We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
MINUTES OF A special meeting of the CRC board of governors detail how it was agreed to give outgoing chief executive Paul Kiely a €742,000 pension and pay-off package – and to keep it confidential – in March of last year.
The minutes have been published on the Public Accounts Committee website today and were discussed at yesterday’s revelatory hearings where Kiely’s retirement package was disclosed.
The meeting took place on 25 March 2013 at 5pm in the Central Remedial Clinic boardroom and present were Hamilton Goulding (son of CRC founder Valerie Goulding), Hassia Jameson, Jim Nugent, Ailbhe Rice-Jones, and Martin Walsh.
Not present were Vincent Brady, Brian Conlan, David Martin and Pat Ryan.
Crucially, the minutes record that chairman Goulding made a presentation “outlining details of a proposed financial settlement which might be offered to Mr Kiely”.
“The board considered that the proposed arrangement was fair both to the CRC and to Mr Kiely and approved the package as presented,” the minutes state.
The minutes state that it was agreed by board members that “the terms of Mr Kiely’s settlement are confidential, and that a legally binding Confidentiality Agreement will be put in place”.
The actual details of the package are not recorded in the minutes but were disclosed by the CRC’s interim administrator John Cregan in this letter to the HSE director general Tony O’Brien that was read out at the PAC yesterday.
Can’t see the minutes clearly? Click here
A crucial question which arose at yesterday’s hearings, where former chief executive Brian Conlan was quizzed for nearly four hours, was whether, having not been present, he had read the minutes.
He told PAC members that he did not, saying: “I was not privy to Mr Kiely’s pension settlement. That is the truth. I was not part and parcel of the remuneration committee.”
Conlan later added: “I would say that the decisions made by the board to award Mr Kiely [that] level of remuneration in his pension was wrong.”
It’s not clear whether Conlan, who was not giving interviews today, was sent a copy of the minutes or if they would have come across his desk.
That is likely to be an issue the PAC will want clarified.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Why is the manufacturer of the blocks not taking some liability
@John O Reilly: because they’re too busy building a brand new estate from the council and even using the same quarry…. An absolute joke!
It must be heartbreaking for the people involved. I built a house myself 20 years ago as a single guy and without doubt its one of the most satisfying things I’ve achieved in my life. If for something like this to shatter that achievement I would be devastated. My heart goes out to the families involved and I hope they get fully compensated for something that wasn’t their fault. Even then it still takes from calling it their dream home. Good luck with your fight.
@James Fox: Clearly they deserve better. As an aside I’ve very jealous of you. I’d love to be able to build my own house but the current housing climate and planning laws make it impossible. Well done. I’m sure you get a sense of immense pride every time you step though the threshold.
What were the consequences for the companies who provided this product in the first place. Why aren’t they footing the bill? Where is the regulation?
@Neil Ryan: Where is homeowners insurance in this?
@Contrary Mary: why should insurer / goverment foot the bill for a substandard product being sold? This is not an act of nature, accident, fire, illness.
@Contrary Mary: Don’t you mean the building contractor, the block company and the sand quarry. Why should ones house insurance be used by the way the insurance is keeping well away from this once again.I fear the only way is to bring all to civil court
@Neil Ryan: Cassidy’s changed their name and Company to avoid any liability. Still supplying blocks/bricks around Donegal and getting away with it.
@Thomas Armstrong: It is required in order to have a mortgage, to protect the bank’s investment. This is a time I would support the use of insurance, as insurance company’s have the money to go after those who have absconded from their responsibility to sell a safe abode.
Terrible situation for these people… who manufactured these concrete blocks? I dont know much about the whole affair..
@John Bathe: cassidys in falcaragh
@John Martin: cassidys buncrana
@John Bathe: Cassidy’s, Letterkenny. They have multiple businesses around Donegal. They are a total disgrace. #boycottCassidy.
I live in a mica house and it’s falling down. The issue I have is that I paid VAT to the government for the materials and services 20 years ago and now I have to pay VAT again for the replacement materials. Also windows are not covered in the scheme. I am expected to build a house that complies with current building standards and then put 20 year old windows back in. There’s a role for SEAI to step in here and ensure that these new builds have a good energy rating. Any builders that I’ve spoken to reckon that I’ll have to put in an additional €100K to get the same house.
@Cheeky Charlie: this is insane and I feel terrible for you, and others in your situation. What in the actual what is wrong with this completely bleeped up government? I have never seen such an incompetent bunch. When’s the next election again?
The state has a long history of doing the least they can when faced this type of issue.
Why is the states problem? The issue is with the suppliers of the building materials and sure home insurance has a role to pay. While I empathise with the home owners the state cannot always be the solution.
@Paul Murphy: the supplier changed its name so they can’t be touched and our houses aren’t covered for insurance.
@Paul Murphy: apparently the defective bricks complied with the government set regulations, it is a case of manufacturing defects and inadequate regulation. Both are liable and should compensate the house owners for restitution and for the impact this has had on their lives. What kind of legal system do we have when a person gets €122k for a dog bite, but people living in crumbling ruins due to faulty bricks are given the runaround for years.
@Paul Murphy: That’s only 1 case your talking about -The country is full will house/Homes in very bad conditions and damaging to the families health that live in these dilapidated conditions- Guaranteed no goverment td has to live like that nor do there kids – grandkids ……..
@Jules: How can regulation be faulty if at the time of publication it was the best standard that was available. Its the same with the whole emissions from cars thing, the cars met the regulations and the manufacturer was found liable but the regulators who set the standard were not at fault. Can’t see why insurance won’t pay up given no one knowingly built a house with faulty raw materials. If not its the building federation that need to be,addressed as it was their members who source and built with faulty material, not the government
@dubirishHerbguy: Again if there is failure on the part of the service provider the case is with the and the umbrella group that guarantees their work, not the government . The plans etc must have met with regulation at the time of build otherwise mortgage approval wouldn’t have been issued. By some of the logic here the banks could be liable for providing funds for faulty buildings have ensured that regulation had been followed
@Paul Murphy: the fact of the matter is this, the block supplier no longer exist, they shut down that company and stuck the word ‘bros’ at the end and operate now as normal, from the same quarry. All the while they put out a statement to say they complied with regulations at the time. If the regulations said that there cannot be more than 1% mica in blocks, then how did my blocks come back a mica percentage of 9%? And my Newton block strength come back at 1.1nm when the regulation at the time stated it needs to be 7.5nm and now 10nm?
@JimD: My house needs demolished and rebuilt from the founds up, I have to now pay 10% of this, continue to pay my mortgage, pay rent in another property, if I can find one and pay storage costs. And yes I called my bank last week, they said they never heard of it despite policians stating they need to help, and yes I called my insurance, but guess what, they don’t cover defective material…. So tell me, where do we turn?
@Jules: The grading of bricks / blocks came afterwards. But no way the State are liable. I don’t care if a company changed their name go after the owners this country just can’t have loopholes for everyone.
@Thomas Armstrong: there are regulations in place in this country since the 1940′s regarding building material standards. It’s the government’s job to oversee and enforce these regulations. They did not do this. They are supposed to test samples of every batch of blocks produced. They did not do this. And you think it’s not the government’s fault?
The government write the laws for this country. They produced legislation which allowed a company liable for producing substandard blocks to change names which leaves them protected against any legal action. And you think it’s not the government’s fault?
@Paul Murphy: seriously? Why then did state stump up 100% redress including temporary rental accommodation for pyrite affected families? Read the comments the supplier took easy way out went out of business at 5pm 1 day opened up at 8an next day changed name.
@Paul Murphy: its the state’s responsibility to regulate industries. There are building standards and regulations to be adhered to. The state cannot allow companies to destroy people’s lives then simply shut up shop and start a new company like nothing ever happened.
There is something fundamentally wrong with how building companies are allowed set up subsidiary companies for a project build and then shut it down not long after with no responsibility to the faults that have arisen and then home bound is useless and you can’t claim the builders insurance as by that stage the subsidiary has been folded and they move on to next project
There are hundreds of houses in Co. Mayo badly affected especialy in the Ballina/Killala area, what the people affected with Pyrite in Donegal and Mayo is the same terms as those in Dublin and the east got. 100% money and the cost of rental accomadation and storage costs, they are being offered 90% but rental accomadation and storrage must be footed by the homeowner.
Blocks manufactured by Smiths quarry, Mullafarry, Killala
If I buy a faulty product from a shop, I can return it and get a full refund. Why does the same legal system protect cowboy builders from being held accountable to the house owner. Are the legislators at fault or are they protecting the builders from selling faulty products. The taxpayer should be the last people to pay up. Why are builders allowed to continue to build houses when they don’t have proper insurance in place to cover such cases. I sympathize with these people but by trying to get the legislators to sort it, the ones who created the problem, they are barking up the wrong tree. Get together and take a test case against these builders or the Govt will continue to fleece the taxpayer for their mistakes.
@Barrycelona: block manufacturers has effectively closed and reopened under a new name. builders bought materials in good faith.
council didnt bother testing the materials produced ( good old light touch regulation).
homebond wont cover it as far as I’ve heard.
@Barrycelona: the issue is that’s it’s not the builders fault, it’s the supplier of the blocks. Numerous test cases have been taken against them to no avail as the company/quarry changed names so on paper the company that supplied the blocks cannot be held liable in court as they no longer exist.
The gov are also at fault as there are regulations against what occurred, each batch of blocks should have been tested but these test were not carried out and the regulations were not enforced by the council’s and government regulatory bodies.
This issue isn’t just large developments by contractors and builders, it effects self build houses and one off properties.
@Barrycelona:
What about the blocklayer who built his own houes which is now affeected with pyrite?
@Barrycelona: you cannot take a group case in the Irish courts
@Padhraic McLaughlin: Padhraic, If there are regulations in place, surely legislators can implement those regulations because they are on the statute books. If they are not sufficient, that is the fault of the legislators and have they tried to learn from their mistakes and updated. Cowboys over the years have thought us all about their scams and we still, orthe legislators either have learnt nothing or they are too happy to take the easy way out and charge the taxpayer. Would it be possible to get a team of solicitors and go through the older legislation and update it. Just think of the money you could save by making the cowboys pay and the number of Hospitals you could build with it
Why would taxpayers money be used for this.
@Paul Dolan: if you were living in an affected home id guess you would know why. The home owners have no other fall back or compensation available. The whole situation stinks but homeowners need gov support. Precedence was set for pyrite issue that happened across the east coast.
@Paul Dolan: I would rather my taxpayers money be used to fix houses affected by this than to facilitate people sitting around all day doing nothing with their lives and being voluntary unemployed.
@Fi Wyse: I’m just enquiring why tax payers money is to be used. They all has engineers who had to give reports to the banks to satisfy mortgage release. Why not sue them. They all had insurance.
@Paul Dolan:
One of the reasons is the problem did not surface for a number of years afterwards, when inspected by the engineers after them being build they would have being perfect. Think allso that some houses that was built at the same time with blocks from the same quarry are fine.
@Fi Wyse: Very noble of you! If you won the euromillions maybe you could put them all on a floating island and push them all out to sea. The Govt are lucky to have you. Pay up first and ask the searching questions later, much later
@Paul Dolan: There are regulations against what occurred but these regulations were not enforced by the regulatory bodies. The council were supposed to carry out tests on each batch of blocks made as per regulations and this did not occur. The block manufacturers (Cassidy Bros) changed names and directors there for on paper the company that manufactured the blocks no longer exists so can’t be held liable.
That is why the Gov need to step up and be held accountable, they create the laws to allow companies like Cassidys escape responsibility and they are the body that don’t enforce their own regulations!
I really wish that I won the EuroMillions last night so that I could use the ridiculous amount of money to fix these houses it’s just so unfair that people are left in the situation.
Well the block supplier, the quarry that made & sold the defective blocks availed of the age old irish solution, go out of business & reopen next day with slightly altered name
have your say