Posts by Thomas Johnson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Don't worry, Labour is going to help you by exempting you from CGT for 5 years!
Seriously though, it is an awful situation that is going to lead to windfall gains for city-margin landowners.
-
Can if Fieldmarshall Brownlee declares so. Again, bound to have been part of those secret negotiations anyway.
I heard that there was an election in a few months. I wonder what the range of promises on Christchurch will look like.
-
Assuming that this is common to all the banks, then they're not actually the ones doing the insuring, are they? I think they're just the middle-man.
This is the common practice.
Just been looking through RA/Scoop to see what other solutions have been proposed by the political class, and it seems there is a lot of concern, but nothing firm outside the current government offer.
This from Brendan Burns
One big issue raised was whether the Government would make people leave red-zoned land if they had not come to an agreement to leave. Mr Sutton said no decision had been made yet, but residents maintained Gerry Brownlee had said last week that they would have to go. This was confirmed by a member of the media. There was also much concern about valuations, chattels and where people could go. The Kaiapoi Community Board expressed some anger that Kairaki Beach people had been kept in the dark, and that there was only one Waimakariri person on Gerry Brownlee’s Community Forum. Mr Sutton acknowledged that communication with Waimakariri people had left a lot to be desired, and committed to openness, transparency and high-quality communication under his watch. That will be a breath of fresh air. The overall feeling after the meeting, however, is that the Government and CERA have not yet filled in detail for residents around decisions that have been made, and many decisions have still to be made. How can residents feel certain about the future if they don’t get factual information? The detail is simply lacking. Roger Sutton confirmed last night that communities have no right to appeal against their zoning, but he agreed to provide Kairaki Beach people with their geotech data so that the community’s geotech people could peer review it.
Of interest is the complaint about lack of detail (c.f last week's pressure to get an announcement out), and the unclear status of red zoned land for continued occupation.
Given that the current buyout proposal is unlikely to be substantially revisited by the Nats' you have to wonder if Labour will start looking for and promoting an alternative solution.
I would think that if there is a sufficient number of hold-outs who want to remain living in the red zones, then it will quickly become politically impossible to forcibly remove them, or even cut off power supplies (water/wastewater may be different, but these are a lot easier and cheaper to self-provide as many already do around NZ).
-
I think your ‘thoughts’ shows a astonishing lack of empathy, Thomas. Imagine yourself in our situation: you’ve specifically taken out ’Total Replacement” insurance; you’ve paid your insurance bills for years without complaint; but when you lose your house as a result of an earthquake then the insurance company doesn’t honour the “Total Replacement” policy.
Fair comment. I was not considering your invidual situation enough, but more responding to Islander's comment that it was all the fault of National/Brownlee, and a kind of building impetus for the government to "do something" - maybe use CERA to force full payouts on insurance companies. There will be a consequence of such actions beyond "sticking it to the man".
The consequence could be that earthquake cover in ChCh is simply not available, as the council is finding. Of course, that might happen anyway.
Perhaps a better option would have been to organise individual valuations as at August 2010, but this would be logistically difficult - as you noted in the interview w.r.t engineering reports.
Regardless of all this I wish you and your family the best in achieving a solution that puts you in a better position.
-
Talented & trained people who've hung in for the past shakey shakey 9 months,
and now realise that the current government isnt interested in retaining such citizens-
so: Dunedin;Oz:;Auckland, and far north, in order of their going.And the South bears their loss.
And STUFF the current government-
I'm confused about what you suggest the govt should be doing Islander. It cannot "unhappen" the earthquake. It cannot wave a magic wand and rebuild the CBD in 3 months. It cannot make the land along the Avon stable in 6 months. It cannot conjure up similar housing stock to replace that which is damaged or destroyed. It cannot order people to stay in ChCh. It cannot build a new CBD out on that plains somehere.
What do you think the solution is?
-
Some thoughts
- Why the finger pointing at Brownlee/Key? I know most here hate the Nats, bu surely the government cannot take on an obligation to put every single resident/owner/business into the same situation as pre-quake. That would be ruinous. As it is they are paying out approximately 100k to each of the 5000 in the red-zone as a top up to the EQC cover.
- Does any insurance company offer a no-strings replacement cover, and at what cost?
- It may be that public/legal pressure force a change on Tower (and the others which seem likely to follow the same logic) which will benefit those currently making claims. However it may make future house insurance in ChCh impossible or extremely expensive. (heard someone say yesterday that they are ready to build a new house there, but the builder cannot get construction cover, and they cannot get house cover for when it is completed)
(I don't work for an insurance company)
-
Hard News: Here's one I prepared earlier, in reply to recordari,
<Right, I'm over the wall>
Oddly, that song came up on my ipod* today while I was driving home. Great stuff, and vastly preferable to Wham imho
*insert non-apple mp3 player of your choice.
-
Up Front: Respectably-Dressed Sensible…, in reply to Russell Brown,
They should not do so. Especially when the pick-up happens at or subsequent to an event they have attended in their capacity as an MP.
Apparently it is all McCully's fault? I have trouble following Pagani's logic here.
-
Hard News: The Political Lie, in reply to Neil Morrison,
Not that I think Winston required any training, but most politicians spend a good deal of money to have quite intelligent people, Clark had somone quite good I hear, train them to turn any question against the intentions of the interviewer if to do otherwise would paint them in a bad light.
Right, and it gets to be so common to hear a Pollie never really answer the question. I wonder how the General Public feel about it - I usually just change the station in frustration.
I recall hearing a 'spoof' this on NatRad some time ago. Can't find the audio, but here is a transcript
-
Hard News: Some Lines for Labour, in reply to Steve Barnes,
The smile is the same smile that you see on a Hyena
Tell us what you really think about Key Steve? I suppose it will be the Brownlee fat jokes next?