Many apartment owners have been left with the legacy of poor regulation and building standards. I am Director of a management company of an apartment complex in West Dublin. Significant issues highlighted in recent surveyors report regarding roofs, ventilation and fire safety . Most of these issues have significant health and safety implications. Owners may not be able to afford to remedy these issues in addition to paying high management fees. Are we going to wait for a Grenfell towers scenario when likely costs for government would be far higher than preventative work now?
How foolish of you Brendan! This is the People's Democratic Republic of Ireland. The State is responsible for every bad thing that happens everyone and must immediately establish a no-fault, no-questions-asked, gold-plated, top of the range redress scheme to fully compensate them, and pay their lawyers too, even if it's not the state's fault at all. In recent weeks, we've actually extended this principle to cover cases where there was no actual harm but people were "at risk of harm" as exemplified by the South Kerry CAMHS fiasco.
Is the time honoured caveat emptor too harsh a principle?
I'm not entirely without sympathy. But if the state (aka Brendan and I and every other taxpayer) is expected to pick up the tab, surely we're entitled to more than surly pyrite/mica style demands for our cash. How about an equity share in the property, proportional to the rectification cost, redeemable when it's sold? Or an interest free loan on similar terms? Or an insurance based scheme where ALL developments would pay into a fund which could then be drawn upon in the event of long-term problems emerging? Or a combination of some of the above? Surely that's a more moral solution than expecting a buckshee handout from your neighbours.
www.thejournal.ie
Apartment owners would have had the resources to have a surveyor produce a report for their own apartment but would have trusted the "professionals" who signed off on the common areas in the block.
Apartment owners are taxpayers too. Many bought an apartment because they did not have the resources to afford a house at the time. It is a dreadful situation to find themselves faced with large bills because of the incompetence of those who should have done their jobs properly.
It is. But it's not my fault. Why should I pick up the tab? And if I did pick up the tab, should I not acquire an equity interest of some sort in the property? It's completely unreasonable to expect me to pay to enhance someone else's asset and see the benefit go entirely to that person.
I don't understand why this approach isn't standard, including for the Mica schemes. Owner gets a portable, interest-free loan for life subject to a cap of maybe 50%. State recoups some of its outlay (eventually). Owner still has an incentive to maintain the property as there will be residual value for family members to inherit.
Agree 100%. In general, every bailout should require some quid-pro-quo from its beneficiaries.
The Mica redress scheme is extraordinary in that you will have landlords with zero mortgage getting a better product than they already own for which they'll be able to charge a higher rent. For free, from the state!
The remediation work will hopefully make these properties safe and liveable. Yes this is a "benefit" but it should also be a reasonable expectation for a buyer of any new property that has been built in the last 20 years.
I agree the building regulations and liability regime in place at the time were a disgrace. I understand they have been tightened up since for new builds.
That's the nature of property and caveat emptor, you have more consumer protection buying a toaster. However, it's still astonishing how little homework many prospective purchasers prior to committing massive amounts of money on property while signing contracts confirming they understand the risks.
Buyers of an apartment would not be in a position themselves to conduct a hire a surveyor to conduct a buildings survey for the whole block. They would (foolishly in hindsight) have trusted the professionals whose job it was to ensure proper ventilation, fire safety and adequate roof structures to comply with government building regulations. They were badly let down by those who were paid handsomely for their "professional advice".
Hire someone competent who knows what to look for and what questions to ask, and make sure appropriate indemnities were in place. There was plenty of chat at the time that corners were being cut in some developments, but in the scramble to get on the property ladder lots of people just didn't want to know.