Jump to content

Damage to Flats At ED Station


Recommended Posts

Would imagine that there is a higher likelihood of damage to flats built so close to the road, where large lorries have to pass multiple times a day (deliveries to the building supplies business behind). Also imagine though it was very apparent to people viewing before buying these properties, and that the damage will eventually be repaired by the insurer of the lorry drive.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

indeed it was quite a shock to see that the brick is not, in fact, brick. Or was I being incredibly naive!


This has been widely discussed in an earlier thread, brick or stone cladding on buildings is very common - much of Bayswater is stone clad - it doesn't represent any form of cheap or skimped building works, necessarily, but reflects a finish which is deemed to be appropriate. It can allow for levels of e.g. insulation far better than any apparent surface finish. Think of it as being a tiled finish - as indeed buildings in e.g. Kent often have tiled walls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new damage is further up the road and has torn off a narrow strip of the metal cladding. Problem is it's unlikely they'll catch the person who did it. So maybe it goes on the service charge.

This was designed in - they encroached across the road as far as they possibly could get away with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this the 3rd or indeed the 4th time that the lorries delivering to Buildbase have smashed the corner flat.

These must be the shoddiest build quality of any building I have ever seen.

And badly designed give the narrow road and business at the end of it.

As a warning to prospective purchasers, they are made out of plasterboard, insulation and a skim of fake brick cladding. And all for ?450K min.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think I posted more or less this a while ago. Looks very shoddy and dangerous . People who have already bought must be raising concerns surely? Also Southwark must have a role and responsibility in this somewhere.

Crystal Matt Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Is this the 3rd or indeed the 4th time that the

> lorries delivering to Buildbase have smashed the

> corner flat.

> These must be the shoddiest build quality of any

> building I have ever seen.

> And badly designed give the narrow road and

> business at the end of it.

> As a warning to prospective purchasers, they are

> made out of plasterboard, insulation and a skim of

> fake brick cladding. And all for ?450K min.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • What would I do about cyclists?  The failed Tory manfesto commitment to train all kids was an excellent proposal.  Public information campaigns aimed at all road users, rather than singling some out, to more considerately share the road, as TfL have done, is welcome too. As for crunching vehicles.  I'd extend this to illegal ebikes, illegal e-scoooters (I think some local authorities have done this with the latter) but before that I would (a) legislate that the delivery companies move away from zero hours contracts to permanent employees and take responsibility for their training, vehicles and behaviour on the road.   More expensive takeaways are a price worth paying for safer roads and proper terms and conditions (b) legislate to register all illegal e-bikes and scooters so that when they are found on the road the retailer takes a hit, and clamp down on any grey markets.  If you buy an e scooter say from Halfords this comes with a disclaimer that it can only be used on private land with the owner's permission.
    • I know a lot of experts in the field and getting a franchise was a license to print money, that is why Virgin were so happy to spend lots of dosh challenging government ten years ago when they lost the West Coast franchise.  This will not be overnight, rather than when the franchise has come to the end. Government had previously taking over the operator of last resort when some TOCs screwed up. Good, at last some clear blue water between the parties.  Tories said they were going to do a halfway house, but I've not noticed.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_British_Railways   : "On 19 October 2022, Transport Secretary Anne-Marie Trevelyan announced that the Transport Bill which would have set up GBR would not go ahead in the current parliamentary session.[15] In February 2023, Transport Secretary Mark Harper re-affirmed the government's commitment to GBR and rail reform.[16] The 2023 King's speech announced the progression of a draft Rail Reform Bill which would enable the establishment of GBR, although it has not been timetabled in the Parliamentary programme.[5] The Transport Secretary Mark Harper later told the Transport Select Committee that the legislation was unlikely to reach Royal Assent within the 2023-2024 parliamentary session.[17]"
    • Can't help thinking that regardless of whether Joe wanted to be interviewed, the 'story' that Southwark News wanted to write just got a lot less interesting with 'tyre shop replaced with ... tyre shop'! 
    • Labour are proposing to nationalise the railways, (passenger trains but not fright)  Whilst it removes them from shareholders control, and potential profit chasing, is it workable or will it end up costing tax payers more in the long run?  On paper the idea is interesting but does it also need the profitable freight arm included to help reduce fares,? 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...