Grenfell-ex-residents-should-get-a-3-bed-house-with-a-garden-if-thats-what-they-want? - thread 2

[cathf]

Don't know how to do links
But this is to continue discussing the Grenfall-ex-residents-should-get-a-3-bed-house-with-a-garden-if-thats-what-they-want? thread

Or the "moon on a stick" thread!

Applebee - the people managing my block will do their best in line with current standards. But if that fails, I'll be left to rely on my insurance policy, that I pay for myself. The council won't be rushing to rehouse me or to give me compensation! Others made that point on the other thread.

And no. That is not what a service charge is for. It pays for building maintenance; porters' salaries; lifts; gates; gardens; swimming pool; gym etc etc etc.

Apple, so the answer to who gets the available flat is ..... More homes should be built.
Bingo

Got it in one, cath - let's face it, it's the best answer you're going to get

To mention a new thought, I'm just pondering the money already spent on the Grenfell folk, specifically anything that's been provided over and above what would be usual when someone loses their home

If it comes to some sort of compensation payout, I wonder if any adjustment will be made to reflect the above?

I do find it fascinating that people are so vocal when they think wrong decisions have been made, but when faced with the reality of the decision themselves, can't do it.
It's like that NHS programme that was on TV earlier this year that showed the tough real-life dilemmas the NHS faced, and I'm sure everyone watching was glad they did not have to make that kind of decision, because it's impossible to keep everyone happy.
Posters like Apple - who I suspect we will not see again on this thread - are very reactive. They see something they think is unfair and they want to jump straight in and make it better, without thinking of the consequences. It's a very simplistic way of looking at things.
Regarding the money already paid to Grenfell victims and further compensation, that's a very interesting question.
Personally, I think the victims should be awarded the same compensation as anyone else who loses their home should get, perhaps with a little extra, as it was clearly an horrific experience.

I think they deserve everything and more. I can’t imagine seeing your neighbours die or losing loved ones and knowing it could have been prevented.

Everything and more? Explain exactly how you would define everything and more?

cathf Do you have a link to the fact they are refusing housing offers? You insisted that this was the case several times on the previous thread.

amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/11/grenfell-fire-only-10-households-affected-have-permanent-homes
That's my first ever link - I hope it works!
I have also heard radio articles on Radio 4 about it.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/five-reasons-why-grenfell-residents-have-yet-to-be-rehoused-10937592

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-41894673

Many properties that were bought were unsuitable and they don't want to go in to temporary when they came from permanent homes. They know of people as I do that you can be in temp for five years plus. I'm not feeling the love here and I'm not sure why ? No home however grand can replace what these people have lost, The community is still in shock six months on so please show compassion

Compassion is one thing but some people are making unreasonable demands I think.
Have you read the other thread?

And you believe it? These people are in trauma and not surprisingly .

Believe what?

All that you read in the papers? Sky news has got some things wrong as well

cathf believes what she wants to believe Jan. The previous thread had a lot of racist posts as well.

Here we go again.
A pp asked for links about Grenfell victims refusing homes. I provided them, the pp has not been back.
Can you give any substance to you claim I believe what I want to believe?
What do YOU believe?

I provided a link to The Guardian, Jansred, as for some reason that is deemed an acceptable source of information on MN.
So, let's get this right, you are saying that all newspapers and TV news programmes have got it wrong?
OK

Yes they should be first in line for the best homes the council has to offer, they've lost all their possessions and in the worst cases their family and friends a fresh start in a lovely new home is needed not another shabby flat which reminds them of the horror they suffered. When my little sister was run over and passed away our council moved us into a new development a nice three bed with a garden (what we wanted and begged for years before her passing but these councils wait until the worst happens before moving their arses) so it's definitely possible to prioitise their needs as they should be doing.

They are first in line for the best homes, only the best homes are being turned down.
Now what?

I find it extremely hard to believe they were shown the 'best' homes and turned it down obviously it wasn't suitable and far from the best then in that case.

I'm sorry that your sister passed, HappyLollipop but the Grenfellers want to stay only within the same area. Whether it's W10-W11-W2 there are no houses with gardens in Zones 1 & 2, but there are in the next borough which is Hammersmith & Fulham (W6 & W12) - but they do not want to go there. Some have even declined to go to W14 a very nice area and still within RBKC.

Everyone has compassion for the survivors, but if the public get a whiff of that emotion being misused in order to blackmail the council it may rebound on the Grenfellers.

Compensation for the lost lives of loved ones should be assessed, as well as compensation for the survivors. I'm afraid that comp. always boils down to £. We do not yet know who will pay that; it may well be the building firm, the surveyors or the Council because someone in procurement chose that particular cladding, and a senior signed off on the purchase. It may be found that manufacturer-builder-Council are jointly and severally responsible legally.

The Grenfellers are clearly waiting for that decision before they begin to accept housing offers.

If they will not accept rehousing within RBKC in flats and will not move out of Borough, what do you HappyLollipop suggest?

I feel this way because I am from London and have had to move to the midlands for the foreseeable future to afford to live. So it does grate me a tad when people say they need a house in x borough, a couple of miles away, an extra stop or two on the tube.

I agree. I could never afford to live there and nor could anyone I know.

cathf Jansred says the other thread is racist, because a few of us challenged the idea that all illegal occupants and the greedy tenants who sublet their flats for MONEY while living elsewhere is NOT okay.

Let's be clear what this is. It is (i) defrauding the public purse, and (ii) not giving up a flat when the tenant clearly no longer requires it. Some obviously think this is not a big deal.

Govt had to give an amnesty to the illegals to this country living at Grenfell, and all the illegal sublets in order to sort out who is who. The tenants who were subletting for profit are not going to be penalised - they have been given a pass - and will not lose their place in the queue for a mythical 3 bed house with garden in Zone 2.