Your "chancer Irish private sector builders" slur is unwarranted.As for the state being inefficient, yes there is some truth to that but it is not the whole truth. Look at the motorways, the Luas, the Electrical infrastructure, gas piplelines, plenty of big infrastructural projects that are still standing and working today, unlike many houses built by the private sector over the last 20 years. And yes, I know the state has to take a share of responsibility for not enforcing regulations, but chancer Irish private sector builders still took the chance and got away with it.
Your "chancer Irish private sector builders" slur is unwarranted.
How many houses built by the private sector in the past 20 years are no longer standing? I'd guess it's at most a few hundred. Take the Mica cases, where the blame lies with the quarry owners rather than with the builders, and the figure is even smaller.
For perspective, remember that before 2008, the private sector was building 75,000 units a year.
Ok, accepted.Current figures for MICA are between 5000 and 7500 houses, not a few hundred and as as time passes, I expect that number to grow
All the coverage I've read on this issue appears to pin the blame on the quarries. That's evidenced by the inclusion of self-builders in the redress scheme. If you can find a source that credibly finds a builder ultimately responsible for Mica damage, do let me know.Firstly, the builders are totally and utterly responsible for the suppliers they use. No one forced them to go these quarries, they made a decision and like any final manufacturer, they are responsible. As are the quarry owners. The builders should never have been able to abdicate their responsibility. If you buy a BMW and a component in the car made by a 3rd party supplier fails, you go to BMW to resolve it as BMW are responsible
Different issue.Then lets look at all of the apartment complexes where owners are having to spend thousands on basic things like bringing the complex up to standard.
Even if true, neither here or there. Nobody is credibly claiming that 80% of apartments built between 1991 and 2003 are uninhabitable or anything like it.This article is scary. 80% of apartments built in Ireland between 1991 and 2003 have fire, structural or water ingress isssues.
Mick Clifford LOL.Mick Clifford: Citizens will pick up the tab for building defects
Legally, builders including Flynn & O’Flaherty are only responsible for defective work if it is discovered within seven years of constructionwww.irishexaminer.com
In fairness, the builders may not all have been chancers and may just have been incompetent, but lets be honest, would anyone in their right mind buy a 2nd hand Celtic Tiger apartment right now?
Yes, and BMW would recover the cost from their supplier at the same time. That's why their supplier have insurance. When they sign a supply agreement with their supplier issues such as liability and insurance are covered. If a supplier is not ISO/TS 16949 certifies they would not use them. If they don't have sufficient insurance they won't use them.If you buy a BMW and a component in the car made by a 3rd party supplier fails, you go to BMW to resolve it as BMW are responsible
I would happily buy one if if fit my circumstances. There were perhaps 150k apartments built 1995-2010 and Priory Hall is the only development that required a full demolition. So that's 200 units out of 150,000 or 0.13%.In fairness, the builders may not all have been chancers and may just have been incompetent, but lets be honest, would anyone in their right mind buy a 2nd hand Celtic Tiger apartment right now?
If I want to build a house, I sign a contract with a builder, rendering the builder liable for supply errors, sub-contractor mistakes, materials supply problems or delays and/or deviations from the materials specs., plans, and/or delivery dates. e.g. €1,000 / day for missed completion dates, full rectification costs for workmanship or materials problems.The suggestion of 'builders' being in any way liable is as unrealistic as it is ignorant of reality.
The home owner should make a claim against the main contractor. The main contractor then claims against whomever built the brick/block work. They in turn claim against the supplier of the bricks/blocks and so on. If the home owner is the main contractor then the first step is skipped. That's the way liability works.Why do you assume that every builder is globalmegacorp, where you have 'contracts' and professional indemnity insurance etc. - Rightly or wrongly, the majority of houses in Donegal are self-build. I appreciate that's hard to understand in urban areas. Trying to go after hundreds of builders as opposed to one supplier also is unnecessarily legally complicating it.
No matter how many lawyers we have in this country, there won't be enough to process all the cases against each individual builder and in turn by them against the supplying quarry if we proceed along these lines.The home owner should make a claim against the main contractor. The main contractor then claims against whomever built the brick/block work. They in turn claim against the supplier of the bricks/blocks and so on. If the home owner is the main contractor then the first step is skipped. That's the way liability works.
What shouldn't happen is "This is complicated so the State should pay for it". We have an abundance of lawyers in this country. Let's use them.
Take test cases and make the insurance companies pay out to the limit of their liability. There should be a discussion about whatever shortfall there is after that but all these quarries and construction companies had insurance so why is should the State take on liabilities that massive international insurance companies have been paid vast amounts of money to underwrite?No matter how many lawyers we have in this country, there won't be enough to process all the cases against each individual builder and in turn by them against the supplying quarry if we proceed along these lines.
Besides, many homeowners in likely negative equity can ill-afford the substantial upfront outlay inherent in mounting legal action, especially when everyone knows that the ultimately culpable party cannot compensate even a small fraction of claimants.
Again, if your house is literally falling asunder, you won't be able to afford a test case.Take test cases and make the insurance companies pay out to the limit of their liability. There should be a discussion about whatever shortfall there is after that but all these quarries and construction companies had insurance so why is should the State take on liabilities that massive international insurance companies have been paid vast amounts of money to underwrite?
If the quarries and construction companies didn't have insurance then they were trading recklessly and their directors should be held personally liable.
But the private sector built all of this on contract for the state, no state employees got their hands dirty doing this work. Now since Covid many of them are still working from home hardly conducive to building 10s of thousands of social houses.for the state being inefficient, yes there is some truth to that but it is not the whole truth. Look at the motorways, the Luas, the Electrical infrastructure, gas piplelines, plenty of big infrastructural projects that are still standing and working today, unlike many houses built by the private sector over the last 20 years.
Maybe we're all sick of hearing the Nordies moaning?Why is this such an issue for Donegal property, but wasn't in the case of Pyrrhite in Dublin property? Sectarianism isn't just along the grounds of religion.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?