Cladding dispute. — Scope | Disability forum
Find out how to let us know if you're concerned about another member's safety.

Cladding dispute.

onebigvoice
onebigvoice Member Posts: 258 Pioneering
edited January 11 in Coffee lounge
With yet another discussion about who pays for changing cladding that is around your property and the Grenfell disaster.
  Now may be I am looking at this from the wrong angle, but this is my opinion, what's yours.
  I am in a position to buy or put a deposit on a property so I have a survey done and like the place after the viewing so I decide to buy.
  I move in and a few years go by and we have a disaster where people are killed because of the same cladding that is around the building that you now live in.  You try to sell and can't and all of a sudden its down to you to pay for the removal of the cladding, money you don't have?
  Why is it down to you to pay?  since the survey would have checked the building structurally including cladding the same as finding Blue Asbestos on a garage roof, if you want to buy you have to have it removed at a mutual agreement.  Mine would be, if you replace it I will buy it?  
  The owners of the bock would have known the limitations of the cladding since the clerk of the works would have with the design engineer been sent the safety specifications of its use and limitations, yet still went ahead and used it.
  Did the cladding show up in the report before you bought or was it not mentioned?  Either was to me its deception, would you have bought if you had known the risks?
  People/survivors of Grenfell are still waiting, years after that disaster, and the government if you remember tested every building that had similar cladding around it and there was a similar report, REPLACE AS ITS UNSAFE.  why are we still looking for answers?  the people involved could have moved to Australia by now? 
  Companies House had the following day applications to remove contractors names from the list of suppliers for Grenfell?  What does that tell you?
  I have seen the safety Specifications for the materials used and it says in the form that within the price of supplying ALL THE FIXTURES including the glue and resins used they will supply a specialist team of fitters free of charge, as each piece is made individually at their factory like a jig saw puzzle, and cutting of pieces requires specialist cutting equipment.  ( this is because normal grinding alters the molecular structure of the plastic, this also includes the glue and insulation materials.)
  The " Z " specification was not used and the free fitting was also no taken up?  WHY, simply jobs of the boys and keep the profits in house so to speak.

Comments

  • mikehughescq
    mikehughescq Member Posts: 8,228 Disability Gamechanger
    Your post once again contains inaccurate assertions so I for one will not be engaging further on what might otherwise have been an interesting topic.
  • onebigvoice
    onebigvoice Member Posts: 258 Pioneering
    I make a comment and you yet again make comments like that without any means of supporting your assertions of what you think is wrong?
      I can show you the data sheets of the cladding used, and the cladding that should have been used, I can name the clerk of works that ordered the materials and the fact that she did not take up the offer of the free fitting of the cladding and used a company that was not given the correct information, I can show you the transcript of the people who gained the contract to recladding not only this building but many others and how this person left the company just before the fire and took all the specification sheets with him on his computer stating because it was his computer every thing on it belonged to him?
      This as you may or not be aware is wrong since people of that level sign a disclosure stating that any work done under the company name belongs to the company, and when asked to down load the whole job off his laptop back onto the company files the private/company computer was destroyed, or so he said, and it was this person that tried to remove his name from the register at Companies House later that day.
      So explain what I have stated wrong as I would like to know what you know about the subject?
      As for the SAFETY OFFICERS on site who issued the materials and the specification sheets, interdepartmental E Mail state that the specifications the got were not suitable for use and to get round it they stated that it would not be used over three stories high and therefore would not need the free fitting service either?  The company supplying the cladding refused to sell it to them and they were then told we will try it on some of the other lower sites first then reorder later.  This never happened.
      Comments greatly appreciated,     
  • mikehughescq
    mikehughescq Member Posts: 8,228 Disability Gamechanger
    I make a comment and you yet again make comments like that without any means of supporting your assertions of what you think is wrong?
    A rather unfortunate comment given the many times myself and other posters have had to correct your inaccurate assertions re: benefit claim processes and the nature of assessments. 

    I have nothing to add here but, for clarity, your 5th to 7th paragraphs are a distortion/misrepresentation of the processes which actually take or have taken place and that’s just for starters. Anyone who has recently purchased a property will know that to be the case so the case for links could not be less necessary. You do not qualify such obviously wrong assertions with “in my experience” or “in my opinion”. You start a thread and simply expect people to accept things as fact which are not.

    I note no-one else has dignified this with a response. It’s good occasionally to reflect on things like that. 
  • Libby_Scope
    Libby_Scope Posts: 635

    Scope community team

    Hi @onebigvoice and @mikehughescq

    Please can we both bear in mind the community house rules here in this conversation. That is, we ensure the information we provide is correct and that we do not present opinions as facts. I would also like to encourage a friendly supportive atmosphere and ensure that we are respecting one another. 

    If you have any further comments, please ensure that they are relevant to the post and are respectful.

    Libby
    Online Community Information Coordinator
    Scope

    Concerned about another member's safety or wellbeing? Flag your concerns with us.

    Did we do a good job at answering your queries or concerns? If so, complete our feedback form now. 
  • woodbine
    woodbine Community Co-Production Group Posts: 6,052 Disability Gamechanger
    I think it's an interesting subject especially as the govt. as I understand it has found a further £4 billion  to help some people have their cladding modified, I assume what angers many is that they seem reluctant to foot the bill for everybody.
    Since Grenfell I should imagine a lot of people living in high rise flats have been extremely worried.
    Be kind to newer members
  • chiarieds
    chiarieds Community Co-Production Group Posts: 11,600 Disability Gamechanger
    Mike said, 'Your post once again contains inaccurate assertions so I for one will not be engaging further on what might otherwise have been an interesting topic.'
    This only reflects what he & others, myself included, have seen as Mike later says about this poster's many comments on benefits, PIP assessments, etc. Nothing I can see which contravenes the community's house rules in what Mike has said @Libby_Scope -  it is nigh on impossible to 'support' inaccurate info, nor should it be given as per Scope's house rules.
  • woodbine
    woodbine Community Co-Production Group Posts: 6,052 Disability Gamechanger
    I think there is a point here, we should always take a post/thread on it's own merit or lack of merit and not refer back to previous post by a member, to me that seems unfair.
    I do agree that scopes rules should be adhered to at all times, after all it's their forum and their rules.

    But getting back to the thread I maintain it's an interesting subject that affects large numbers of people and some of those will be forum members, I think @Libby_Scope was perfectly correct to say keep to the rules whilst discussing the subject.

    I'd be interested to see what other members experiences on this are and how they are (if they are) affected.
    Be kind to newer members
  • lisathomas50
    lisathomas50 Member Posts: 4,951 Disability Gamechanger
    There are a couple of blocks of flats under investigation  where I live thry knocked two blocks of  flats down because they were realy old and not worth takeing the cladding off  they have re housed the people that were in the other flats so have to see what they do with the ones that are left 

    It must be a horrible situation to be in 
  • mikehughescq
    mikehughescq Member Posts: 8,228 Disability Gamechanger
    A very disappointing response @Libby_Scope and @woodbine

    I do not see why I am referenced at all. The OP contains an inaccurate summary as previously described. As I’ve observed that, then either it does or it doesn’t. Either it gets edited or it doesn’t. Issuing a public “reminder/warning” which names me was wholly unnecessary. Kindly aim your comments to the poster who created the problem. I have not breached anything here as @chiarieds has rightly observed. I am also on the end of an aggressive request for links which is plainly ludicrous given that the purchase process is well known. 

    In observing explicitly what the problem is I think it is absolutely legitimate to refer to a past history of presenting opinion as fact. If you’re a first time offender then that’s forgivable. Why should we pretend that a repeat offender isn’t? What have they done to earn that right exactly? 

    It appears the house approach is once again to shoot the messenger. 

    As regards the topic itself, does it really need pointing out that it’s wholly inaccurate to suggest a survey would contain this information? 
  • Libby_Scope
    Libby_Scope Posts: 635

    Scope community team

    Hi all,

    My comment wasn’t intended to target anyone out singularly, so I apologise if anyone felt that way. I was merely reminding everyone of the house rules, and how important it is to respect each other when posting on the community as things were deviating off topic.

    It would be a shame if we had to delete this conversation, as it is a meaningful and important subject matter, so I would appreciate if the comments on this thread from now on, was about the subject matter and not one to highlight other members and their remarks. If you have any further questions, then please just let us know.

    Thank you. 

    Libby :) 


    Online Community Information Coordinator
    Scope

    Concerned about another member's safety or wellbeing? Flag your concerns with us.

    Did we do a good job at answering your queries or concerns? If so, complete our feedback form now. 
  • lisathomas50
    lisathomas50 Member Posts: 4,951 Disability Gamechanger
    I think the thread has already gone @Libby_Scope

Brightness

Need to talk?


Over Christmas the online community might be a little quieter than usual, so if you need urgent emotional support or if you feel like you might be in crisis, please read up about how to stay safe for now and find help.

You can also speak to somebody in confidence by calling Samaritans on 116 123 for free or send an email to
[email protected]

Of course, if you feel like you might be at risk right now, please call 999 or visit your local hospital.
Complete our feedback form and tell us how we can make the community better.