Support NeoGAF

[grumble]

Four ministers were warned about tower block fire risks via BBC

Key excerpts







This shit is inexcusable and that Liberal Democrat (and his Conversative counterparts) should all face jail time.

This is typical of governments around the world. Ignore, run endless studies, do nothing. Any government that has any bold action wouldn't be a democracy. Their job is to get re-elected, not to govern.

 

[strafer]

5500 is like 65 000 swedish kronor and that's not a lot for someone who lost everything.

 

[Crispy75]

Ooooh, that's just insulting. A paltry sum.

Those people lost everything and will likely need counselling / support for the rest of their lives.

The £5,500 is not compensation. It's the standard relocation allowance paid out when people are forced out of council housing.

 

[thelatestmodel]

The £5,500 is not compensation. It's the standard relocation allowance paid out when people are forced out of council housing.

Well, it comes across very differently. The government needs to be on its knees right now emphasizing that it is giving these people everything they could need. But I suppose we can also blame the press for the way it was reported.

 

[JonnyDBrit]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40343897

Victims of the Grenfell Tower fire are not being asked to move hundreds of miles from their homes, the team organising the emergency response says.

The Grenfell Response Team also said it was not aware any victims were sleeping in parks and denied claims some could be made "intentionally homeless".

Mr Lammy tweeted that he had heard survivors could be made intentionally homeless if they turned down accommodation offers - some 200 miles away, in Preston. Lancashire.

However, the official Grenfell response team - made up of council and government staff, charity workers, the police and fire service - rejected the claims.

In a statement, the response team said it was not aware of any victims living in parks, that nobody was being forced into accommodation, and people were being homed "as locally as possible".

Some 138 hotel placements have been made for people living in Grenfell Tower and Grenfell Walk, it added, while 112 additional residents from the wider area are now in hotels.

"No-one is being forced into housing they don't want. We will continue to work with everyone until we find them an offer of housing that they accept," it said.

Hoping this is actually true. Though they've apparently also had trouble with getting victims coming forward due to concerns over their immigration status.

 

[Number45]

Hoping this is actually true. Though they've apparently also had trouble with getting victims coming forward due to concerns over their immigration status.

I thought it had already been confirmed that this wouldn't be a problem?

 

[JonnyDBrit]

I thought it had already been confirmed that this wouldn't be a problem?

On the re-housing issue - Sharma had stated it was the intention to re-house people locally, but claims started coming out that people were being asked to move to the likes of Preston. I believe this is the first time the Response Team has rebuked it specifically.

 

[Zaph]

Isn't it funny what can happen when you have the community out there demonstrating, and left-wing politicians actually talking about the massive inequality in this country?

 

[GrizzleBoy]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/21/grenfell-tower-families-to-be-given-68-flats-in-luxury-apartment-complex

Damn son, that's quite he hook up:

Sixty-eight flats in a luxury apartment complex where homes are on sale starting at £1.6m are being made available to families displaced by the Grenfell Tower fire.

Families who escaped the tower blaze will be able to take up permanent occupation in July and August in the apartments in the Kensington Row scheme about 1.5 miles south of Grenfell, where last Wednesday's blaze left 79 people dead and missing and presumed dead.

The homes are within the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea but in the more affluent south end of the borough. They have been purchased by the Corporation of London and will become part of its social housing stock.

The most luxurious four-bedroom apartments are currently on sale in the development for £8.5m but the homes being released to Grenfell residents are part of the affordable quota being built and feature a more ”straightforward" internal specification, but have the same build quality.

The complex includes a 24-hour concierge, swimming pool, sauna and spa and private cinema.

It is not yet clear if the Grenfell residents will have access to the facilities, which are normally not included for those in affordable housing.

”We've got to start by finding each of them a home," said Tony Pidgley, chairman of the Berkeley Group, which built the homes. ”Somewhere safe and supportive, close to their friends and the places they know, so they can start to rebuild their lives. We will work night and day to get these homes ready."

Whew!

 

[darkinstinct]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/21/grenfell-tower-families-to-be-given-68-flats-in-luxury-apartment-complex

Damn son, that's quite he hook up:

Whew!

It's time for a general change in housing policy. It can't be that there are thousands of apartments all over the city (or really worldwide) that are being used a couple of days each year and otherwise just owned to sell them off sometime in the future. Every place that is not used for at least half a year by the same tenant (otherwise it's just AirBnB) should be ripped from their owners and given to people that actually need a place to live.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

It's time for a general change in housing policy. It can't be that there are thousands of apartments all over the city (or really worldwide) that are being used a couple of days each year and otherwise just owned to sell them off sometime in the future. Every place that is not used for at least half a year by the same tenant (otherwise it's just AirBnB) should be ripped from their owners and given to people that actually need a place to live.

No. You wouldn't want to give up your home, which you paid for, because the government didn't do a good enough job building social housing.

Why the fuck should anyone else? What people do work property they own is up to them, if you want more social housing, demand it from the government and vote for the parties that promise it.

 

[Theonik]

No. You wouldn't want to give up your home, which you paid for, because the government didn't do a good enough job building social housing.

Why the fuck should anyone else? What people do work property they own is up to them, if you want more social housing, demand it from the government and vote for the parties that promise it.

Land is finite. Just tax the hell out of empty properties and the use of land.
Society has no benefit to incentivise such reckless behaviour.

 

[satriales]

No. You wouldn't want to give up your home, which you paid for, because the government didn't do a good enough job building social housing.

Why the fuck should anyone else? What people do work property they own is up to them, if you want more social housing, demand it from the government and vote for the parties that promise it.

People wouldn't be giving up their homes, they'd be giving up properties that were bought purely to sit on and make money.

 

[thelatestmodel]

People wouldn't be giving up their homes, they'd be giving up properties that were bought purely to sit on and make money.

This. The time has come to prove that your dwelling is lived in. If it's not, then sorry, but it has to be sold so someone can live in it. There isn't room for this practice in London any more.

 

[vordhosbn]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/21/grenfell-tower-families-to-be-given-68-flats-in-luxury-apartment-complex

Damn son, that's quite he hook up:

Whew!

Now watch everybody go back to the default mode of "those damn leeches taking a nice house BEFORE a british person!!!"

 

[MistakenMobius]

It's time for a general change in housing policy. It can't be that there are thousands of apartments all over the city (or really worldwide) that are being used a couple of days each year and otherwise just owned to sell them off sometime in the future. Every place that is not used for at least half a year by the same tenant (otherwise it's just AirBnB) should be ripped from their owners and given to people that actually need a place to live.

I am away at least 5 days away from home due to my work, does that mean that my apartment should be nationalised?

More housing should be built and clearly more in the style of HDB like in Singapore, that's it.
That means probably replacing Old building and getting rid of a few parks but that needed in all global metropolitan area.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Land is finite. Just tax the hell out of empty properties and the use of land.
Society has no benefit to incentivise such reckless behaviour.

It doesn't, but that's the society we have now and I don't like the idea of removing property rights from anyone, even if the property is empty 11 months out of the year.

People wouldn't be giving up their homes, they'd be giving up properties that were bought purely to sit on and make money.

Besides the point. These are paid for properties, no-one has the right to tell the owners what to do with them to to have their ownership rights revoked because of poor government investment.

If the government isn't happy with the current setup, they are fee to change the rules and tax owners of empty properties.

 

[thelatestmodel]

I am away at least 5 days away from home due to my work, does that mean that my apartment should be nationalised?

More housing should be built and clearly more in the style of HDB like in Singapore, that's it.
That means probably replacing Old building and getting rid of a few parks but that needed in all global metropolitan area.

We're talking about the ones that are empty for months on end. You're obviously fine.

 

[GrizzleBoy]

This. The time has come to prove that your dwelling is lived in. If it's not, then sorry, but it has to be sold so someone can live in it. There isn't room for this practice in London any more.

But then how will Russian oligarchs pay for their kids Mar a Largo memberships?

 

[StayDead]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/21/grenfell-tower-families-to-be-given-68-flats-in-luxury-apartment-complex

Damn son, that's quite he hook up:

Whew!

The move follows calls by Jeremy Corbyn for luxury homes in the borough to be requisitioned.

Excellent. This is what should've happened to begin with!

 

[Al-ibn Kermit]

No. You wouldn't want to give up your home, which you paid for, because the government didn't do a good enough job building social housing.

Why the fuck should anyone else? What people do work property they own is up to them, if you want more social housing, demand it from the government and vote for the parties that promise it.

Short-term rentals aren't the main cause of high housing prices in major cities but they make the problem worse, especially by gentrifying areas that are popular with tourists.

The main problem is lack of new housing being built for the last 30 years and requires legislation that requires every tower to be above a certain height and every unit to be below a certain number of square feet/meters. Getting that passed and setting up subsidies to make it profitable enough for developers will take a few years longer than legislation that restricts investment homes though.

 

[Theonik]

It doesn't, but that's the society we have now and I don't like the idea of removing property rights from anyone, even if the property is empty 11 months out of the year.

Eh, that's what taxes are essentially. If we are to solve the housing strategy we need to introduce new policy. Whether we strip empty housing or we devalue it as an investment to end the artificial housing shortage is the same difference is semantics.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Short-term rentals aren't the main cause of high housing prices in major cities but they make the problem worse, especially by gentrifying areas that are popular with tourists.

The main problem is lack of new housing being built for the last 30 years and requires legislation that requires every tower to be above a certain height and every unit to be below a certain number of square feet/meters. Getting that passed and setting up subsidies to make it profitable enough for developers will take a few years longer than legislation that restricts investment homes though.

The selling of social housing stock will forever be one of the most idiotic decision made by any government.

The failure to build more, even more so. The affordable homes you find in some new builds are anything but and we need to address, but not through stripping property rights because a place is empty for X amount of time.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Eh, that's what taxes are essentially. If we are to solve the housing strategy we need to introduce new policy. Whether we strip empty housing or we devalue it as an investment to end the artificial housing shortage is the same difference is semantics.

Or we could demand more social housing and hold any party that promises to build it to their pledge.

Stripping someone's property rights isn't the way forward.

 

[Jackpot]

If we can have an empty bedroom tax to squeeze the poorest for a few extra quid we can sure as hell have an empty house tax.

 

[Theonik]

Or we could demand more social housing and hold any party that promises to build it to their pledge.

Stripping someone's property rights isn't the way forward.

Building housing is cheap, It is land that is the issue. You are talking about nationalising huge parcels of private property either way. That's not actually a solution. We should have been doing that anyway. We need to re-think how we deal with housing as property. Or you will see more wealthy people using housing as bullion.

 

[darkinstinct]

Besides the point. These are paid for properties, no-one has the right to tell the owners what to do with them to to have their ownership rights revoked because of poor government investment.

If the government isn't happy with the current setup, they are fee to change the rules and tax owners of empty properties.

You know what happens when a road needs to be built in a certain place and the owner of the property refuses?

You know what should happen when an apartment is needed and the owner of the property rather keeps it empty?

 

[MistakenMobius]

Isn't it funny what can happen when you have the community out there demonstrating, and left-wing politicians actually talking about the massive inequality in this country?

Does that mean that it was paid market price?

 

[CelticKnight]

Isn't it funny what can happen when you have the community out there demonstrating, and left-wing politicians actually talking about the massive inequality in this country?

i'm beyond sick. A true kick in the teeth to all those who struggle to pay their mortgage, repair their house, feed their kids.

I wonder how long before an opportunist sets a fire in their own block of flats to have money and a wonderful new apartment handed to them.

this is utterly disgusting, why aren't our ex forces offered accommodation like this?

SHAMEFUL! Absolutely shameful. Our servicemen and women serve OUR country and a few of us end up on the streets or bottom of the food chain. Disgraceful. Take note, burn your belongings and change your name to Muhammed. They deserve nothing. Only a one way ticket home. But British first

I am paying for this lot. why bother working?

Expect half a dozen tower block fires next week then. But auntie Mable who filled anti aircraft shells during the war, but with her gammy leg who now can't walk out, 'Ya sorry love you can make it 10 yards so were cutting off your PIP benefit.'

Tragic what has happened and the loss of life doesn't bear thinking about. But, if my home was to go up in flames would I be afforded he same gesture and be moved in to luxury apartments?

So... yeah.

 

[Saya]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...ves-were-devastated-in-grenfell-a3569876.html

Two bedroom flats are currently being advertised for up to £2.4 million, but it is understood the City of London Corporation paid around £10 million for the flats thanks to an “extraordinary gesture” of goodwill by developer St Edward in selling the properties at their cost price.

A property source said: “They are being sold to the corporation at cost. It is a huge gesture by them. It just goes to is show what kind of mark-up there is.”

£10 million for those flats is an amazing deal.

 

[Theonik]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...ves-were-devastated-in-grenfell-a3569876.html



£10 million for those flats is an amazing deal.

Remember that's them selling the properties at cost out of moral obligation. The margins on these property investments is insane.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

So... yeah.

British public doing what they do best. I'm sure for a lot of them sympathy disappeared when they saw who the victims were.

 

[Mimosa97]

Isn't it funny what can happen when you have the community out there demonstrating, and left-wing politicians actually talking about the massive inequality in this country?

Master move from the evil tories. Now watch public opinion make a complete 180 turn. People will start hating on the victims and the support for reform will die. The real culprits will be able to walk away and cuts will start again.

 

[Zaph]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...ves-were-devastated-in-grenfell-a3569876.html



£10 million for those flats is an amazing deal.

That's what's fucking infuriating - it's really cheap to build flats. 68 homes built to a high standard for only £10m.

Nobody would give a fuck about luxury developments if the government also held back an appropriate amount of land to keep social housing at sustainable levels.

 

[I H8 Memes]

Have they updated the official death toll? Seems like it hasnt risen over the last couple of days.

 

[daviyoung]

Master move from the evil tories. Now watch public opinion make a complete 180 turn.

Not when they find out where the money used by the government to buy these flats came from.

 

[Theonik]

Not when they find out where the money used by the government to buy these flats came from.

The Corporation of the City of London?

 

[daviyoung]

The Corporation of the City of London?

It's not a real corporation and its funded by taxes.

 

[Timbuktu]

That's what's fucking infuriating - it's really cheap to build flats. 68 homes built to a high standard for only £10m.

Nobody would give a fuck about luxury developments if the government also held back an appropriate amount of land to keep social housing at sustainable levels.

One would assume these blocks would make up for any affordable housing quota that the development might have to fulfill. There are just usually not too many ways for developers to get around those requirements.

 

[Theonik]

It's not a real corporation and its funded by taxes.

It is a corporation in any sense of the word. And it is funded from its holdings of businesses, land, and more than 800 years of investments. It also collects a portion of the business rates raised within the City. There is only about 30,000 people in the City so it would be rather difficult to fund itself otherwise.
If you are interested in seeing where the money comes from the data is available to view online. [1] [2] [3]

 

[Machina]

So... yeah.

Just goes to show that the best strategy the haves can use is to turn the have nots against each other

 

[Ravensmash]

So... yeah.

So what.

If the housing stock situation in Kensington is so bad, that large amounts of money need to be spent then so be it.

It should also highlight the lack of funding in social housing.

I'm certain that none of those people commenting have been made forcibly homeless, and witnessed their neighbours dying in the process.

Poor Jack might have to spend the weekend delaying the moving vans.

 

[dabig2]

Just goes to show that the best strategy the haves can, have, will, and do use is to turn the have nots against each other

Slightly fixed that for you. That's a strategy as old as humanity.

 

[CREMSteve]

Has the death toll been officially updated for this yet?

 

[Number45]

At least 79 is the most recent official figure.

 

[jellies_two]

So to no surprise AP reports that the London authorities are finding similar installed panels on other buildings are flammable.
http://apne.ws/2rULz7n

 

[ThankeeSai]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...amilies-will-lower-house-prices-a3570331.html

Good to see folks in the luxury complex have got their priorities right.

Fucking hell.

 

[spineduke]

At least 79 is the most recent official figure.

Are there still unaccounted bodies in the tower? It's been a little over a week - I can't imagine they'll let the bodies just rot up there.

 

[CadetMahoney]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...amilies-will-lower-house-prices-a3570331.html

Good to see folks in the luxury complex have got their priorities right.

Fucking hell.

They don't like the sight of brown skins around them.

 

[Dougald]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...amilies-will-lower-house-prices-a3570331.html

Good to see folks in the luxury complex have got their priorities right.

Fucking hell.

The obsession with home values over all else we're starting to get in this country will end up with US-style homeowners associations where you get sanctioned for parking your car on your own driveway

It also ties into the fact that a certain subset of the population believes that the misfortunate deserve to live in the most squalid conditions possible and don't "deserve" anything better