to her flooded one (5 bedroom or more, she was single, no kids) within a commuting distance to work. I'm sure they did a good deal with hotel. Very nice it was!
There was a years wait to hire dehumidifiers at one point after the flooding there back in early 2000s.
How do 100 households become 200? Well see anything I ever write about social housing. In most cases, at every opportunity tenants try to wrinse the system dry.
I’m rehousing 100’s of families right now from high rise. Nothing to do with cladding, the blocks as an asset with near 100% benefit dependent tnts, are a worthless asset.
I’m having none of the trouble of these muppets in fairy land. Community? Precious village in the sky? They can’t wait to get their compensation and leg it.
I’m rehousing 100’s of families right now from high rise. Nothing to do with cladding, the blocks as an asset with near 100% benefit dependent tnts, are a worthless asset.
I’m having none of the trouble of these muppets in fairy land. Community? Precious village in the sky? They can’t wait to get their compensation and leg it.
mx5nut said:
jdw100 said:
After the floods in Hull the council had people in temporary housing for years afterwards.
Also, after flooding in Cambridgeshire I had a colleague who spent 18 months or more in a suite in very nice hotel. Some issue with insurers refusing/unable to rent her a similar property to her flooded one (5 bedroom or more, she was single, no kids) within a commuting distance to work. I'm sure they did a good deal with hotel. Very nice it was!
There was a years wait to hire dehumidifiers at one point after the flooding there back in early 2000s.
Money being spent on your stereotypical Cambridge resident doesn't wind up NP&E quite as much as your stereotypical Grenfell resident. I wonder what the difference could be Also, after flooding in Cambridgeshire I had a colleague who spent 18 months or more in a suite in very nice hotel. Some issue with insurers refusing/unable to rent her a similar property to her flooded one (5 bedroom or more, she was single, no kids) within a commuting distance to work. I'm sure they did a good deal with hotel. Very nice it was!
There was a years wait to hire dehumidifiers at one point after the flooding there back in early 2000s.
On Newsnight a while back they said that if there was more than one adult living in a flat they didn’t have to stay together when rehoused - they were offered separate homes hence ~100 has become 200+. So those with grown up kids, grandparents etc get their own places.
Edit: “The original 138 households have split into 211 households.”
http://www.itv.com/news/london/2018-04-13/grenfell...
Edit: “The original 138 households have split into 211 households.”
http://www.itv.com/news/london/2018-04-13/grenfell...
austinsmirk said:
How do 100
households become 200? Well see anything I ever write about social housing. In most cases, at every opportunity tenants try to wrinse the system dry.
I’m rehousing 100’s of families right now from high rise. Nothing to do with cladding, the blocks as an asset with near 100% benefit dependent tnts, are a worthless asset.
I’m having none of the trouble of these muppets in fairy land. Community? Precious village in the sky? They can’t wait to get their compensation and leg it.
households become 200? Well see anything I ever write about social housing. In most cases, at every opportunity tenants try to wrinse the system dry.
I’m rehousing 100’s of families right now from high rise. Nothing to do with cladding, the blocks as an asset with near 100% benefit dependent tnts, are a worthless asset.
I’m having none of the trouble of these muppets in fairy land. Community? Precious village in the sky? They can’t wait to get their compensation and leg it.
Edited by BlackLabel on Thursday 11th October 22:53
The displaced Grenfell residents don’t want to leg it.
If they did they would, and could.
If you know the area (as I do) you’ll recognise why people don’t want to leave. It’s a community in the true sense, a real melting pot with low crime where people look out for one another. it’s near central London, the West end and city. The transport links are excellent, you can be at Heathrow in 30 mins and the area has great local amenities.
People don’t want compo so they can scarper. They want compo so they can stay and why not!
If they did they would, and could.
If you know the area (as I do) you’ll recognise why people don’t want to leave. It’s a community in the true sense, a real melting pot with low crime where people look out for one another. it’s near central London, the West end and city. The transport links are excellent, you can be at Heathrow in 30 mins and the area has great local amenities.
People don’t want compo so they can scarper. They want compo so they can stay and why not!
austinsmirk said:
How do 100 households become 200? Well see anything I ever write about social housing. In most cases, at every opportunity tenants try to wrinse the system dry.
I’m rehousing 100’s of families right now from high rise. Nothing to do with cladding, the blocks as an asset with near 100% benefit dependent tnts, are a worthless asset.
I’m having none of the trouble of these muppets in fairy land. Community? Precious village in the sky? They can’t wait to get their compensation and leg it.
There were 129 separate households in the tower (according to https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/how_many_of... ). The other 80 or so are from Grenfell Walk, directly around the tower. Most of those had shared heating systems with the tower, so had to be relocated.I’m rehousing 100’s of families right now from high rise. Nothing to do with cladding, the blocks as an asset with near 100% benefit dependent tnts, are a worthless asset.
I’m having none of the trouble of these muppets in fairy land. Community? Precious village in the sky? They can’t wait to get their compensation and leg it.
A father trapped in Grenfell Tower considered letting his young daughter die in her sleep to spare her seeing the terror of the fire.
These are the families that people on social media/forums were "running out of sympathy" for and "bored of hearing about".
These are the families that people on social media/forums were "running out of sympathy" for and "bored of hearing about".
There was what started as a genuinely interesting documentary on BBC2 this evening about previous fires in tower blocks suggesting the "stay put" advice of the Fire Brigade was wrong, and the dangers of retrofitting materials to blocks of flats that arguably made it easier for fires to spread, and to be more dangerous. Hearing a recreation of a 999 call in which a woman died whilst on the phone to 999 was harrowing.
Sadly, in the last few minutes, the documentary, in authoritative tones, spoke of Grenfell being fitted with cladding for cosmetic reasons. So far as I'm aware, that has yet to be established, and other reasons, such as improved insulation, are still in the frame, as the inquiry continues.
Why does the BBC have to undermine what was otherwise a genuinely interesting documentary (with input from the likes of Tessa Jowell, god rest her soul, saying effectively "it doesn't matter which hue of government, we all got it wrong") by pushing an agenda, in advance of a public inquiry finding the facts?
Sadly, in the last few minutes, the documentary, in authoritative tones, spoke of Grenfell being fitted with cladding for cosmetic reasons. So far as I'm aware, that has yet to be established, and other reasons, such as improved insulation, are still in the frame, as the inquiry continues.
Why does the BBC have to undermine what was otherwise a genuinely interesting documentary (with input from the likes of Tessa Jowell, god rest her soul, saying effectively "it doesn't matter which hue of government, we all got it wrong") by pushing an agenda, in advance of a public inquiry finding the facts?
Europa1 said:
There was what started as a genuinely interesting documentary on BBC2 this evening about previous fires in tower blocks suggesting the "stay put" advice of the Fire Brigade was wrong, and the dangers of retrofitting materials to blocks of flats that arguably made it easier for fires to spread, and to be more dangerous. Hearing a recreation of a 999 call in which a woman died whilst on the phone to 999 was harrowing.
Sadly, in the last few minutes, the documentary, in authoritative tones, spoke of Grenfell being fitted with cladding for cosmetic reasons. So far as I'm aware, that has yet to be established, and other reasons, such as improved insulation, are still in the frame, as the inquiry continues.
Why does the BBC have to undermine what was otherwise a genuinely interesting documentary (with input from the likes of Tessa Jowell, god rest her soul, saying effectively "it doesn't matter which hue of government, we all got it wrong") by pushing an agenda, in advance of a public inquiry finding the facts?
I couldn't agree more.Sadly, in the last few minutes, the documentary, in authoritative tones, spoke of Grenfell being fitted with cladding for cosmetic reasons. So far as I'm aware, that has yet to be established, and other reasons, such as improved insulation, are still in the frame, as the inquiry continues.
Why does the BBC have to undermine what was otherwise a genuinely interesting documentary (with input from the likes of Tessa Jowell, god rest her soul, saying effectively "it doesn't matter which hue of government, we all got it wrong") by pushing an agenda, in advance of a public inquiry finding the facts?
A fascinating programme that examined the history and the failings of every one regardless of Party in power, that did nothing for years and years despite the evidence that cladding these buildings and the regulations covering the cladding were both not fit for purpose, and people had tragically lost their lives as a consequence.
The comment referred to was senseless and provocative in the extreme, and ignores the fact that the aesthetic of the Blocks was a welcome consequence of the improvements to the towers, which was originally designed to hide what was supposed to improve the lives of the residents (improved the external insulation of the block/s) but sadly and tragically caused the opposite.
I noted last night that it was the Labour MP, in 2005 that oversaw the current building regs pertaining to fire etc, as his role as Fire MP.
I'm sure the Grenfell crowd will be hastily writing an apology to their Tory local council about the class war that clearly was behind this terrible incident.
At least a few of the interviewee's made the sensible point that multiple people, on multiple occasions had the chance to change the law, but didn't. And thus ALL of them failed residents over many years, at many points of incident.
I'm sure the Grenfell crowd will be hastily writing an apology to their Tory local council about the class war that clearly was behind this terrible incident.
At least a few of the interviewee's made the sensible point that multiple people, on multiple occasions had the chance to change the law, but didn't. And thus ALL of them failed residents over many years, at many points of incident.
austinsmirk said:
I noted last night that it was the Labour MP, in 2005 that oversaw the current building regs pertaining to fire etc, as his role as Fire MP.
I'm sure the Grenfell crowd will be hastily writing an apology to their Tory local council about the class war that clearly was behind this terrible incident.
At least a few of the interviewee's made the sensible point that multiple people, on multiple occasions had the chance to change the law, but didn't. And thus ALL of them failed residents over many years, at many points of incident.
I think you may find the cladding/installation didn't meet building regs, are the regs now being questioned?I'm sure the Grenfell crowd will be hastily writing an apology to their Tory local council about the class war that clearly was behind this terrible incident.
At least a few of the interviewee's made the sensible point that multiple people, on multiple occasions had the chance to change the law, but didn't. And thus ALL of them failed residents over many years, at many points of incident.
Saw the programme on BBC 2 last night about the buildings over the years which should have been a warning.
Wasn't aware of the Summerland fiasco on the Isle of man. Horrifying.
Meanwhile. Another fraudster from Grenfell has been named.
http://courtnewsuk.co.uk/32k-grenfell-tower-swindl...
Wasn't aware of the Summerland fiasco on the Isle of man. Horrifying.
Meanwhile. Another fraudster from Grenfell has been named.
http://courtnewsuk.co.uk/32k-grenfell-tower-swindl...
austinsmirk said:
I noted last night that it was the Labour MP, in 2005 that oversaw the current building regs pertaining to fire etc, as his role as Fire MP.
I'm sure the Grenfell crowd will be hastily writing an apology to their Tory local council about the class war that clearly was behind this terrible incident.
At least a few of the interviewee's made the sensible point that multiple people, on multiple occasions had the chance to change the law, but didn't. And thus ALL of them failed residents over many years, at many points of incident.
Yep - felt initially as though it was concentrating on the Thatcher government & their failings, but it did also acknowledge Prescott & Fitzpatrick's failures as well. I did think, however, that Harriet Harman got an easy ride, given she was in the same government as Fitzpatrick & Prescott and the member for Lakanal at the time the cladding was added there.I'm sure the Grenfell crowd will be hastily writing an apology to their Tory local council about the class war that clearly was behind this terrible incident.
At least a few of the interviewee's made the sensible point that multiple people, on multiple occasions had the chance to change the law, but didn't. And thus ALL of them failed residents over many years, at many points of incident.
Also felt that they only concentrated on approved document B & regs as applied in England and didn't explore changes that I think were made in Scotland after the Garnock Court fire.
I'd also never heard of the incident at Summerland - that appeared to be absolutely horrific and I'm amazed it didn't lead to much stricter regulations on the mainland much sooner.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff