PDA

View Full Version : flooding chaos



mr do dar
23-Jul-07, 11:22
:roll: what do people think about the flooding in england at the moment do you really think its to do with global warming :(

Ash
23-Jul-07, 11:25
i think its awful and i feel really sorry for them, fed up with people complaining that they should have had house insurance an having a go at them, not everyone can afford it and they probably never thought that was going to happen!:confused

johno
23-Jul-07, 12:38
yes Ash thats very true. we always have home ins & have never claimed on it, but if we dont renew that,ll be the time when something happens for sure.

DarkAngel
23-Jul-07, 12:40
It is a shame on the poorer people who cant afford home insurance or anything that needs to be renewed... I do believe Global warming has alot to do with it...

Lolabelle
23-Jul-07, 12:46
what do people think about the flloding in england at the moment do you really think its to do with global warming

I think that it is terrible for the people who have been effected. And no I don't think it is due to Global Warming, I think it is due to weather, we can hardly tell how the rythmns of the earth's weather and temperatures really work. We haven't been recording them long enough, imho. Who knows what the weather was doing 1 million years ago, who knows what the weather patterns are like long term? :confused

changilass
23-Jul-07, 13:20
I have no sympathy for the ones with no home insurance, seen plenty on the tv of folks without but with brand new sofas ect, they should do like the rest of us and go with out the luxuries to get it. Why should I pay premiums and folk that dont get a fund set up to get them replacements.

I dont think it is anything to do with global warming, I think it is more to do with lack of thought when building new homes. Developers should be forced to update water systems when they do new builds to ensure that it can cope with the extra load put on the system. We are living with drainage systems that havnt been upgraded in years yet new builds are allowed to go ahead, its stupidity.

Ash
23-Jul-07, 13:29
i have every sympathy for them, i dont have home insurance as its something i never really thought about, not everyone can afford it!

changilass
23-Jul-07, 13:37
I have to give up on other things to afford home insurance, so I dont see why when folks have a house full of brand new things they cant afford home insurance, they are then demanding the government help them out, I just dont see why they should. I pay my insurance, I dont see why I should pay someone elses in the form of taxes. If I decided not to pay all the vaiious insurances we could probably afoord a couple of holidays abroad each year and I wouldnt be sat on a second hand sofa typing.

I just get really fed up of folk expecting others to bail them out, its about time forlk took responsibility for themselves and their actions.


Grrrrrrrr rant over

Ash
23-Jul-07, 13:42
well i for one dont have a house full of fancy things! i still feel sorry for the people who have lost things that money cant replace!:mad:

2051donna
23-Jul-07, 13:43
I have to give up on other things to afford home insurance, so I dont see why when folks have a house full of brand new things they cant afford home insurance, they are then demanding the government help them out, I just dont see why they should. I pay my insurance, I dont see why I should pay someone elses in the form of taxes. If I decided not to pay all the vaiious insurances we could probably afoord a couple of holidays abroad each year and I wouldnt be sat on a second hand sofa typing.

I just get really fed up of folk expecting others to bail them out, its about time forlk took responsibility for themselves and their actions.


Grrrrrrrr rant over

Absolutely Agree.. When we rented our old house it was just a few pounds every month, + altho we never claimed it gave us great reassurance..
Now we bought our house we obviously have building + contents insurance etc.. But id much rather be insured then have for example Sky or Broadband, Cos you never know what will happen..

jinglejangle
23-Jul-07, 14:11
I have to give up on other things to afford home insurance, so I dont see why when folks have a house full of brand new things they cant afford home insurance, they are then demanding the government help them out, I just dont see why they should. I pay my insurance, I dont see why I should pay someone elses in the form of taxes. If I decided not to pay all the vaiious insurances we could probably afoord a couple of holidays abroad each year and I wouldnt be sat on a second hand sofa typing.

I just get really fed up of folk expecting others to bail them out, its about time forlk took responsibility for themselves and their actions.


Grrrrrrrr rant over


I feel really sorry for the people whose homes have been ruined by the flooding however I agree with the quote above that the people who don't pay insurance should just get on with it. I have paid insurance since the moment I became a home owner although I never hope to need it - it only costs £22 a month [less than a pound a day].

I also think the flooding has to do with global warming!

golach
23-Jul-07, 14:45
I have to give up on other things to afford home insurance, so I dont see why when folks have a house full of brand new things they cant afford home insurance, they are then demanding the government help them out, I just dont see why they should. I pay my insurance, I dont see why I should pay someone elses in the form of taxes. If I decided not to pay all the vaiious insurances we could probably afoord a couple of holidays abroad each year and I wouldnt be sat on a second hand sofa typing.

I just get really fed up of folk expecting others to bail them out, its about time forlk took responsibility for themselves and their actions.


Grrrrrrrr rant over
Changi, I with you on this one, I think house insurance is essential and like Council Tax should be compulsory, although I have sympathy at the poor folks that have been flooded out, it must be soul destroying to see all your personal and prized possessions destroyed

Tristan
23-Jul-07, 15:59
I am surprised that there are so many people without house insurance, most mortgage companies require it as part of the offer.
Contents insurance can be optional but for less than £10 a month well worth the investment.
In large scale catastrophes there can be an argument for extra government support especially for houses (if there are any) outside the flood plain who would not have needed flood insurance.
Regardless each householder should ensure they are insured.

Ricco
23-Jul-07, 16:15
We have always had full insurance... and never claimed on it. The day we let it lapse will be a day we rue. I think it is very short-sighted to not be insured - my brother isn't, and I always tell him so.

The flooding has been dreadful - our school closed quite late on Friday because we couldn't let the kids go - no buses could get out to us for a couple of hours. I have been out with the camera to our local park and ride (fortunately all the cars had got out) and will be out again tomorrow when the worst is expected.

Will post some photos tomorrow.

Ash
23-Jul-07, 16:16
its something that ive never had much thought about, but certainly going to look into it more

laguna2
23-Jul-07, 16:17
We too have also always had insurance and have never (thankfully) had to claim on it.

I feel extremely sorry for all those who are flooded - I just cannot imagine how they are, or will, cope!

MadPict
23-Jul-07, 16:22
Global warming? Nah - I remember flooding way back in 1964 - even have pics somewhere of the back garden under water. It's more likely caused by the endless building on floodplains and the expansion of towns into areas which should never have been built on....

Tristan
23-Jul-07, 16:31
Global warming? Nah - I remember flooding way back in 1964 - even have pics somewhere of the back garden under water. It's more likely caused by the endless building on floodplains and the expansion of towns into areas which should never have been built on....

I agree with what you are saying about building on floodplains, expansion of towns and we should include the paving over of yards - these are all contributing factors.
However, whether-or-not it is global warming or a weather blip the amount of rain we have had is unseasonable.

seren
23-Jul-07, 16:33
Global warming? Nah - I remember flooding way back in 1964 - even have pics somewhere of the back garden under water. It's more likely caused by the endless building on floodplains and the expansion of towns into areas which should never have been built on....
that's the main problem around this area. my brother's a fireman and he's been working non stop since friday - he's never seen anything like the flooding in the gloucestershire area before.
they're actually starting work to build a whole new 'village' on a flood plain just up the road from us - it's complete madness. thankfully the water round here is subsiding now :confused

crashbandicoot1979
23-Jul-07, 16:38
I think the floodings due to greed, pure and simple. As mentioned earlier, developers buidling on flood plains and every other scrap of spare ground they can find, to hell with the consequences. I feel for those that are suffering for it, it must be absolutely soul destroying.

As for house insurance, never bothered with it for the first few years I lived in my council flat because I had no idea how important it was. As for now, I have a mortgage so its compulsory, but I got it before then - when my parents found out I wasn't insured they nearly had a turn! Wouldn't be without it now, too paranoid. But I reakon its something that people should be told about at school. Youngsters have no idea how important it is, same as other things like car insurance, council tax etc. I certainly had no idea.

NickInTheNorth
23-Jul-07, 16:44
seems to be at least 2 interesteing subjects in here.

Firstly, I am in no doubt whatsoever that the recent changes in weather patterns, including the increase in rainfall levels does have something to do with global warming. The increase in very heavy rainfall in short periods of time is unusual. Yes it has happened in the UK before, but it is becoming a much more common event.

Undoubtedly many of the hous flooding problems could have been avoided with a little more forethought. To my mind building on a "floodplain" suggests that there could just be a teensy problem... if the rain happens to fall a little more heavily than normal. Unfortunately far too many people seem to believe that as a species we have now eveloved to such an extent that nature cannot hurt us. I just hope that we live long enough as a species to become a little more humble and realise that nature is a far stronger beast.

As to the home insurance argument.

It is interesting that most people that have commented upon the matter are home owners. Which does suggest a level of income slightly higher than many that through circumstances are living in rented accomodation, be that private rented or social landlords.

Believe it or not it is possible to be on benefits, not have sky, not have new everythings, not be on holiday twice a year, not smoke, not drink, and still be short of money.

It is not very long ago at all that I was living on £48 per week after rent and all bills were paid. Yes we had a TV and paid the licence fee, and yes we had a sky dish and received the free to air channels. As for luxuries, those would be clothes for me and my wife.

Try feeding a family of 5 on £48 per week. And then try keeping them clothed properly and with decent shoes on their feet.

And then tell me which bit of the luxuries in life you would give up to pay insurance? Some of the bits of yorkshire that suffered in the first lot of flooding contents insurance would cost more than £20 per month - because the crime rates are so high ( I know my brother lives very close by, in a better neighbourhood and I know what he pays).

So please don't judge everyone because of what the rightwing tabloids would have you believe. There are people that genuinely cannot afford insurance. Living quitetly within their means because they prefer that to going on benefits for the life of luxury, that so many that have not endured it recently wrongly believe it to be.

To some people £5 a week is a fortune that they just cannot afford.

seren
23-Jul-07, 16:58
we didn't have house insurance until the house next to ours caught fire. we realised that night how close we'd come to losing everything we owned. we've been totally skint in the time since, and comfortably off, but we've never gone without house insurance again. we've never paid more than about a tenner a month and we just put it in with essentials that have to be paid like rent.

Ash
23-Jul-07, 17:00
for once nickinthenorth i completely agree with you, i rent from council,dont have sky,dont smoke, or drink and at this precise moment in my life i cannot afford home insurance

Tristan
23-Jul-07, 17:03
seems to be at least 2 interesteing subjects in here.

Firstly, I am in no doubt whatsoever that the recent changes in weather patterns, including the increase in rainfall levels does have something to do with global warming. The increase in very heavy rainfall in short periods of time is unusual. Yes it has happened in the UK before, but it is becoming a much more common event.

Undoubtedly many of the house flooding problems could have been avoided with a little more forethought. To my mind building on a "floodplain" suggests that there could just be a teensy problem... if the rain happens to fall a little more heavily than normal. Unfortunately far too many people seem to believe that as a species we have now eveloved to such an extent that nature cannot hurt us. I just hope that we live long enough as a species to become a little more humble and realise that nature is a far stronger beast.

As to the home insurance argument.

It is interesting that most people that have commented upon the matter are home owners. Which does suggest a level of income slightly higher than many that through circumstances are living in rented accomodation, be that private rented or social landlords.

Believe it or not it is possible to be on benefits, not have sky, not have new everythings, not be on holiday twice a year, not smoke, not drink, and still be short of money.

It is not very long ago at all that I was living on £48 per week after rent and all bills were paid. Yes we had a TV and paid the licence fee, and yes we had a sky dish and received the free to air channels. As for luxuries, those would be clothes for me and my wife.

Try feeding a family of 5 on £48 per week. And then try keeping them clothed properly and with decent shoes on their feet.

And then tell me which bit of the luxuries in life you would give up to pay insurance? Some of the bits of yorkshire that suffered in the first lot of flooding contents insurance would cost more than £20 per month - because the crime rates are so high ( I know my brother lives very close by, in a better neighbourhood and I know what he pays).

So please don't judge everyone because of what the rightwing tabloids would have you believe. There are people that genuinely cannot afford insurance. Living quitetly within their means because they prefer that to going on benefits for the life of luxury, that so many that have not endured it recently wrongly believe it to be.

To some people £5 a week is a fortune that they just cannot afford.

One reason this thread is looking at homeowners for the most part is that many of the people being interviewed on the telly are homeowners.

There are people with genuine need and the government safety net should help cover them.
I am being mean here but if you cut the £12 a month tv license you probably have enough for contents insurance.
There may actually be instances when you may not want to bother with contents insurance. We have set up a flat for our son, shoped for bargains etc and we don't believe it is worth the cost of insurance so we are in effect self insuring.
You say your brother is paying around £20 a month but he lives in a better area(close to a bad one) the contents insurance will be higher because he has more to insure and the stuff will have a higher value. I am not saying insurance is cheap but your brother may not be the best example to use.


On a different note, people should have a good read over their contents policy and make sure it reflects the value of the contents of their home. With new electronics, CDs, DVDs etc many people are probably not adequately covered for a complete loss.
Our initial estimate for replacement cost was about half what we really needed once we did a detailed inventory.
In addition many contents policies put a cap on certain parts of your claim.
It is also a good idea to take photos of the rooms or video walk through of the house. Insurance companies are more likely to believe you had 300 CDs/DVDs if they can see them.

MadPict
23-Jul-07, 17:32
I live in a very flood prone area and recall the hue and cry amongst residents of one village over the lack of flood protection. They suffered floods on an almost yearly basis and I seem to recall that discussion of building better flood defences in one area brought problems of the flood water just being forced into someone else's back garden.

Water has to find its way once the rivers burst their banks. How much of the problem recently has been down to the old 'escape routes' for excess water being blocked. Routes which 30 or 40 years ago where still there. Now those routes have been built on and the water rushes through and breaks out at the next weak point.

I can't believe we are having yet another "review" of why things go wrong! If they listened to advice given they would realise why this is happening. More money down the drain (or into the pockets of "experts" more like) and no doubt the result will be that "we have to build sympathetically with the environment in mind"...

3½ years ago....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/norfolk/3447889.stm

concerned resident
23-Jul-07, 17:46
If you lived near a river, or you were flooded before, would an insurance company take you on as a customer, and at what price. Also would anyone be interested in Buying your house in the Future?

dunderheed
23-Jul-07, 17:53
personally speaking , i would never go without insurance for my home, as for the people who have none why should the tax payer bail them out?
as for the flooding i dont blame global warming ,every year for the last 10 years or so , germany ,france belgium and austria have suffered from flash floods in the summer months.

NickInTheNorth
23-Jul-07, 17:53
I am being mean here but if you cut the £12 a month tv license you probably have enough for contents insurance.

And then where would to £2000 for the fine be found...

and don't try and suggest that the telly should go in preference to the insurance. The kids would have killed me.

Tristan
23-Jul-07, 18:10
And then where would to £2000 for the fine be found...

and don't try and suggest that the telly should go in preference to the insurance. The kids would have killed me.


I am not trying to single people out, I am only looking at alternatives and as I said I was being mean by saying do not pay the tv license.
As an although you can run a telly with videos etc as long as you don't hook it up to an aerial. It depends on priorities. In your situation I may have chosen TV over contents insurance, I don't know.
I do know if I had enough "stuff", that I could not afford a total loss, I would find a way to pay for the insurance including not watching live TV.
It sounds like yours was the type of situation where the government needs to ensure is adequately covered by benefits etc.

connieb19
23-Jul-07, 18:35
I don't think the government should pay out to the people who are not insured, if they start doing this how long will it be until the insurance companies stop paying out in the event of floods because the Governent will pay out instead.
IMO Insurance should be a priority like rent and council tax, coming before any luxuries.

As for Global warming, I think it's rubbish. I never see ditches full to the brim with water anymore, they've all been filled in.

coppertop 1958
23-Jul-07, 18:49
There is no global warming. Period.

You can't find a real scientist anywhere in the world who can look you in the eye and, without hesitation, without clarification, without saying, kinda, mighta, sorta, if, and or but...say "yes, global warming is with us."

There is no evidence whatsoever to support such claims. Anyone who tells you that scientific research shows warming trends - be they teachers, news casters, Congressmen, Senators, Vice Presidents or Presidents - is wrong. There is no global warming.

Scientific research through U.S. Government satellite and balloon measurements shows that the temperature is actually cooling - very slightly - .037 degrees Celsius.

A little research into modern-day temperature trends bears this out. For example, in 1936 the Midwest of the United States experienced 49 consecutive days of temperatures over 90 degrees. There were another 49 consecutive days in 1955. But in 1992 there was only one day over 90 degrees and in 1997 only 5 days.

Because of modern science and improved equipment, this "cooling" trend has been most accurately documented over the past 18 years. Ironically, that's the same period of time the hysteria has grown over dire warnings of "warming."

Changes in global temperatures are natural. There is no proof that temperature is affected by anything that man has done.

In fact, recent severe weather has been directly attributed to a natural phenomenon that occurs every so often called El Nino. It causes ocean temperatures to rise as tropical trade winds actually reverse for a time.

The resulting temperature changes cause severe storms, flooding and even draught on every continent on earth.

It's completely natural. El Nino has been wreaking its havoc across the globe since long before man appeared.

How about the reports that the polar ice cap is melting

nannydip
23-Jul-07, 19:17
This is perhaps deviating from the insurance debate, but I once lived in a house that flooded. I had no insurance, at that time simply could not afford it.

Yes we lost most of our belongings, but it was the things we couldn't replace like family photo's that caused the biggest heartache.

Tristan
23-Jul-07, 19:49
Yes we lost most of our belongings, but it was the things we couldn't replace like family photo's that caused the biggest heartache.


From a personal side it must be tough to loose everything like that.

badger
23-Jul-07, 19:52
I do agree all homeowners should have insurance but nothing can compensate for what people have lost, for the sheer misery of it all, for having no water or electricity. I could weep seeing the damage to what was my home until a few years ago and can only imagine how my little Cotswold village must be looking now as it is a long narrow valley with a canal down the middle. Even when we had a bit more rain than usual I remember how the roads down the sides of the valley turned into raging torrents and I'll never forget the night the water came through the back wall of my house (which was built into the hillside) and out through the front again. It did no permanent damage and all I had to do was keep sweeping it out but these people now cannot do anything except move their belongings upstairs as much as possible.

No doubt the volume of rain is extraordinary but equally too much building must be partly responsible for the effect of this.

We haven't heard anything about any preparations in London but surely the volume of water which will be going down the Thames is going to cause some problems?

Tristan
23-Jul-07, 19:57
I think they are now saying it is the worst flooding in 60 years.
Yahoo's news links had a note on London and its preperations.

seren
23-Jul-07, 20:15
i do often wonder about extreme weather in the past and how it wasn't documented. i was watching a documentary a few months ago about how a huge flood in the severn estuary devastated rural communities in south east wales and along the severn beach in the middle ages. it was a flood of cataclysmic proportions, long thought to be a tsunami but it wasn't caused by a tsunami at all, just freak weather conditions. if that happened now it would definitely be put down to global warming.

seren
23-Jul-07, 20:21
http://www.burnham-on-sea.com/1607-flood.shtml

badger
23-Jul-07, 21:49
I think they are now saying it is the worst flooding in 60 years.
Yahoo's news links had a note on London and its preperations.

Thanks - interesting. Wonder how London will fare if the Thames really rise. The only flood barriers as far as I know are the other side and work the other way. Doubt if they'll be able to do much to protect all those places along the river.

Saw in the news that people are buying water bottles in shops and then selling them off at crazy prices. How low can profiteers sink?

corgiman
23-Jul-07, 22:26
I really don't see why my insurance policy should go up because of this it makes me mad also that I have always paid my insurance just in case yet those who don't bother get bailed out by the government and my taxes maybe nobody should bother with the expense we pay on insurance and see if the government would bail us all out in the event of us flooding :confused I doubt it somehow as there was hardly a mention about the storms and floods last year in the highlands.

Solus
24-Jul-07, 00:13
Found out this evening what it is like to experience something like these folk are having to deal with ! although in a smaller scale.

This eveing, sitting down to eat supper, door open looking out to garden. It was over cast, muggy, the odd spell of sun peaked through now and again, when it just got real dark, heavens opened and rain came down so fast and heavy it was like a monsoon !! and continued for around 45 minutes, it was unbelievable

Our back garden flooded with rain water running down the hill so fast it took us by surprise, and our neighbours patio was under water with the pair of us standing at our back doors with " oh crikey " faces on ! thankfully it was a short shower compared to whats happening south of the border, but its amazing how quickly it can all go wrong ! What dawned on us tonight was that there was a drain out in the path but after workmen erected new street lights its now gone ! covered with tarmac now :eek:

On a brighter side , I did laugh later as I had visions of me ripping up the decking to get my resident hedge hogs to safety :lol: or throwing them a rubber ring !

DeHaviLand
24-Jul-07, 00:40
Everybody has missed the point that for a lot of people, home contents insurance is simply not available, whether thay can afford it or not. All insurance companies have identified large areas of the country where they simply will not issue cover to householders living in those areas.
This may be because the area has flooded before, or because it has been identified as an area at risk from flooding.
Whether this insurance is deemed essential or not is of little consequence if insurers will not cover you in order to protect their large profits.

Ricco
24-Jul-07, 07:46
Everybody has missed the point that for a lot of people, home contents insurance is simply not available, whether thay can afford it or not. All insurance companies have identified large areas of the country where they simply will not issue cover to householders living in those areas.
This may be because the area has flooded before, or because it has been identified as an area at risk from flooding.
Whether this insurance is deemed essential or not is of little consequence if insurers will not cover you in order to protect their large profits.

Very true, DeH. I live in such an area and many insurers have refused us. Makes me laugh because we live at the top of a long rise and there is a 30ft deep railway cutting 100 yds from the house - a big drain, essentially. Their assessment is based on the low level flood plain 1/2 mile down the road - this always floods when there is a great deal of rain. The assessment is simply based on postal code rather than geographical judgement.

scorrie
24-Jul-07, 18:37
I noticed that the Highland Council have a scheme which offers contents insurance to tenants.

http://www.highland.gov.uk/livinghere/housing/councilhousetenancies/homecontentsinsurancescheme/

With £25,000 of cover available for less than 30p a day, it seems reasonable that everyone should have some insurance.

Obviously, if nobody will offer to insure your property there is little that can be done.

Some insurance companies certainly have their quirks. One company would not insure our home because I worked for a Bookmaker, while another would not insure our home because I was unemployed. I was particularly puzzled by the latter, as it surely boils down to whether or not you can pay the premiums?

Then again, unemployed? desperate?... Petrol, matches...woof, blackened shell...insurance claim...SORTED!!

Rheghead
25-Jul-07, 01:19
I agree with the lack of sympathy for those that don't get insurance but I do have sympathy for those that can't get insurance.

I disagree that it hasn't got anything to do with GW, surely it can't be helping and it must be playing a part?

As for the lack of thought when building new homes, yes and no, it was 60 years since the last flood, I think a 60 year cycle might be an acceptable basis to go ahead to build new homes in the flood area?

Dreamweaver
25-Jul-07, 15:38
I think it stems from destroying land and chopping down trees for the endless building of new houses, shopping centres and roads. Concrete won't absorb water and if there's nowhere else for it to go you're gonna get a flood.

Alice in Blunderland
25-Jul-07, 16:28
Well wish me luck everyone Im off to the water logged areas of England tomorrow. :eek:

On a lighter note maybe Noah had the perfect house design with that Ark of his. Wonder if its available in kit form. :cool:

Tony
25-Jul-07, 20:41
Very true, DeH. I live in such an area and many insurers have refused us. Makes me laugh because we live at the top of a long rise and there is a 30ft deep railway cutting 100 yds from the house - a big drain, essentially. Their assessment is based on the low level flood plain 1/2 mile down the road - this always floods when there is a great deal of rain. The assessment is simply based on postal code rather than geographical judgement.

If it is based on post codes then we in Caithness who had floods last year needn't worry as we all live in Kirkwall with KW codes.:)

MadPict
25-Jul-07, 22:49
The south is slowly sinking while the north is slowly rising - so in a few 1000 years Caithness may be the best place to live regarding flooding ;)

golach
25-Jul-07, 22:55
The south is slowly sinking while the north is slowly rising - so in a few 1000 years Caithness may be the best place to live regarding flooding ;)
Its those Wind Farms that are doing it MP, they are lifting the North a few inches a year [lol]

changilass
26-Jul-07, 00:06
Caithness is already the best place to live MadPict :D

Rheghead
26-Jul-07, 00:26
The thing with the human mind is that it is conditioned to judge and remember everything by the exception. That is why we are so susceptible to the global warmist propaganda.

oldmarine
26-Jul-07, 00:38
:roll: what do people think about the flooding in england at the moment do you really think its to do with global warming :(

I read about the flooding in England and wondered about it as I had never seen that problem in all my travels there. I don't believe global warming is the problem. I live in the desert country of Tucson, Arizona, USA and over the years we had occasional flooding in low lying spots near dry river beds, but nothing like London is experiencing.

Tristan
26-Jul-07, 09:10
Well blame it on global warming, global trends, La Nina or sunspots, but it is now the wettest May to July since records began in 1776. http://uk.news.yahoo.com/pressass/20070726/tuk-may-to-july-the-wettest-months-ever-6323e80.html

MadPict
26-Jul-07, 11:25
Ahh, but is it the wettest May to July since time began? :)

The doom mongers are blaming global warming - which of course they will do to add substance to their argument. EVERYTHING is the fault of GW.

Now I am not saying that the impact of man is not having an effect on the environment but I am growing weary of politicians rolling out the GW argument to try and cover up for their mistakes or short sightedness.

I do care about the environment (despite my objections to wind farms in the wrong places) and have been recycling for 20 odd years and have tried to buy local produce, where possible, BEFORE it became a greenies crusade against carbon emissions, buying fuel efficient vehicles and even using low energy light bulbs when you could hardly find them in shops.

BUT 'GW fatigue' is creeping in for me and I suspect that many other green minded folk are also getting fed up with every natural event being the result of GW.

Green_not_greed
26-Jul-07, 12:48
My heart goes out to all who are affected - it will take them a long time to recover and some will never be able to recover personal items and historic family artefacts lost.

As for global warming - not the cause. On the other hand, I do think its a combination of:
- climate change (a change in the world's weather patterns and temperature on a long-term cyclic pattern)
- extreme weather and
- building houses on floodplains.

Floodplains are named for a reason.

dunderheed
26-Jul-07, 17:32
I agree with the lack of sympathy for those that don't get insurance but I do have sympathy for those that can't get insurance.

I disagree that it hasn't got anything to do with GW, surely it can't be helping and it must be playing a part?

As for the lack of thought when building new homes, yes and no, it was 60 years since the last flood, I think a 60 year cycle might be an acceptable basis to go ahead to build new homes in the flood area?

dont think it was 60 years ago oxford had floods , wasn't it just about 4 years or so ago?

captainpugwash
27-Jul-07, 18:49
I think the flooding was caused by too much rain and not enough drainage thanks to knuckleheads tarmacing their gardens and greedy developers building on the floodplains. "Global warming??" no.... very heavy rainfall, inadequate drainage.... they need to start digging holes instead of building more houses.

corgiman
27-Jul-07, 19:10
I think the flooding was caused by too much rain and not enough drainage thanks to knuckleheads tarmacing their gardens and greedy developers building on the floodplains. "Global warming??" no.... very heavy rainfall, inadequate drainage.... they need to start digging holes instead of building more houses.

that I absolutely agree with, there is nowhere for the water to go anymore and they rip out all the tree's that used to suck it all up :eek:

changilass
27-Jul-07, 19:17
I have a gunnera in the garden, sooks up the water good style

rockchick
29-Jul-07, 16:24
Very true, DeH. I live in such an area and many insurers have refused us. Makes me laugh because we live at the top of a long rise and there is a 30ft deep railway cutting 100 yds from the house - a big drain, essentially. Their assessment is based on the low level flood plain 1/2 mile down the road - this always floods when there is a great deal of rain. The assessment is simply based on postal code rather than geographical judgement.

If it is the case that you have no risk of flood damage due to the topography of your area, why not have your broker negotiate a policy which specifically excludes flood damage? It's not required to be included in an insurance contract and you would still be covered for fire, theft, etc. The only risk you might have is the inability to access your home if the area around you is flooded.

mums angels
29-Jul-07, 23:12
its something that ive never had much thought about, but certainly going to look into it more

these people on the news that have no insurance do have fancy nice things, sky tv and most likley broadband .my insurance is £25 a month and if i couldn't afford to have insurance i wouold have to go without one of lifes little luxuries ..like sitting here using broadband at 21 a month :(

they brought it on themselves but no doubt it will be the working folks that have to pay for them to have it all replaced ..

mums angels
29-Jul-07, 23:17
i think its awful and i feel really sorry for them, fed up with people complaining that they should have had house insurance an having a go at them, not everyone can afford it and they probably never thought that was going to happen!:confused

Thats exactly what insurance is for , its to protect ourselves from the unexpected things that could happen..fire , flood , earthquake, theft ..etc
not knowing it was going to happen is no excuse for no insurance