Grenfell ex-residents should get a 3-bed house with a garden if that's what they want

[pingodolcepo]

Daily mail outrage that some of the residents are asking for a 3-bed house with a garden. But honestly, they have been through a living hell that was caused by someone else's very bad choices.

There are plenty of people in London that have a 3 bed council house, why can't these people that have dealt with horrors get one also?

I know someone that got a council house in Highgate in the 80s, was a cabbie with a good wage, bought it when offered and sold it a few years ago for over a million and now lives in a fab place with loads of land and a pool in the south of France. If plenty of normal people got houses why can't these poor residents get one? They won't ever be able to afford to buy it due to the high cost of london houses now.

I don’t know whether at that age we gained anything from being in this mixed socio-economic bag

I think you have answered your own question here.

Damn you guys really dislike brown people don't you.

That's not helpful make.

I agree this "OMG immigrants are spoiling things" narrative is based on inaccuracy and misapprehension. But either we discuss it with reference to the facts, and hopefully puncture some myths, or we have a taboo and the myths go unchallenged.

Make - nice assumption there as to my colour/my partner's colour!

The problem is that the UK is seen as a soft touch in some countries because there is a widespread belief that we give away free housing and money. That is NOT the individuals' fault and it is nothing to do with their race . Who wouldn't want to move somewhere that they could greatly improve their lives and be given support for housing etc?

It is, however, one of the by products of a generous welfare state. People will talk and spread rumours. There has to be a happy medium that sees Britain do its share and welcome immigrants without having to build over everything to accommodate everyone.

"I think you have answered your own question here"

This kind of passive-aggressive, smart-dick crap few can stand. Cut it out.

Somehow I don't think make was trying to be "helpful", Battleax

I appreciate that, for some, it's always got to be made about race or colour, but out here in the real world it seems to me to be more about a generalised dislike of those who take the p**s ... and they can be from absolutely anyone at all

It's not even about asylum seekers - or at least not the genuine ones, who I'd hope any decent person would be willing to help. But just as some will bend the truth in order to access social housing, so some will lie in pursuit of their chosen immigration status - as even some charities in this field are now prepared to admit

Let me ask this. It has confused me for a while.

I know that for a long time certain people have felt that they "couldn't speak out about things". "PC gone mad isn't it?" "Snowflakes, etc." "We need to have a conversation about race and immigration."

That has changed recently hasn't it? Now if someone spews some ignorant bile and someone raises an objection all hell breaks loose.

Stop disparaging asylum seekers. Somalian or otherwise. We wrote the Treaties, we signed the Treaties. We may ourselves need protection under the Treaties at some point.

That has changed recently hasn't it? Now if someone spews some ignorant bile and someone raises an objection all hell breaks loose.

What?

Why do you assume all somalians are asylum seekers?

Why do you assume all somalians are asylum seekers?

The guy who x-rayed my foot was on a T2 visa. We chatted about it a bit.

And he told you that ALL somalians are asylum seekers?

Most of the Somalians in the UK are EU citizens.

And he told you that ALL somalians are asylum seekers?

I don't think he said any such thing. Nor would I expect him to know the immigration status of every Somalian.

Aside from Somalians and racial discussion - and back to Grenfell and entitlement, does anyone know the full total of financial charitable donation and if it has been shared out equally per household affected? If so, I'm imagining a sizeable amount. Would it be enough per household to secure deposit for rental or purchase a property anywhere?

Or was this supposed to be given in addition to new housing?

In addition to, I would have thought Happyinherts, although I don't know. Certainly there has been no mention of it in discussions about rehousing, so I assume it is seperate.
Depending on how much is in the pot, it could be used to buy any HA style houses currently for sale in the borough to bring them back into housing stock. That would be a good legacy for the money raised.

Yes, cathf - I do wonder - as with so much charitable donations - as to whether it's all gone to rightful recipients. It was a very sizeable amount. Far more than needed to replace furnishings and possessions per head, so questioning whether this ought to have been raised for acquisition of homes - although by no means ignoring the council's responsibility in this situation.

does anyone know the full total of financial charitable donation and if it has been shared out equally per household affected?

I don't pretend to know, but imagine it would be hard to quantify exactly what's been donated, given the number of initiatives involved

Even with major charities it can be hard to know exactly what's been spent where, so it's not easy to see how this could be channelled into something as concrete as housing (pun not intended )

Depending on how much is in the pot, it could be used to buy any HA style houses currently for sale in the borough to bring them back into housing stock. That would be a good legacy for the money raised.

Impossible, it was donated to the victims, not the landlords. Can you imagine the outcry?

But yes, in the end, the survivors will be well compensated.

You are right battle-ax, there would be an outcry.
But given that the victims are already getting compensation from the Government (I think??), I would question the need for any additional money, so it's a shame the donations could not be used for something with a lasting benefit.
I have a question - are tenants expected to have insurance to cover them in case of fire? I realise flats are difficult because the risk is not limited to the policyholder only, but is it not the tenants' responsibility to insure the contents of their home?

Social tenants, like all tenants, have a responsibility to arrange contents insurance.

I thought so.
So, presumably those with insurance will get an insurance payout, government compensation and money from the charitable collections?
I am not sure how 'vulnerable' some of these tenants really are.

I have a question - are tenants expected to have insurance to cover them in case of fire? I realise flats are difficult because the risk is not limited to the policyholder only, but is it not the tenants' responsibility to insure the contents of their home?

Try having a sensible conversation about insurance with socialists. It's basically impossible.

The existence of insurance implies that people have some control over the fallout from disaster in their lives, which is an anathema to people like makeourfuture.

Try having a sensible conversation about insurance with socialists. It's basically impossible.

Try having a sensible conversation about insurance with socialists. It's basically impossible.

I took the liberty of fixing that for you.