House flooded, contents destroyed, no power for 48 hours

[Herr Tubthumper]

So you think it's all justified, like some strange form of Karma?

Or the green-eyed monster?

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Difficult one really. On the one hand, it is awful for people to see their property damaged, or to be without power for long periods.

But one or two I've seen on the news seem to be demanding the impossible. It's not like the power companies have been sat around drinking Bailey's & scoffing turkey while people were at home in the cold. They've had teams out night and day since events on Christmas Eve, working non stop. I was working Christmas Eve and there were UK Power Networks guys all over the place, trying to repair damaged cables and so on. As for the flooding, it is an unfortunate side effect of living in a place like Yalding, and it's presumably a risk people take when they decide to move there.

I daresay there are some preventative measures that can be implemented, but the Government is hardly going to spend millions on a massive defence scheme for a village the size of Yalding. And does an area's political leanings make much difference to the treatment they get? I'm not so sure. Off th e top of my head, I can recall huge floods in the past in Lewes, Uckfield, Chichester (locally speaking), plus large areas of Gloucestershire, and no doubt many more. Most of these areas (Lewes being the exception I'd guess) are fairly true blue and I don't recall them being besieged with central government funds.

Can we not just agree that sometimes, unfortunately, shit happens, nature wins, and leave the politics out of it? That, and stop demanding the earth and stars when it does go a bit wrong, and accept that people are trying to help, however long it takes.

 

[Nibble]

Difficult one really. On the one hand, it is awful for people to see their property damaged, or to be without power for long periods.

But one or two I've seen on the news seem to be demanding the impossible. It's not like the power companies have been sat around drinking Bailey's & scoffing turkey while people were at home in the cold. They've had teams out night and day since events on Christmas Eve, working non stop. I was working Christmas Eve and there were UK Power Networks guys all over the place, trying to repair damaged cables and so on. As for the flooding, it is an unfortunate side effect of living in a place like Yalding, and it's presumably a risk people take when they decide to move there.

I daresay there are some preventative measures that can be implemented, but the Government is hardly going to spend millions on a massive defence scheme for a village the size of Yalding. And does an area's political leanings make much difference to the treatment they get? I'm not so sure. Off th e top of my head, I can recall huge floods in the past in Lewes, Uckfield, Chichester (locally speaking), plus large areas of Gloucestershire, and no doubt many more. Most of these areas (Lewes being the exception I'd guess) are fairly true blue and I don't recall them being besieged with central government funds.

Can we not just agree that sometimes, unfortunately, shit happens, nature wins, and leave the politics out of it? That, and stop demanding the earth and stars when it does go a bit wrong, and accept that people are trying to help, however long it takes.

This was the thing that surprised me, power companies tripling compensation for anyone that has been in the dark for 48 hours or more. Ridiculous. The only reason I can think they would agree to this is that when they next hike their prices up they can now justify it as being a direct result of paying out on this one.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

It has been company policy to compensate for long periods of outage, for many decades. It has to be a minimum of 24 hours.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

Unless I'm missing the point, what have the floods got to do with politicians? Mixing the terrible situation that so many people have found themselves in, with cheap jibes at politicians, of whatever party, is somewhat childish, in my opinion. If there was just one thread for the Tory haters it would make this board far less cluttered.

 

[Davemania]

Very easy to write this from the comfort of your warm dry house I bet?

Yes but if people do insist on buying a house on a flood plain cant really complain, can they? I dont see how its Cameron's fault exactly

 

[BensGrandad]

One assumes they all have insurance.

I would'nt have thought it would cover that sort of damage.

Most probably. Unfortunately, fresh problems will arise when they renew. Premiums will either be sky high or Insurance companies won't touch them.

Would the insurance companies use their old favourite to avoid paying out by saying a flood is an act of God, over which they nor anybody else has control?

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

It has been company policy to compensate for long periods of outage, for many decades. It has to be a minimum of 24 hours.

This wasn't the case when we had the hurricane in 1987 , no electricity for 4 days at my flat in Chatham Place and Seeboard called it an "Act of God" so they didn't have to pay out.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Some people here in Ashington lost power on 23rd and only got it back last night. I feel more sorry for them than I do for people who live on a floodplain that already has recent "previous" of devastation, in this case the year 2000.

Maybe instead of whingeing more people should take an interest in local politics and try and get something done about this sort of thing by campaigning. I see that in Yalding's case an earthwork burm was discussed but decided against because it would not be aesthetically pleasing. OK, so that didn't happen but the issue shouldn't have been allowed to have been left there.

 

[Spun Cuppa]

A mate of mine has lost his bungalow, all the contents, the garden, the dog, and his car. Surprising really, as I never thought for one moment they would get divorced

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Cameron's visit to Yalding is a sign of how this country is dumbing down. When Lewes flooded in 2000, they sent Prince Edward to save the day.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

Would the insurance companies use their old favourite to avoid paying out by saying a flood is an act of God, over which they nor anybody else has control?

But which God, Yahweh? Allah? Ganesha? et al. Could make a difference depending on location.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

It's not like the power companies have been sat around drinking Bailey's & scoffing turkey while people were at home in the cold.

Couldn't agree more. Given the tariffs they charge the power companies were probably lying down on a solid gold chaise being fed roasted swan and caviar.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Yes but if people do insist on buying a house on a flood plain cant really complain, can they? I dont see how its Cameron's fault exactly

No one has said its Cameron's fault. I know Cameron destroys people's lives and hopes but this was down to nature.

 

[severnside gull]

"We have to learn from this" says Cameron........whose decisions on planning policy gave allowed and indeed encouraged building houses on flood plains

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

"We have to learn from this" says Cameron........whose decisions on planning policy gave allowed and indeed encouraged building houses on flood plains

Surely it was Labour's fault

 

[dougdeep]

Unless I'm missing the point, what have the floods got to do with politicians? Mixing the terrible situation that so many people have found themselves in, with cheap jibes at politicians, of whatever party, is somewhat childish, in my opinion. If there was just one thread for the Tory haters it would make this board far less cluttered.

You are missing the point. Politics makes the rules and regulations. Anyone suffering from floods in recently built houses should be able to get compensation from their local authority.

 

[Seagull over Canaryland]

Ok it's hardly a disaster of third world proportions and rather embarrassing to make such claims when there is a little discomfort for leafy surburban Surrey and Kent, when compared to Tacloban etc. However I guess they are entitled to vent frustration if the authorities have repeatedly failed to take reasonable action to prevent flooding or have exacerbated it by allowing house building on flood plains.

But I do feel genuinely sorry for those that have had several feet of floodwater through their properties - like in Lewes in 2000 or at Boscastle when in many cases it reached above ground floor height in minutes and punters had to be rescued from upstair windows. There was no real warning ahead of these flash floods. I can recall many of the properties were uninhabitable for 6-9 months after while they dried out or were rebuilt. Imagine losing your possessions and being displaced for that long.

However in the last 10-12 years warnings from various agencies have become far more proactive and there is far less excuse not to take some form of pre-emptive action. So I have less sympathy for those who do not help themselves when ample warnings had been given. It seems crass to moan about damage from a few inches of water when they didn't bother to move valuable possessions. It especially seems common sense to be watchful if you live in a well known flood risk area. Why should an insurance company pay out if you haven't made a reasonable effort to prevent avoidable damage?

It the same as punters driving into floodwater and then wondering why their car gets trapped then rely on others to rescue them, all for the lack of a bit of common sense and allowing an extra minute or two to find an alternative route. Then there are those who let their kids play in floodwaters yet it is heavily contaminated with sewage, oil and chemicals. quite apart from the hazard of any flowing water that is more than 6'' deep. It seems that life and property is cheap for too many who don't bother to help themselves.

By the way I seem to recall it was that nice John Prescott who insisted on huge new house building targets for local authorities and sadly there was too much use of flood plains, despite advice and warnings to the contrary.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

When they showed where the water level reached in one of the houses they had a damp proof course about 4 feet from the ground , the problem was the water rose to about 5 feet.

 

[Seagull over Canaryland]

When they showed the water level in one of the houses they had a damp proof course about 4 feet from the ground , the problem was the water rose to about 5 feet.

Haven't seen that image - but surely there is a clue if you have to build in a DPC 4 foot above ground level................. that maybe it isn't the best site to build on? How would you hope to get insurance cover? Would be better off owning a house boat.

I feel sorry for punters who have much older properties that have become surrounded by much newer developments and hard landscaping which have now turned them into proper flood risk areas.