Southerly: Tower Insurance Have Some Bad News For You
899 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 14 15 16 17 18 … 36 Newer→ Last
-
Hilary Stace, in reply to
Yes like a sloppy basin of water, after the harbour floor rose a few feet. And a tsunami on the south coast. Also lots of liquifaction (which is not a new word) on low lying parts of Wgtn. His new book, The Visitation (VUP) is about the 1848 Wgtn earthquake and probably just as fascinating. Of course it wasn't that easy for the people to leave in those days, so they just had to make the best of it. But they didn't build in brick or stone until that generation's memory had past.
-
Sacha, in reply to
And curse the day the Building Act 1991 was passed into law.
Bless those fervent deregulators; Atlases all.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
Bless those fervent deregulators; Atlases all
But it's the ground that shrugs...
-
Joe Wylie, in reply to
But they didn't build in brick or stone until that generation's memory had past.
From Lady Barker's description of Wellington, c. 1865:
At first I thought the shops very handsome, but I found, rather to my disgust, that generally the fine, imposing frontage was all a sham; the actual building was only a little hut at the back, looking all the meaner for the contrast to the cornices and show windows in front. You cannot think how odd it was to turn a corner and see that the building was only one board in thickness, and scarcely more substantial than the scenes at a theatre.
Christchurch shortly afterwards, already on the slippery permanent materials slope:
Christchurch is a very pretty little town, still primitive enough to be picturesque, and yet very thriving: capital shops, where everything may be bought; churches, public buildings, a very handsome club-house, etc. Most of the houses are of wood, but when they are burned down (which is often the case) they are now rebuilt of brick or stone, so that the new ones are nearly all of these more solid materials. I am disappointed to find that the cathedral, of which I had heard so much, has not progressed beyond the foundations, which cost £8,000; all the works have been stopped, and certainly there is not much to show for so large a sum, but labour is very dear.
-
-
And here from Papers Past Nelson Examiner. Check the time it took for Nelson (! closest SI town to Wellington) to find out what happened. Tweets now make it ridiculously fast. Obscenely fast. Unthinkingly fast even....
But a more interesting and extraordinary phenomenon occurred (I say extraordinary, because no person appears to have observed it in the earthquake of 1848) : for eight hours subsequent to the first and great shock, the tide approached and receded from the shore every twenty minutes, rising from eight to ten feet, and receding four feet lower than at spring tides. One ship, I heard, was aground at her anchorage four times. The ordinary tide seemed quite at a discount, for tbe following day (24th) it scarcely rose at all.
-
Mr Haywood (good day to you sir and your fine family) has made it into Hansard during question time today with thanks to the Labour Party for their line of questions with regard, land value and losses to be incurred.
-
Sacha, in reply to
made it into Hansard during question time today
This question I presume?
-
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
It was either Ruth Dyson or Lianne Dalziel who mentioned him by name and his probable losses but cant see where that is now. You would be better than me at that though surely? Perhaps you can sort that out, yes? ;)
-
Do all supplementary questions get written up? David was possibly a mere supplementary question around question 9. :)
-
Fooman, in reply to
They do. The Clerk's site normally has a transcription after 5 pm on the same day. 2 or 3 days later, the official Hansard version comes out.
FM
-
Fooman, in reply to
-
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
But I've seen it once already today, and now Hilary Staces sister's doco got a mention by Phil Twyford whilst dealing with the Leaky homes resolution services today. Great to see that last night too.
-
3410,
Another fortnight rolls on and I've been a bit reluctant to talk about Chch, given that I'm not - and wasn't - there... Bearing that in mind (and all other relevant disclaimers) may I just ask of Chch people:
We're now about, what? about 14 weeks out from an election. Is it an issue that certain commitments from govt./business/other should or must be extracted before then?
-
Joe Wylie, in reply to
We're now about, what? about 14 weeks out from an election. Is it an issue that certain commitments from govt./business/other should or must be extracted before then?
Given Brownlee's craven collusion - and really, that's a perfectly fair assessment - with the insurance industry against their clients, information will continue to be released in a way that minimises any possibility of collective action by the aggrieved.
-
Melmac, in reply to
I absolutely agree.
The people on the East side of Christchurch have been sacrificed in another large corporate welfare scam.
Instead of ensuring that insurers honour their contracts with people affected by disaster... Brownlee has given bankers and insurers more money on a plate.
Firstly, many insurers will keep more of their money now that they do not have to 'replace' many properties. Secondly, the banks will of course profit through poor people driven to apply for mortgages (more toxic debt for NZ) in order to replace their houses.
The gradual release of land information is a tool in the arsenal of the corporates as you point out.
I am wondering if we now have a Corporatocracy instead of a Democracy on our own country?
-
merc,
-
Just one step up from tent cities. Auckland's eastern suburbs would be the perfect location.
-
Emma Hart, in reply to
We're now about, what? about 14 weeks out from an election. Is it an issue that certain commitments from govt./business/other should or must be extracted before then?
I don't think anyone's expecting anything to change after the election. Nor are we expecting to be able to change anything. The worst-hit areas of Chch already all voted in Labour MPs...
-
3410,
I don't think anyone's expecting anything to change after the election.
On balance, I think I am.
My prescription (possibly completely without merit):You (Chch.) have the almost full support of the wider public nationally. Harness it now and you will garner commitments from both Goff and Key. Wait until Christmas? Who knows, maybe it goes on the back burner then.
Get together, get on Morning Report, Campbell, Close Up, ONe NEWS, 3 NEWS... Make the ministers publicly back you - now, while you still have the upper hand.
</rant>
#justmytwocents -
Sacha, in reply to
Nor are we expecting to be able to change anything. The worst-hit areas of Chch already all voted in Labour MPs
Frankly that seems one of the least effective means of influence at present - I'd go with media and reaching out to relevant organisations and networks other than political parties. But you'd need a clear aim and some coherence first. That might be a lot to ask for many people right now.
-
Hebe,
A real estate agent told me yesterday (I know, I know but this good stuff, promise) that all Christchurch rebuild claims (on all land zones) from one insurance company at least are now going to Scotland for the fine-toothcomb treatment. And that those previously classified as rebuilds are now being reclassified into repair status. Thought this may be useful to a reader.
-
-
Tower have made a number of Redundancies in Christchurch, as they centralise Rural Insurance to Auckland.
-
I have asked for a reassessment of my 'repairable' house in the redzone...and I made sure to advise them to quote for foundations that are suitable for liquafacted land (not regular undamaged land). AMI responded they would quote for foundations per council regulations...have the CHCH council updated what is required to rebuild on damaged land? Does anyone know?
Post your response…
This topic is closed.