Grenfell Tower surviors move Bad idea waiting to happen?

Tonight I got curious about what the death toll had gotten up to concerning the fire at the Grenfell Tower. In my search I came across an article that had something interesting to mention at the end of it concerning how they were going to house some of the people that had lost their homes.

Now I live in America so I'm not real aware of what people from that side of the pond think or feel about things, but what Ive read as of late, I feel I have a slight idea at least. Somehow I don't think what their planning to do is going to go over so well and may very well be asking for more problems.

Part of the article I am referring too:

Jeremy Corbyn and senior Labour MPs, including Ms Abbott, had called for properties left vacant in Kensington and Chelsea by overseas investors to be “requisitioned” in order to rehouse those who had been left homeless.

The Government has now announced that survivors will permanently be rehoused in a £2bn luxury apartment block in Kensington.

Some 68 flats have been bought by the Government at the upmarket Kensington Row development just off Kensington High Street, Sajid Javid, the Communities Secretary, said.

The Department for Communities and Local Government said the “expectation is that these new properties will be offered as one of the options to permanently rehouse residents from Grenfell Tower”.

The properties are “newly built social housing” at a site where private homes are on offer from £1,575,000 to £8.5m.

If the rich folk were already upset about just having to look at the ugly towers to begin with, how are they going to feel about these same people moving in right next door? Is the government going to be paying the taxes on these places for the people? Surely they cant afford it? That is just one thing to consider among many other points I'm guessing. Then again I don't know how this really works, but my gut tells me it has a good chance of turning ugly way before it gets and kind of pretty.

Don't get me wrong, I feel awful for these folks that have lost their homes and the tragedy they have suffered through for reasons they should have never had to experience. While this may seem appealing to them, I don't see it really doing them any favors and I just don't see it going peacefully in the big picture. Cant help but wonder if there is more to this behind the scenes that puts the big picture together.

LINK TO ARTICLE

I'm really curious to hear what the people that live there think about this. Or is this an idea being slipped by in the dark of the night?

Just read that the samples of the building failed all safety tests.

I read that too, but I think they're rental suites so there's no property taxes. Not sure how taxing works there though

Apparently they're peeved because they paid big money for their homes and worry their value will drop.

I see a helluva lot of CYA going on concerning the GUBMINT...

Decisions made are now exposing liability...

CYA in HYPER MODE.....

a reply to: thesolartruth2013
Which building are you referring to? The tower or the new one they want to move the people into?

I'm not in the UK, can't weigh into much. Though, from what I understand people have warned about these building including the one that became a death trap, and no one listened.

I do find this very tragic and hope it is addressed accordingly, then again in the US you have places like Flint and many more where it goes on for years, until infrastructure crumbles and tragedies happen.

Local governments just let it happen, just as much as the slum lords who get away with it all-sometimes they area real estate lawyers which helps them get away with it-, because they are tired of dealing with every problem that arises. With that don't want to deal with homeless in their precious cities, so they allow slum lords to continue with their practices.

Of course sick how it had to end.

You may be onto something, that there's a bigger picture here. Doubt they would all the sudden cater to the low income now, if not the government at least the people will have issues with it overall. Dunno who would be paying though.

Good for the thread, I hope UK members can weigh in.

Where else are they going to put them?


Anyway I have no sympathy for these foreign investors.

Saudi princes and Russian oligarchs are buying huge swaths of london to deliberately drive up prices. I say sieze all there ill gotton property for economic terrorism.

Yes, I read about that, apparently some of the existing residents are none too happy lol...tough cookies for them, anyone who can pay over a million quid for a flat, are both wealthy and imo, quite stupid. I have always said that houses are for living in, places for people to make their lives, not magic cash machines, investments, pensions etc, they are bloody homes, and everyone should have the basic right to a decent home.

But as people are inherently greedy, they have pride in "how much their house is worth" and seem to have lost basic humanity in terms of understanding that houses are an essential for everyone, and not everyone has vast sums of money at their disposal, simply to buy a property, and instead of being compassionate, they look down their noses at those who cannot afford the privilege of a decent home.

ETA one resident at the posh block apparently moaned about how hard they worked for their property...aye petal and so do all the people on minimum wage who could only dream of spending £1.5 million on a flat.

To me if it is a choice between taking these people out of their communities and rehousing them hundreds of miles away or worse leaving them homeless then yes we should be taking those vacant luxury homes and using them to rehouse these people.

At least on a temporary basis until more permanent housing can be found.

Think about how awful it must feel, your house is burnt to a crisp and some of your family have died, the government then do naff all for you. Now to top it all off they want to rehouse you hundreds of miles away but let the posh people keep their empty apartments.

The government should take these apartments to house these people in, then they should also take up a chunk of land in the area to rebuild them a new housing block to eventually move them into.

a reply to: destination now

I agree the rich really don't like sharing their shiny things and they don't play well with others they feel are below them.

On the other hand, I think there may also be moaning and groaning from other people that are in the same situation poor wise that will be jealous and full of why not us too?

I just don't see this turning out well and I feel bad for the people that are going to be put in this situation. They could be pure angels at heart, but people won't see that at all. Just a matter of time before something blows or gets sabotaged.

a reply to: onehuman

TBH I don't think these residents should be rehoused in spanking new flats all paid for by hard-working people... most of which can't afford a flat of their own. Most of those at Grenfell Tower were moved up the ladder just because they were from ME & other areas and because those at Kensington Council are immigrants themselves from those areas!

Why were they moved up the ladder? Is it right they should be moved up the ladder?

Also why if they aren't working and don't speak English should they have priority??

I know someone will come back at me and say 'these people have lost everything in the fire and blah blah blah' but I don't think it's right unless they are English first and were born here. People from those areas which include Asylum seekers and such... why should they get these apartments to live in paid for by the working people when they have put nothing into our Society? Many English people have moved out because they can't afford to live in London.

yes, Grenfell Tower fire shouldn't of happened but IMO they shouldn't have been there in the first place. Some of those flats had 4,5 people living in them when they are only supposed to house 2. I really don't know why they were housing so many... oh yes I do, they were hoping to get a house with 4 or 5 bedrooms!

I think it's absolutely the right thing to do on a moral level.

People on these kinds of estates have been battling social cleansing of the capital for years. Developers can make piles of money from building on that land and landlords can command extortionate rents and would quite happily see folk moved up North away from their communities, families, friends and jobs if it meant more money for them. Most of these properties are bought up by rich investors and left empty while ordinary people are continuously priced out of London. How is going to work when lower paid workers like nurses can't afford to live anywhere near their jobs?

I'm not sure how it will work out as some folk do seem angry about it but perhaps it's time they realised we need to look after everyone for society to function, greed and selfishness has been promoted for far too long and the results are really showing. Time to change the rules on buying up property for investment too I feel.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

If i was living on the streets, I wouldn't be too happy to see me being ignored but all these Immigrants from ME areas and Africa being housed.

I'm not racist but i wouldn't be happy. I'm also not white... I'm mix Race and I'd still not be happy if i was sleeping rough on the streets whilst all these people were being housed.

a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

If i was living on the streets, I wouldn't be too happy to see me being ignored but all these Immigrants from ME areas and Africa being housed.

Neither would I

But to say we should not help them when we an because they are immigrants to me is cruel, they are human-being who have just lost everything, we have the ability to help them, we have accommodation for them sitting empty.

To argue that its ok somehow to put a entire family on the streets after a disaster not of their making because they are immigrants to me is tantamount to racism. IF you are saying you would be happy to rehouse the British born victims but not those from Syria or Iran, then that's racist.

(I would remind you that discrimination basted on nationality under UK law is also regarded as racism)

a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

It's not OK for anyone to be homeless but it doesn't have to be that way, we can change it so that everyone can have a roof over their head and then there will be no need to blame others who are housed as a priority. Aside from that I am sure there were plenty that do work in that Tower, you don't have to be jobless to qualify for social housing.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

If i was living on the streets, I wouldn't be too happy to see me being ignored but all these Immigrants from ME areas and Africa being housed.

Neither would I

But to say we should not help them when we an because they are immigrants to me is cruel, they are human-being who have just lost everything, we have the ability to help them, we have accommodation for them sitting empty.

To argue that its ok somehow to put a entire family on the streets after a disaster not of their making because they are immigrants to me is tantamount to racism. IF you are saying you would be happy to rehouse the British born victims but not those from Syria or Iran, then that's racist.

(I would remind you that discrimination basted on nationality under UK law is also regarded as racism)

I think you misread my post a bit. I never said 'they should be left on the streets'. I said 'I wouldn't be happy seeing them housed in these apartments whilst i'm living on the street'.

By all means as they were moved up the ladder and housed in the first place, they should be re-housed after the fire but not in upmarket apartments which other people of English decent can't afford or be moved into (from the council). That's the part i don't think is right.

a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

they should be re-housed after the fire but not in upmarket apartments which other people of English decent can't afford or be moved into (from the council). That's the part i don't think is right.

Well I think they should be rehoused as close as possible to Grenfell tower, even if that means using vacant private properties while a new building is built for them. I dont think this should be a permanent fix, just until new accommodation can be built for them.

Wouldn't it be grand if the queen took her raise and put it into developing some of the run down places and making it better for all? I know, pipe dream...

People's priorities theses days are truely disappointing, and that's pretty much an understatement.

I think I'm glad I'm older and won't have to live through too much more of this madness. It just stinks when your the type of person that tries to see the beauty and knows there is so much more. At least for now

a reply to: onehuman

Wouldn't it be grand if the queen took her raise and put it into developing some of the run down places and making it better for all? I know, pipe dream... Text

I was actually thinking the same.

She just got a 8% pay rise and we are giving her £350 Million to refurbish her house and i bet when she gets her's refurbished she won't be getting a whole load of cheap flammable insulation.

I think it would be amazing for the country if she announced that she is going to personally pay for the rehousing of the people affected by the fire and build them a new tower block.

Have a read of this, we can afford to build more social housing....

There is a magic money tree...in fact there are two

"So when we are told social welfare, education, housing, health cannot be afforded because there is no magic money tree, this is a lie."