Building under construction collapses in George

Yeah, right - let's throw accusations out and call people and companies out without establishing the facts first so that we can riots and burning before we know the full story...
Telling the public who is the contractor is not really accusing anyone of anything though, unless you are saying they are not sure of the facts precisely on who is the contractor?
 
I think they're being prudent and staying away from anything potentially inflammatory in this situation - playing it by the book.

The information is publicly available or should be. Heck there would have been a huge sign at the site giving all and sundries details. The officials gain nothing by trying to hide the info except make it seem like they are hiding the info. We've had incidents like this before and no-one went moggy or lost the plot.

I'm still shaken by the reality of the explanation earlier that the weight of all that concrete would have literally reduced any human being caught underneath the collapse to dust and moisture

:(
 
They also have to tow the national ANC laws line.
Nope, DA building bylaws are more onerus than the SA national building code.

Source: I wanted to build a garden hokkie, but gave up to the sheer number of onerus things I needed to do, just for a simple garden hokkie.
 
“Should any member of the public wish to provide drinking water, Lucozade, wine gums, or any food for the services while they are on site — they must please deliver via Ivy Street at 79 Victoria St, Delplan Consulting.”

What the ****.
 
“Should any member of the public wish to provide drinking water, Lucozade, wine gums, or any food for the services while they are on site — they must please deliver via Ivy Street at 79 Victoria St, Delplan Consulting.”

What the ****.

It's papsak country. What do you expect?
 
Telling the public who is the contractor is not really accusing anyone of anything though, unless you are saying they are not sure of the facts precisely on who is the contractor?

The information is publicly available or should be. Heck there would have been a huge sign at the site giving all and sundries details. The officials gain nothing by trying to hide the info except make it seem like they are hiding the info. We've had incidents like this before and no-one went moggy or lost the plot.



:(

Yeah, I think corporate reality (and the WC govt tends to run like a corporate) would dictate how they respond.

I can see why they're being prudent.
 
Nope, DA building bylaws are more onerus than the SA national building code.

Source: I wanted to build a garden hokkie, but gave up to the sheer number of onerus things I needed to do, just for a simple garden hokkie.
Yep, there's going to be big kuk as they investigate who is responsible for cutting corners and how they managed to do so.
 
Yeah, I think corporate reality (and the WC govt tends to run like a corporate) would dictate how they respond.

I can see why they're being prudent.

I've just realised any journalist worth their salt wouldn't have asked this stupid question anyway. They would have had all the details with some minor digging
 
The construction firm responsible doesn't look very BBE to me.

The property developer isn't necessarily the construction company.

Developers get finance, clients, tenants, and then issue a contract for a construction company to make it.

The liability for this will probably sit with at least one of the following:
the construction company
their subcontractors
or the engineers.
 
Telling the public who is the contractor is not really accusing anyone of anything though, unless you are saying they are not sure of the facts precisely on who is the contractor?
You say that as if there can only be one contractor involved.

Nothing wrong with them being 100% sure of everyone involved before throwing them under the bus.
 
The construction firm responsible doesn't look very BBE to me.

I would be pooping myself if I lived in any of those blocks now :laugh:

 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X