News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Waiting 100 years for a home isn't a housing crisis, it's a moral collapse. Parent comment

Re:Waiting 100 years for a home isn't a housing crisis, it's... by mschuster91 on Friday April 18, 2025 @06:51AM (#43726785)
> Even if they are built, the entire insurance system post-Grenfell is causing absolutely insane service charges for residents.

If it's building insurance hikes, for fucks sake it should not be allowed to roll these over to the renters - they have had zero say in shoddy construction, the developers should be the ones held liable.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Waiting 100 years for a home isn't a housing crisis, it's... by iamacyborg on Friday April 18, 2025 @06:56AM (#43726817)
They should, but they’re not and the government appears unwilling to do anything about it.

Hell, my building recently lost it’s fire safety certificate because one guy decided to scam the system which has caused a ton of knock-on impact for owners looking to move out.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Waiting 100 years for a home isn't a housing crisis, it's... by milesrout on Friday April 18, 2025 @07:06AM (#43726880)
Not allowed to roll over to renters? What does that mean? How would it work? Money is fungible.

Why should the owner of a unit be expected to absorb the cost? It isn't like they chose the cladding.

People obviously do go after the developers but it isn't like they are picking and choosing from materials lists during construction either.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Waiting 100 years for a home isn't a housing crisis, it's... by iamacyborg on Friday April 18, 2025 @08:11AM (#43727317)
Renters in this case probably means leaseholders. Under leasehold, the owner of the unit is effectively a renter.
[ Parent | on HN ]