| Fire resistant cladding 19:27 - May 9 with 2145 views | Basuco |
It seems very wrong that private landlords are happy to take the profits from residents rent in tower blocks but not want to pay for fire resistant cladding. We the tax payers are having to pay for it.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48211833 |  | | |  |
| Fire resistant cladding on 19:28 - May 9 with 2140 views | Sarge |
Probably because most landlords are scum. You’d have to be wouldn’t you, to want to profit from a person’s basic need for housing? |  | | |
| Fire resistant cladding on 19:32 - May 9 with 2122 views | m14_blue |
Very wrong but not in the least surprising, unfortunately. | | | |
| Fire resistant cladding on 19:33 - May 9 with 2125 views | UB9Blue |
Generally they collect money for the building upkeep through service charges that tenants are obliged to top up where spending exceeds revenue.
Is a bit rich that the owners dont pay but they would ultimately pass it back down if their profits were threatened. At least this way we can hope there will be repetition of Grenfell. | | | |
| Fire resistant cladding on 19:35 - May 9 with 2119 views | lowhouseblue |
they won't be landlords in a standard active sense - but will just be receiving a ground rent or equivalent. the terms of the (long) lease won't provide for them to maintain the property otherwise that lease term would be enforced. the government wouldn't intervene if the freeholder had a legal duty to meet the cost. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Fire resistant cladding on 20:15 - May 9 with 2045 views | factual_blue |
| Fire resistant cladding on 19:28 - May 9 by Sarge |
Probably because most landlords are scum. You’d have to be wouldn’t you, to want to profit from a person’s basic need for housing? |
I'd say most are financially naive and vain.
Putting all your money into a property to rent out is a bit dim, but lets you kid yourself you're the Duke of Westminster. |  |
| |
| Fire resistant cladding on 20:17 - May 9 with 2039 views | factual_blue |
| Fire resistant cladding on 19:33 - May 9 by UB9Blue |
Generally they collect money for the building upkeep through service charges that tenants are obliged to top up where spending exceeds revenue.
Is a bit rich that the owners dont pay but they would ultimately pass it back down if their profits were threatened. At least this way we can hope there will be repetition of Grenfell. |
You want a repeat of the Grenfell fire? | |
| |
| Fire resistant cladding on 20:24 - May 9 with 2023 views | Muncher |
| Fire resistant cladding on 19:35 - May 9 by lowhouseblue |
they won't be landlords in a standard active sense - but will just be receiving a ground rent or equivalent. the terms of the (long) lease won't provide for them to maintain the property otherwise that lease term would be enforced. the government wouldn't intervene if the freeholder had a legal duty to meet the cost. |
This entirely. We are not talking about landlords being bailed out here, we are talking about largely individual flat owners that are not able to pay, what would And should be a service charge expense. | | | |
| Fire resistant cladding on 20:24 - May 9 with 2024 views | Sarge |
| Fire resistant cladding on 20:15 - May 9 by factual_blue |
I'd say most are financially naive and vain.
Putting all your money into a property to rent out is a bit dim, but lets you kid yourself you're the Duke of Westminster. |
I don’t have a problem with them, if I had an extra property through inheritance or it being attached to my house then I’d probably rent it out. It’s the ones with a ‘portfolio’ who probably are the Duke of Westminster that can do one. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Fire resistant cladding on 20:48 - May 9 with 1979 views | vilanovablue |
Most of the buildings controlled by housing associations that in this day and age can't afford the work. It's not council housing anymore... |  | | |
| Fire resistant cladding on 20:59 - May 9 with 1955 views | Clapham_Junction |
| Fire resistant cladding on 20:48 - May 9 by vilanovablue |
Most of the buildings controlled by housing associations that in this day and age can't afford the work. It's not council housing anymore... |
Registered social landlords are eligible to request money from a central funding pot for cladding replacement and have the same access to it as council landlords.
The issue is that it isn't enough (L&Q and Camden council's costs are about a quarter of what is available for the whole country) and DCLG seem very reluctant to part with the money. |  | | |
| Fire resistant cladding on 22:57 - May 9 with 1869 views | Marshalls_Mullet |
You're getting confused between freeholders, and private landlords.
The leaseholders are effectively the owners and they are the people not wanting to pay. |  |
| |
| Fire resistant cladding on 22:57 - May 9 with 1868 views | Marshalls_Mullet |
| Fire resistant cladding on 19:35 - May 9 by lowhouseblue |
they won't be landlords in a standard active sense - but will just be receiving a ground rent or equivalent. the terms of the (long) lease won't provide for them to maintain the property otherwise that lease term would be enforced. the government wouldn't intervene if the freeholder had a legal duty to meet the cost. |
This. | |
| |
| Fire resistant cladding on 14:12 - May 10 with 1690 views | No9 |
| Fire resistant cladding on 19:35 - May 9 by lowhouseblue |
they won't be landlords in a standard active sense - but will just be receiving a ground rent or equivalent. the terms of the (long) lease won't provide for them to maintain the property otherwise that lease term would be enforced. the government wouldn't intervene if the freeholder had a legal duty to meet the cost. |
After the 1966 Housing Act didn't government have the pwoer to enforce landlords to make their properties fit and safe for habitation?
And wasn't that Act, at least partly, neutered by a government in the 80's?
Private profits Taxpayer pain - again?? | | | |
| Fire resistant cladding on 14:18 - May 10 with 1676 views | No9 |
& the son of the responsible Minster reputedly aquired more than40 London properties | | | |
| Fire resistant cladding on 14:40 - May 10 with 1653 views | lowhouseblue |
| Fire resistant cladding on 14:12 - May 10 by No9 |
After the 1966 Housing Act didn't government have the pwoer to enforce landlords to make their properties fit and safe for habitation?
And wasn't that Act, at least partly, neutered by a government in the 80's?
Private profits Taxpayer pain - again?? |
don't think it applies to leasehold properties. the main press coverage of this has been very poor. with leasehold flats there may well be a service charge to cover repairs to the external envelope. if the freeholder had a liability the courts would enforce it. perhaps the leaseholders need to sue their conveyencers if it was not made clear that when they purchased the leasehold interest that they were taking on a financial risk associated with future external repairs. if the freeholders were liable under the terms of the leases the government wouldn't be stepping in. equally if the buildings are new you would expect someone to have the benefit of any warranties and for it to be resolved in that way. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
