No one is immune to the effects of climate change. Even the richies with all of their wealth cannot avoid it !!

Quote:


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3625866/Sydney-s-wild-weather-pushes-hom...

sir Nail,

it's explained here:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 7:53pm:


What are those houses worth now ? That storm would have knocked off a few million in value. Nobody is going to touch them with a barge pole

The collapse of these houses has nothing to do with stormy weather so much as criminal negligence on behalf of the people who built them on such poor foundations.

Heads should roll.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 8:04pm:


Plus.....they built them too close to the ocean.

I mean duh!

Take look at the mega-piles in California.

The whole state is liable to slide into the sea one day.

"As long as it's not in my lifetime".



Same as in Sydney.

One of these days!

Heads should roll.

For a start - the council that approved the plans.

Concrete reinforced with rebar meshing should have been sunk deep into the ground to bedrock as the foundation piers for the housing to sit on.

Councillors must have taken 'kick-back' money in brown envelopes from the builders who did these jobs. There's no other explanation for this criminal neglect.

This was just bad luck that a huge storm coincided with the biggest tide if the year.
Most oceanfront property in Sydney is on sandstone.  Not many like this.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 8:16pm:


Yes.

Melanias purse wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 8:30pm:


Smart yids live  up the hill. But hang in there Fatima, in a few hundred thousand years your muztard ghetto will be waterfront.

Sucko you rich bastards!!

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 8:02pm:



Bulldoze the lot as unsafe and turn it into a park for the people.....

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 7:44am:



they're still worth millions. And you pretend to be in real estate 

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 7:44am:


Been speaking to a few experts about this incident.

Govt will need to step in and secure the shoreline so as to ensure public safety.

Duty of care etc.

Whatever land remains after it stops moving will be a no go zone while lawyers work out who pays for what.

The residents in question will no doubt sue the Local Council. Why? They've got nothing to lose. And they can't sue their insurer. Why? This event will be considered an exclusion.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 7:56am:



only one of us is unemployed lisa, and I'll give you three guesses as to who that is

John Smith wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 7:45am:



I cant see that.......the land has almost gone....and if it doesnt this time round it will the next..

I was amazed to hear where that lady ZaZa only bought the house 3 years ago...lets face it if ytou are waiting for councils to build wall that would never have stopped that rage.. then basically you are asking for trouble........they also said many were not insured for that type of damage....... at the end of the day.. councils have to accept some responsibility that lad shouild never be built on.. when you think of all the pipes that have to be built underground and then I saw that whopping great pool...what sort of hole would that need????....we have to accept it all unstabalises the land...

cods wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 8:02am:



Had a $16m house up on Palm Beach wash away a third of it's block one year about 5 or 6 yrs ago .... they sold the same house 3 yrs later , still without 1/3rd of it's block for $14 million ( house prices on the GC crashed that year).

This isn't the first time waterfront homes have been damaged. They'll make repairs, and this time next year everyone would have forgotten it.

John Smith wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 8:11am:



Had a $16m house up on Palm Beach wash away a third of it's block one year about 5 or 6 yrs ago .... they sold the same house 3 yrs later , still without 1/3rd of it's block for $14 million ( house prices on the GC crashed that year).

This isn't the first time waterfront homes have been damaged. They'll make repairs, and this time next year everyone would have forgotten it.[/quote]

its a bit hard to miss a coastline being washed away.....its a natural occurrence.. its what I would expect if I had a house perched on a cliff....

if people are prepared to take that risk dont complain thats all I can say...... so now when they have a telethon to raise money for them.. I wont contribute as you say they are still getting millions...

Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 8:23am:



well I dont know too many people who enjoy seeing a beautiful ocean liner sink......but rusty sure enjoys seeing people he thinks are rich because they own their own home...sink into a void.

cods wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 8:23am:



it won't be ... Some of the sand will wash back, the rest council will pump back. The waterfront homes attract the highest rates and councils usually look after their cash cows

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 8:25am:


My property is insured to the hilt, and so if a tornado should lift it off its foundations and carry it all the way to Colorado I would make a motsa out of my claim against the insurance company.

I have it insured for a lot more than it's worth ... if youse get my drift ... wink wink nudge nudge ..  .. I'm thinking of paying an owner / driver truckie to have an 'accident' that has his truck veer off the road and plough into my house like a Wrecking-Ball ...  .. if youse get my drift ... 

Couple of points I thought interesting:

Apparently most home insurance does not cover damage by the sea.

Also apparently a proposal was floated to build a concrete boardwalk along that Collaroy Beach area like you see on lots of other beaches, apparently it was rejected as the residents didnt want it, would spoil their views and bogans like Herbo would be walking along there perving with shitting dogs etc. Anyway I realise that the boardwalk (concretewalk) may have only partially helped protect the homes but it would have saved some I am sure.

cods wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 8:25am:


Trust me - the owners of these investment properties have been praying for this to happen so they could collect on the insurance.

.. wink wink nudge nudge .. 

It was all pre-planned as an investment that would 'come good' in a few short years from which they would benefit to the tune of millions from the insurance companies ..  ..

The owners have probably long since retired back to Greece or Italy - or even to China, and are at this very moment getting drunk on Chianti, Ouzo, or Rice wine.

It was all planned ..  ..

Don't cry for me Argentina ....  ... it was all planned, codsey-baby. Put your tissues away ..  ....

Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 8:36am:


OMG! You clearly don't have any home insurance.

You've just posted utter rubbish.

TIP :

GOOGLE ANY AUST. HOME INSURANCE POLICY.

Then come back and apologise to us ALL for having to read your nonsensical dribble.

Redmond Neck wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 9:00am:


Yeah...you do that.

Google HURRICANS.

Let us know what they are and if they're on sale at the supermarket this week. 

Redmond Neck wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 9:11am:


Oh ok... was too busy laughing at the many nongs online today.

You gotta admit,  OzPol is hilariously funny these days.

I've never lauged this hard in ages.

....  ....


Ooooopah!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ ....  ...

There's not the slightest chance that the owners of those properties didn't know this was on the cards and highly likely to happen within a very few years. They themselves could see with their own eyes the ongoing erosion just metres away in front of their properties.

No sympathy from me whatsoever. I don't sympathise with culpable stupidity. They bought those properties for prestige reasons without giving the practicalities any serious consideration. Egos trumped commonsense.

And they did absolutely nothing about it.

There are simple means of using reinforced concrete to give stability to the ground facing the sea. Not rocket science, and relatively inexpensive. 

If they couldn't afford the insurance on those places - then they should never have bought those properties, and if they couldn't find an insurance company willing to insure against sea-damage, then that in itself should have alerted them to the fact that these properties were on Death Row and shouldn't be bought.

Those seafronts have been crumbling into the sea since Captain Cook arrived, and it was always a case of Buyer Beware for anyone stupid enough to buy those houses.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 9:45am:


Thank you Captain Obvious.

Now, have you googled ANY AUST. HOME INSURANCE POLICY YET?

Best you do that BEFORE you post again.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 9:31am:


I've had my fair share of Ouzo I have to admit.

I am now subsiding into an ocean of boredom ....

Talk amongst yourselves if you must, but I'm out of here.

red baron wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 10:44am:


I am sure I heard they rejected the idea of a sea wall walkway in front of their houses.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 10:50am:


I'm more apalled that you cannot read AND comprehend what's been posted in this topic.

Then again....at least you're consistent.

red baron wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 10:44am:


Aren't there remnants of an ancient beach at the foot of the Blue Mountains?

Perhaps one day residents will have ocean views again.

issuevoter wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 11:29am:


If I needed a rat's arse I would acquire it from the source; Issuevoter.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 10:52am:


Please explain how I could possibly comprehend if I cannot read as you spuriously and maliciously contend.

No longer content with soiled clothing, the washerwoman shrew now indulges in brain washing.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 12:28pm:


There is also what appears to be an ancient sandy 'beach' there strewn with crushed and broken shells.

The same happened on the Gold Coast during Cyclone Dinah in Jan 1967 ...

then one a month there after til April

Quote:


Then 3 on the trot in 1974...

Quote:


It also occurred in 2000 and 2009.

It's what you can expect .... you may get to pay more for you beach side block & views than you wanted to ...

the sea shows no mercy.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 9:45am:


Who makes the money from these ocean front lucrative properties?
Who allows it?
If insurances won't insure these places because of a high risk factor, and if insurance companies know something...
.... then all the following that make their money from it, must surely know...but are keeping a blindfold on... (for obvious reasons).
a. council
b. builders
c. stamps duty office
d. and of course, real estate agents
....yet, with all the so called 'soil testing' etc. and by the looks of those collapsed back yards, there isn't enough stabilization of rocks/concrete to stop the pounding of the ocean deteriorating the sand/soil.
Why is not some type of 'risk assessment' being conducted, every so often?

I totally blame council, for allowing sub divisions of land, and buildings to be erected, so close to the open ocean!
How can council sit back and not have any responsibility with what happened?
Perhaps councils should have insurance companies teach them something about what is obvious?

What would you do? Sue council? Surely, something has to come back to bite them on the bum?

I am so disgusted with councils for their disregard of what would have disastrous consequences for say, new people coming to live in an estate....and I give this as an example...


Rockhampton. It's just one area known to have major floods (just go ask the council for a copy of the 100 year flood map).....and the last one was no exception (was it 2011?)
This is how common sense hits me (back in the mid 2000's), (and yet the shire knew this area would flood)....on the way to Mt. Archer, I see a old Queenslander home, on flat plains, on huge wooden stumps, about 12 feet high or more!
Must have been an old banana or sugar plantation, as there was a lot of subdivision going on around nearby, with modern single story brick homes being built on concrete slabs.
I recall seeing that old Queenslander home and thought
"Gee, the flood waters must rise very high here"
and then, see those low houses being built, and I thought, no way I would buy a house there. I was so puzzled, why it was being done.

Well, you guess which were worst effected in the last huge flood they just had? Yep, those new homes, only the point of their roofs were above the flood water line.

Why do they do that? (Shire office/councils) Is it for the money? Do builders entice them with that stupid decision also?

cods wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 10:25pm:


Councils have more say in matters than that, if you need a pool, you need a permit, and having a pool right there, near the edge where the ocean is......digging down, making the soil more unstable to give way 
Maybe our council is just stricter, because, they take into account 'land slip' and no matter how hard you fight, or spend money to build a house, they will not let you (taken from some locals experience)...something not done for those NSW properties that gave way recently.
Land slip......something very noteworthy, especially near the open ocean!

As far as insurance companies go, with a rental we bought in a certain area in Queensland, that has periodic flooding, but only parts of the town goes under.....we deliberately bought a house out of this 'flood zone'....and paid a bit more for that privilege.

With a certain insurance company we have been with for some years, they send this letter, they will not be renewing the insurance for our property due to the floods in the area.

Well, I had to debate this, I wrote, that we had studied the 100 year map for flood zones, and bought 'out of the flood zone', and never had any flood waters near the house.

I also wrote, that they should not tar every property with the same brush, as some are known to be in the flood area, and some are not.

Our house, is standing with no propblems, no insurance claims, etc.

They reviewed this, and accepted to keep insuring our property.

Still, it is down to the home buyer to "buyer beware".
Just to save a lot of heartache in the future.

all those houses are unsaleable now are they ?

News just in :

Another king tide hit the Nthern beaches overnight.

Homes/land continue to crumble away into the ocean.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 8^th, 2016 at 7:06am:



eeeeeeewwwwwwwwwww

Bobby. wrote on Jun 8^th, 2016 at 7:26am:


I would imagine so.  I would .

Beachside houses - good to rent for a holiday ..........

Should the community pay for people who ought to have the brains to know they are putting themselves at such risk? Especially when they must have a Bob or two to own a beach front house.

I don't think so.

Emergency handouts, subsidies and services should be reserved for those who get into trouble through accident and misfortune, not for those who deliberately go courting obvious danger.

But then I'm a cold heartless bastard.

Belgarion wrote on Jun 8^th, 2016 at 9:09am:


Yes that has been mentioned a few times.

They didnt want yobbos (Herb) walking along the boardwalk in front of their houses

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 7:52pm:




It is notable that just ONE of these houses carried solar panels
Apparently climate change is a joke - until it affects "me"

buzzanddidj wrote on Jun 8^th, 2016 at 9:48am:


How are storms related to the climate change religion, did storms like this occur before the climate change religion?

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 8^th, 2016 at 11:18am:



YES,  it seems like this sort of thing is the NORM - every second year

Sophia wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 10:20pm:


On the news last night there was a gathering of journalists at one of these properties, and then the Ch7 reporter said .. "Ah .. the owner has just arrived".

Obviously the landlord.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 8^th, 2016 at 1:02pm:




I just looked at the size of that swimming pool some idiot had put in.. the size of the hole would have created a huge problem... I would think even just with normal rain running down would have destabalised that ground... I agree councils need to hold some responsibility for what they allow people to do..as far as i know an in ground pool need council permission...

it would damage the wall just putting in sewage pipes..all the way along..

Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 8^th, 2016 at 2:03pm:


Why would you build a pool when you have a beach in your backyard.

The Council wanted to build a seawall years ago they didn't after dim witted leftists protested.

The Council knew there was a problem and failed to act because dim wits protested, if they could find each and every one of these dim wits I would be happy for them to be sued otherwise I reckon the Council will wear it.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 8^th, 2016 at 12:55pm:


No!

Stop it!