| |
SALFORD TOWER BLOCK RESIDENTS LAUNCH FIRE SAFETY PETITION OVER ‘RISK TO LIVES’
|
|
Star date: 26th September 2018
'THIS SUSTAINED RISK TO LIVES...IS SIMPLY UNACCEPTABLE...' Tenants living in the nine Pendleton Together blocks in Salford that are still covered in dangerous materials have launched a petition to the Government demanding that it releases some its £400million cladding fund to Salford City Council which owns the buildings, or allows Pendleton Together Operating Limited to receive the £25million funding that Salford Council has secured. "This sustained risk to the lives of residents of the nine Pendleton tower blocks is simply unacceptable" states the petition. Full details here...
|
.jpg)
|
Last week, Salford City Council announced that the Government would not allow it to access a portion of the £400million fund set aside for councils to remove and replace dangerous cladding on their buildings. Nor would the Government allow Salford Council to loan Pendleton Together Operating Limited (PTOL) the £25million it had borrowed to do the work (see here). At a Scrutiny panel meeting this week, Deputy Mayor John Merry explained the Government logic; that the Council and PTOL were involved in a Private Finance Initiative (PFI), and thus it would be handing public money to a private profit making company (see here) In turn, the Council argued that the £25million would be lent on a commercial rate of interest, but the Government was having none of it. Now residents of the nine blocks have had enough of being left in dangerous conditions by all concerned, and have launched a petition specifically to urge the Government to think again... "Residents of the nine Pendleton tower blocks have been waiting more than a year to see the material stripped from their homes after the Grenfell Tower tragedy in June 2017 identified risks associated with the ACM style cladding, and will now experience further delays whilst PTOL tries to raise the funds needed to remove the cladding" the petition states. "In the meantime, residents of the nine tower blocks live in fear of a fire similar to that which cost 72 people their lives in the Grenfell Tower disaster" it adds "This is despite Housing Secretary James Brokenshire saying in May 2018 that: 'People must always feel safe in their own home. Since the tragic events at Grenfell Tower, we have taken steps to ensure the IMMEDIATE safety of all high rise buildings'... "This sustained risk to the lives of residents of the nine Pendleton tower blocks is simply unacceptable" the petition concludes. To sign the petition to James Brokenshire MP – click here
|
|
|
|
Felsey wrote
at 19:35:51 on 08 October 2018 |
|
|
| I will of course ask for the Ministers report link. Thank you Ray. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 15:17:25 on 08 October 2018 |
|
|
| Felsey,perhaps you could use your aĺleged networking skills to ask your "Tory mates" why was
it that Gavin Bardswell M.P,Minister of Housing under David Cameron, suppressed a report which warned of the dangers inherent in tower block cladding? |
|
|
?
|
Felsey wrote
at 19:36:42 on 07 October 2018 |
|
|
| Important for residents to kick off on this one. PM May says our Tory party will welcome moderate Labour transferrees. As one of such having crossed over to our great Dancing Queen I am most happy to endorse more applicant transfers to build sizeable team in Salford that can force getting cladding and other problems put at the top of Salford Action Policy to force the Mayor’s hand. |
|
|
?
|
Bob the regular wrote
at 14:54:54 on 04 October 2018 |
|
|
| Ray, I am not sure when the councils will be allowed to borrow money ,I guess it will be soon though. The wicked Tories will not be putting cash in. They are just letting our council borrow as much as they like to build houses.Land values are high in Salford compared to places like Rochdale Oldham etc. Salford will have no trouble raising cash against the land. They have land for thousands of houses. Land they got for nothing. Land forcibly bought from good people under CPO for next to nothing. My question is this, will Merry and Dennett use this land to build houses ,or do they want to sell it to make money to pay their debts of and postpone the day of reckoning a bit? You tell me. I tell you now, there is no way these clowns are going to build anything, lets see. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 07:57:48 on 04 October 2018 |
|
|
| Bob the regular,keep the champagne on ice. Theresa May has a history of making spending promises that don't stand up to scrutiny!
According to the BBC,the new programme for the building of new council houses won't kick in until 2022. At best this initiative will result at a maximum of 20000 new houses a year;currently there are over 1 million on the national waiting list for
housing !
As I've poìnted out previously,Bob, the Tories have no intention to solve the housing crisis - they are addicted to stoking property based property bubbĺes. Theresa May,lapdog of Finance Capitalism! |
|
|
?
|
Bob the regular wrote
at 16:48:34 on 03 October 2018 |
|
|
| Let us all be happy. The time for argueing and squabbling is over.Wonderful news on the lunchtime news. Old tess is going to let councils borrow as much, repeat as much cash as they need to build new council houses. Well our council is land rich, so we can certainly expect a bit of a boom on. Merry and Dennett have no excuse now, they can show us what they are made off. Will they now halt all sales of council land,so that they can develop all the land for the benefit of all our people? I hope so . Good luck to them, and all their team, I hope they succeed. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 11:01:23 on 03 October 2018 |
|
|
| Retired Socialist,before we break bread you need to
retract the claim that I don't care about the residents of tower blocks! |
|
|
?
|
Wise Old Owl wrote
at 21:44:44 on 02 October 2018 |
|
|
| No, I suspect that Old Ray will not see the errorvof his political ways. Ray's a part of the Salford Labour Machine. Fact is, even though he's only a lowly drone bee in the grand scheme of things, he is a bona fide true believer in Salford Labour's vision. I, Wise Old Owl, have a deep understanding of the mindset of staunch Labourites from working class Northern cities and towns, like Ray. Trust me, you can't disuade him from his views. He has been too indoctrinated or brainwashed for that. The only hope for the rest of us citizens, be we the poor unfortunates in Spruce and Thorn Court, or the rest of us living in the Orwellian world of The Socialist Republic of Salford, is if the eighty percent of the electorate who don't vote, can be persuaded to get down to the polling booth and put their X's in a different box. We need to overcome apathy. Apathy is a disease, like cancer, and it allows these despotic creeps to do whatever they want, come what may. We must overcome apathy, if not for our sakes, then for the sakes of the chidren. They are the future after all. |
|
|
?
|
Bob the regular wrote
at 17:09:38 on 02 October 2018 |
|
|
| Well If you think my suggestion is good why do you not put it to Cllr Merry, and to our Mayor. It is obvious you have access to them as a party member. I tell you now, they will not wear it. They will come up with some stupid excuse. Thing is though, you will believe them. You need to believe in them, the people in Salford ,the poor ones have been shit on so bad they all need to believe in something as well. The sad thing is, that thing is Labour, and it is them that has done the harm. I can see, in the way you write, that doubts ,only small ones are beginning to come to tour mind. Do not believe me or anyone else, just trust your own judgement. Look at what is going on around you. I myself have been conned many times over the years, no doubt I will be again, but I am always on the lookout. I predict that before long, you will join retired socialist , mself and others as ones who have seen the light. Perhaps you will start calling yourself retired party member. Good Luck. |
|
|
?
|
Retired Socailst wrote
at 17:09:31 on 02 October 2018 |
|
|
| Yes Ray a Socailst while you were in Nappies. You say you will debate so lets go ahead if you can manage to write, quote or submit data to anything without your usual slant of abuse I will gladly discuss any topic perhaps we could start by you dropping you disguise and I will gladly reciprocate. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 14:34:54 on 02 October 2018 |
|
|
| Yes,Bob the regular,I would support the re-housing of tower block tenants whilst the cladding issue is
resolved!
I'm not sure though whether Cllr. Merry would go
along with this! Perhaps the housing brief should be
removed from Cllr.Merry? To many tenants he appears to be aloof and complacent! |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 12:23:48 on 02 October 2018 |
|
|
| Retired Socialist,sensible debate,yes please;lies and distortion,No! Please stop misrepresenting my views on tower block cladding.
Can you explain what would be wrong with using cheaper cladding which STILL complied with all the
relevant safety regulations? Your objection to this state of affairs seems strange given that you are always slaggiñg the council for wasting money.
Why are you hiding behind the handle of "Retired Socialist" - have you ever been "a socialist"? |
|
|
?
|
Bob the regular wrote
at 12:23:41 on 02 October 2018 |
|
|
| Not quite sure what our pal ray is asking me here.There is a sort of frame fixed to the concrete walls of the high rise building. This holds the insulation, next come a gap, the cavity as it were, or as they like to call it, then comes the cladding, this is still fixed to the frame, this is to keep rainwater out. throughout the cladding there are what is called fire barriers, but hot gases will always find a way through due to the suction of the building.the effect has an Italien name but I cannot remember it.
Anyway as look would have it, I bumped into an old friend of mine the other day, a retired lawyer, I used to do a bit of work for him. We went for a brew in Morrisons and got chatting about this insulation fiasco. It transpired that while the council cannot use the cash they have to bail out the PFI, they could, if they saw fit,use the money to rehouse tennants on a short term thing while the PFI people are made to put things right. The PFI people would then have to pay the council back for these housing costs. This is only on the presumption that the council had not done anything in selecting the system that made them partly responsible for its use. i.e. they did not know the dangers. Come on Ray, should the council use its cash to rehouse these people in a safe place while the liability issues are settled? I think they should, don't you? |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 07:30:02 on 02 October 2018 |
|
|
| Bob the regular, how do you know how the contractors handled the insulation between the cladding and the outer wall of tower blocks?
I agree with you on one thing thouģh - Grenfell is
the death knell for "hiģh rise living" - there are just too many risks! The powers that be need to grasp this stark reality. |
|
|
?
|
Retired Socailst wrote
at 07:29:51 on 02 October 2018 |
|
|
| Ray you are in reality someone prepared to defend Labour no matter what, your abusive tone to many of the people who write hear shocks even me at my age. The years go by and no matter what anyone writes in regard to Labour waste in the city you defend why? even the most avid Labour supporter takes less offence than you, how close are you to this one party state we call Salford LABOUR. Thank god we have some People who are prepared for a sensible argument on the site, your tone over cost again worries me and probably many others sadly a deciding factor in most works, have you spoken with the people who live in this mess try getting a view on their lives I did, have you written to the council trying to get some facts and waiting for ever before you get part of what you asked for? The sad thing is if the rent comes in no one gives a damn about those in the middle, you concern me for someone so aggressive and a concealed Identity you must sit close to our elected body |
|
|
?
|
Bob the regular wrote
at 15:38:56 on 01 October 2018 |
|
|
| In answer to wrote, I don't think Ray has a rager for me, I think you might have mistook me for our Retired Socialist.He is the one that gets a bee in Rays bonnet. Rays actually like me in many ways, he knows what is going on, he is as well informed as I am. The difference is that he has to defend the labour morons that do stupid things in our city, then try to cover them up when things go wrong. I on the other hand ,am a free man, I have no alligence to Labour or any other political party,although I am a fervent brexiteer like many in Salford. We will ,I am sure, find out the full extent of our town hall incompitance discussed in this article. It is only a matter of time. |
|
|
?
|
Bakunin wrote
at 15:38:46 on 01 October 2018 |
|
|
| Ray of Sunshine, Are you Raymond Walker? We have a right to know ... |
|
|
?
|
Bob the regular wrote
at 15:38:40 on 01 October 2018 |
|
|
| Lets try and get it in Rays skull, for the last time of trying.The polystyrene used was fire resistant, that means its hard to set it on fire because its been treated with fire retardent, but it will still burn. A bit like a wooden floor joist, or a cotton nightie thats also been treated.The rules said that this could be used in cavities in walls, but by that they meant between the inner breeze block and outer bricks of houses. These lot stretched that meaning to include the cavities created between the outer cladding and the concrete wall. but the difference here is that you have an up draught here which increases flame spread, and as it starts burning the updraught increases. it is like a chain reaction. It was also not allowed on buildings higher than 18 metres.other insulation, like rockwell does not burn at all, like whats on Cannon hussey. but here concerns are about the plastic cladding and again the updraught effect. Even with totally non flammable insulation, and non flammable cladding, you still have the updraught problem. this can accelerate flame spread between flats, but it would not be as great as the Grenfel situation, still cause for concern though.30 years ago, I looked round and I thought perhaps the only solution is to pull all these old blocks down, perhaps its still right now. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 15:38:29 on 01 October 2018 |
|
|
| Wrote,I object to Retired Socialist making false allegations that I don't care for the safety of tower block residents! He is either being malicious or a first class imbecile who doesn't comprehend the
Queen's English. |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 13:32:24 on 01 October 2018 |
|
|
| Why does Ray have such a rager for Bob? |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 10:58:33 on 01 October 2018 |
|
|
| Retired Socialist,before getting on your high horse,you should READ what I actually posted !
The point I wàs making wàs that the use of a cheaper option wàs permissible PŔOVIDED such claďding complied to all relevant safety standarďs .
The fact that you chose to misrepresent my views just exposes how weak your arguments are!
|
|
|
?
|
Bob the regular wrote
at 08:06:25 on 01 October 2018 |
|
|
| There are thousands who read this journal. Can I just ask one question?Of the people affected most by this scandal, the residents, have any of them spoke to their mp about it? And if so, what did she have to say in reply? This whole fiasco is now getting on my tits even more than the brexit one |
|
|
?
|
Retired Socailst wrote
at 21:50:49 on 30 September 2018 |
|
|
| Ray oh Ray you true colours are coming out, what's the issue if the cheapest option was used?. I thought long and hard about the dead in London then I thought of you I wonder what their views would be if they were still living. These people pay to live in these buildings and deserve safety and security thank god you are not the Landlord. The cost difference between the two types of material should not have been a factor and yet it was. You again show the true character of what claims to be the party of the people. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 13:29:41 on 30 September 2018 |
|
|
| No,Retired Socialist,I don't work for a M.P!
Vespasian,unlike Retired Socialist,I base my argument on facts,not paranoia!
Even if it does turn out that a cheaper option was
used,provided that it adhered to the safety standards of the time, legally speaking, where's the
harm? |
|
|
?
|
Retired Socailst wrote
at 10:12:07 on 30 September 2018 |
|
|
| No Ray at the present waiting for freedom of information request to go with the unit costing with luck I may have some clarification to match the concerns I and others have on site. By the way you never confirmed are you working for our MP? |
|
|
?
|
Vespasian wrote
at 17:51:22 on 29 September 2018 |
|
|
| If Nicodemus is indeed correct in his assertions, perhaps Ray could have a chat with his boss about whether the council did have any input to the choice of insulation used, and answer Bob's assertions. It is a given fact that this is what happened at the London tower to save money.About £5000 if I remember correctly . Labour would never have let us forget this if all their councils had done the right thing and bought the more expensive insulation. In my job, I talk to different councils all the time.They all think the same way, and even talk the same way, no matter what the party is that is elected. Our MP must tell the truth about this one,especially as it seems she is destined for high office. She cannot be seen to be covering up for the misgivings of our town hall. The people have a right to the truth. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 17:50:44 on 29 September 2018 |
|
|
| So,Retired Socialist,as I suspect,you don't know
"Jack,about Jack"! Why let facts stand in the way of
a good moan,eh?
To set the record straight,as part of the procurement process,the council would check the cladding before signing the work off! |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 17:50:18 on 29 September 2018 |
|
|
| Bob the regular,as part of the specification process, the council would have laid down the safety standards to be folĺowed by the contractor.
Once the work had been completed,the council checks that the safety standards had been obeyed.
The problem with cladding,though, is that the existing safety standards are now known to be clearly deficient! |
|
|
?
|
Nicodemus wrote
at 10:34:18 on 29 September 2018 |
|
|
| Ray of Sunshine, Question for you Ray, Are you that salty old boy, Ex Salford City Council employee and now R Long Bailey case worker, Ray Walker? If the answer is yes, yhen that would explain your arcane knowledge on the clowncil's goings on. |
|
|
?
|
Retired Socailst wrote
at 06:15:07 on 29 September 2018 |
|
|
| Ray
I will return the question do you have it was? you seem confident in your comments it was. |
|
|
?
|
Bob the regular wrote
at 06:14:50 on 29 September 2018 |
|
|
| These residents should go and see their mp,and get her to ask the clown hall team one question. Did they have any input over which insulation was used? Was it a case that the installers said we recommend this, but you can save so much using this because the rules say you can? And we're over budget and if you do this it will save money. You know the sort of crap they fall to when the men in suits start their sales talk. I do not think £25m is going to cover it. Its all the PTOL ones and all the Salix ones. If the town hall did the spec, then they do not have a leg to stand on, so why do they keep pretending its not their fault? |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 19:23:44 on 28 September 2018 |
|
|
| Retired Socialist, what eviďence do you have thàt the cladding wasn't tested? |
|
|
?
|
Retired Socailst wrote
at 16:04:02 on 28 September 2018 |
|
|
| I assume after the work was done,council surveyors/inspectors examined the cladding, you assume Ray? assume is a very strong word. You see I assume you don't mind that I do, that no test were carried out, and the work was taken for granted that the products used were suitable to withstand fire so should we be taking the fall for the cost, should the flat dwellers live in basic fear of their lives while Dennett fiddles? i worry all to often this Labour run council signs poor deals and this is just one to add to the ever growing list of incompetent Labour pen pushers. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 15:07:25 on 28 September 2018 |
|
|
| I'd like to make it clear,Retired Socialist, that
I'm neither a Labour Councillor or have access to privileged information. I am a member of the Labour Party who thinks that the council is trying to do its best in a difficult situation.
As to the issue of whether cladding was tested - I
assume after the work was done,council surveyors/inspectors examined the cladding. This examination was based on the current government regulations;these regulations,we now know,were inadequate,they placed tenants at risk! |
|
|
?
|
Bob the regular wrote
at 15:07:00 on 28 September 2018 |
|
|
| How does fireman Rossi think these banners would catch fire? The cladding would have to be burning before they caught fire.Heres another one for you. Why don't all the residents just get off their arses and go to the fire brigade headquarters opposite the Henry Boddington boozer, and ask for the fire report for the blocks that they live on. Fire prevention people are helpful people. I am sure that the fire brigade will give them a copy of this report, the residents have a right to know. I don't think they would give me a copy or The Star a copy, because we are not connected to the property concerned. Come on people, Dennett and Merry are on the floor, give em a good kicking. |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 07:00:05 on 28 September 2018 |
|
|
| Rossi, the cladding up to the 3rd floor has been removed and replaced with something less combustable. They could put the banners on the 1st floor facing McDonalds (for Thorn) and Broad Street (for Spruce) for maximum exposure. If they’re not happy with banners on the block they could lash them to the railings of the block or put some wooden stakes in the grass outside the respective blocks and put banners on them. Add to this the mass withholding of rent (I would advise saving the unpaid rent to pay the arrears when the protest is over, though) and being a loud protest group to get more attention and more will be done. If they try to stop their HB (for those who have it or on Universal Credit) or evict anyone then they just contact the media and invite them down to show them for what they are. |
|
|
?
|
Steve wrote
at 06:59:45 on 28 September 2018 |
|
|
| Perhaps Dennett and Co would like to buy some of those flash apartments being built on Chapel Street for affected residents with the money they're making from their flash office block on the edges of town? |
|
|
?
|
eddie farrell wrote
at 21:42:28 on 27 September 2018 |
|
|
| we wont be getting this cladding done, within the next 5 yrs ,because the price will go up by 50%
so now were will the 25 million pound go,
swallow up by admin.
and according to goverment all thoses parties involed would be brought to court,
that was soon swept under the carpet???
we are left to rot
and hope to god we dont have a fire in theses blocks.
i see theses blocks getting demolition in the end far cheaper,the life span of these blocks were supposed to be 25 yrs not 50+
so between the goverment and the council and i dont know anything thing pendelton together,
we have no hope
|
|
|
?
|
Philip Giuseppe Rossi, The Broadwalk ... wrote
at 21:42:10 on 27 September 2018 |
|
|
| Free Publicity, The banners would be torn down within minutes. They would be seen by Salford Labour Council as a fire hazard. Quite right too. |
|
|
?
|
Free Publicity wrote
at 17:13:20 on 27 September 2018 |
|
|
| I lived on spruce court, I would get all the other residents together, and hang nice banners out of the window airing my complaints. I am sure some banner makers would donate these in exchange for free publicity. Of course the council would not like this, and they would threaten to take them to court to pull them down. Well what could be a more peaceful protest? People putting banners out side their houses,about a legitimate complaint, while they sit quietly and peacefully inside. Not for these people blocking roads, jumping on wagons, throwing stones and fighting with the police etc. What would a judge make of such a protest? |
|
|
?
|
Bob the regular wrote
at 17:12:46 on 27 September 2018 |
|
|
| In a way ,Ray is partly right. This insulation was allowed in cavity walls, and when you look at the rainscreen outer covering ,and the concrete walls of the flats, what was inside indeed was a cavity.
Look , the best way to sort all this rubbish out, and flush the crap into the open sewer our city has now become ,is to launch a judicial review of the governments ruling not to allow Salford Council to use its money in the kind ways that it has offered. Such an action would I believe fail, but it would open our council up to public scrutiny. Merry and Dennett could be called as witnesses before a couple of guys in black robes and silly hats and made to tell the truth. I am sure they would both shit their pants. It would need what is called a locus standi I think. This is a Latin phrase meaning a person with a position close enough to have an interest in the outcome. This person would have to bring the case. It could be a resident. I think that if such a person was given whats called leave to bring such a case, there would be a rush of lawyers willing to do it pro bono(for free).Lawyers do this for the publicity they get, and if they win, they get paid. I would love to see this happen. I would just love to see our knobs throw more and more cash at it to get themselves out of the shit. |
|
|
?
|
Mary ferrer wrote
at 14:14:43 on 27 September 2018 |
|
|
| While the ball is passed here and there people living in buildings that are unsafe.Where are the health and safety police,they normally scream "Pull it down " |
|
|
?
|
Retired Socailst wrote
at 14:14:36 on 27 September 2018 |
|
|
| Ray of sunshine or the Labour Supporter in the loop, you seem to be well informed of the type of cladding used, are you that close to the Labour hierarchy? the last tower to burn had cost cutting untested cladding I can't find any reports of testing can you? was the cladding used on our flats tested have you seen the reports I would like to, perhaps you could ask your friends at the town hall for a copy perhaps the star would print it, it amazes me people like you are so protective are you part of Labours inner sanctum perhaps? |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 11:54:20 on 27 September 2018 |
|
|
| Can a safety notice be served on the owners of the blocks?
What is the solution? Could the nearby houses on the estate they want to demolish be used for housing residents of these blocks?
Ultimately I think they will be demolished as past of the continuing social cleansing of Salford.
Over the lifetime of the Salford Star, how many times has Merry been challenged over something and his response is "That is your view.Wait and see"? How many times has the "wait and see" proved to be a F-ck up?
|
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 11:53:38 on 27 September 2018 |
|
|
| Retired Socialist,yet again you are talking out of your backside! It is the role of national government,not local government to maintain and update building standards,including cladding.
At the time cĺadding was added to Salford Tower blocks it did confirm to national standards - the rub being that these "national standards" failed to
cover all possible dangers.
Perhaps before making further comments,Retired Socialist, you put your brain in gear! |
|
|
?
|
Retired Socailst wrote
at 08:37:38 on 27 September 2018 |
|
|
| So the question still remains who's signature sits drying on the PFI document? did the materials meet the building safety standards at the time? who monitored the work in progress and of course who is legitimately libel. Surely once again we see a council not going through the fine detail and leaving Salford Ratepayers with one more headache. Can they blame the Tory austerity this time no but I will give them full marks for trying.
|
|
|
?
|
Bob the regular wrote
at 21:53:30 on 26 September 2018 |
|
|
| Let all us plotters and anti council conspiracy theorists try and work this one out. Who owns spruce and who owns plane court. are they both the same owner? I get mixed up who owns what. whatever is going on, is a cover up. Pound to a pinch of shit, the council were liable in some way for that cladding being put there and that they knew the risks. By the way ,there is no way Ptol are going to raise that cash, unless the council guarantee it, which they are not allowed to do. |
|
|
?
|
alisonmarybrown@gmail .com wrote
at 17:21:46 on 26 September 2018 |
|
|
| My husband an i live on plane court all our cadding has been removed
Since this has been removed our windows are leaking in and its harder to keeo our home warm
We have not been told when the cladding is going to be replaced or with what?
My daughter on the other hand lives on Spruce court
Part of the cladding has been removed from the lower floors .as my daughter lives higher up the block where the cladding is still there
All we want as residents to be safe in our homes
The goverment should help. |
|
|
?
|
|
|
|
|
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
(3).jpeg)
.png)
(1).JPG)
