How Can He Sleep While Our Batts Are Burning? - Page 3

IRS · 14-02-2010, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Readman

What castr8or said at the start. The federal Environment Department isn't an OHS agency. If the work practices were unsafe, then it's a matter for the state authorities.

See my post. Government grants should have only ever been issued when done by an approved installer to keep the cowboys out of it.

Readman · 14-02-2010, 06:58 PM

I thought that there were accreditation schemes in place, and the problem was that people just weren't following the guidelines or something?

texta · 14-02-2010, 08:04 PM

Yeah exactly. The Opposition have massively jumped the gun on this. They're trying to be judge jury and executioner when there's an actual Coronial Inquest looking into the deaths. From what I've heard at least one of the deaths was caused by someone using equipment that had been banned months ago. If that's the case it's bizarre to blame Garrett.

The fact is that if an employee is injured or killed at work, then the primary place that there should be questions of liability is with the employer. Accusing Garrett is a bit like putting the blame on me if I hired someone to build me a house and their apprentice was killed.

Also. Massive lol at TAT. There's a whole lot of scammers doing exactly what you've described. Pro-tip: don't let random people who knock on your door into your house.

Hide & Reason · 14-02-2010, 08:21 PM

The Coalition are expending all this futile energy on Garrett because to attack Conroy is enter into wedge politics. And beside, swinging voters have long known Garrett is a total joke and have decided he's a zero-sum factor in their 2010 votes. Garrett is like the prison bitch who's had his political welfare traded on condition that the enemy leaves the other gang members alone.

But it's a bit of a stretch to hold him directly responsible. He should certainly be reshuffled, as much for being a slack minister as this particular fiasco.

MacGuyver · 15-02-2010, 11:38 AM

I got proper batts put into my house, none of that foil stuff. I went with an accredited insulation installer, not someone who goes door knocking. And my installation didn't use the full amount of the rebate up either. I didn't have any existing insulation so there wasn't any to remove.

A mate of mine went with a different insulation company and was offered a choice of insulation products, decided to go with some sort of polyester batts.

~~sausage~~ · 15-02-2010, 11:41 AM

So some of these Batt-men were jokers?

texta · 15-02-2010, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TAT

The other dodgy thing that has come out of this is the companies taking the rebate on your behalf. They quote the cost of the job as being exactly $1200 (or w/e the rebate is), then get the rebate for themselves - there is no transfer of money in your name at all.

I'm not sure you understand what a rebate is, but you only get up to the cost of the installation. So if they charged $600 then you'd only get a $600 rebate.

The Government has purposely set the system up so that the money can go straight to the builder to make it easier for consumers. If they gave you the money instead of the installers then you'd have to pay the whole cost of the installation but you'd get that same amount (up to $1200) back from the Government. It's clearly easier just to cut out the middle man (ie you) and is financially irrelevant to everyone else (unless you're trying to scam something).

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacGuyver

I got proper batts put into my house, none of that foil stuff.

The foil stuff is really only used in hot climates. Batts is generally good for keeping heat in, but the foil is good keeping the heat out.

fishfishmonkeyhat · 15-02-2010, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sausage

So some of these Batt-men were jokers?

They certainly weren't Master-Batters!

~~sausage~~ · 16-02-2010, 06:09 AM

Turns out NZ has the exact same problem

Peter Garrett off the hook?

I think so.

TAT · 16-02-2010, 06:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TAT

They did my house about 3 weeks ago, and flat-out refused to remove the old insulation, piling it up in two particular corners of the roof. I'm going to get up there today some time to inspect what they did, and see if they covered our downlights properly (we only have 10, and they quoted that all 10 would be covered).

Well, they lied to me about this, funnily enough. While no downlight has been covered by insulation, these 'downlight covers' are suspiciously absent.

What they've done is fine, though, and it'd be more trouble to chase this up than leave it as is.

14-02-2010, 08:04 PM	#23
texta :stopsound: Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Bartertown Posts: 3,195	Yeah exactly. The Opposition have massively jumped the gun on this. They're trying to be judge jury and executioner when there's an actual Coronial Inquest looking into the deaths. From what I've heard at least one of the deaths was caused by someone using equipment that had been banned months ago. If that's the case it's bizarre to blame Garrett. The fact is that if an employee is injured or killed at work, then the primary place that there should be questions of liability is with the employer. Accusing Garrett is a bit like putting the blame on me if I hired someone to build me a house and their apprentice was killed. Also. Massive lol at TAT. There's a whole lot of scammers doing exactly what you've described. Pro-tip: don't let random people who knock on your door into your house. Last edited by texta; 14-02-2010 at 08:29 PM.

14-02-2010, 08:21 PM	#24
Hide & Reason Spyro Join Date: May 2004 Location: Hide & Reason. Posts: 183	The Coalition are expending all this futile energy on Garrett because to attack Conroy is enter into wedge politics. And beside, swinging voters have long known Garrett is a total joke and have decided he's a zero-sum factor in their 2010 votes. Garrett is like the prison bitch who's had his political welfare traded on condition that the enemy leaves the other gang members alone. But it's a bit of a stretch to hold him directly responsible. He should certainly be reshuffled, as much for being a slack minister as this particular fiasco. Last edited by Hide & Reason; 14-02-2010 at 08:44 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

14-02-2010, 06:58 PM	#22
Readman Don't bin Vin! Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: 中国 Posts: 1,058	I thought that there were accreditation schemes in place, and the problem was that people just weren't following the guidelines or something?

15-02-2010, 11:38 AM	#25
MacGuyver Blasto Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Perth, WA Posts: 290	I got proper batts put into my house, none of that foil stuff. I went with an accredited insulation installer, not someone who goes door knocking. And my installation didn't use the full amount of the rebate up either. I didn't have any existing insulation so there wasn't any to remove. A mate of mine went with a different insulation company and was offered a choice of insulation products, decided to go with some sort of polyester batts.

15-02-2010, 11:41 AM	#26
~~sausage~~ B4nZ0r3d Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Waiting for the custom user title screen in the control panel since 2009 Posts: 4,799	So some of these Batt-men were jokers?

16-02-2010, 06:09 AM	#29
~~sausage~~ B4nZ0r3d Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Waiting for the custom user title screen in the control panel since 2009 Posts: 4,799	Turns out NZ has the exact same problem Peter Garrett off the hook? I think so.