General Developments

They've been at that for months now. I presume there are "Grenfell Tower" type issues. Understandably, they haven't said much about it.

I posted about the Radisson a while back. My friend is the contractor and he hasn't been able to hire people brave enough to undertake the work, hence the delay.

I saw this on the BBC and thought you should see it:

High rise Cardiff hotel fails cladding fire safety test - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-sout ... s-43059208

Well I think this is pretty obvious!

Schooner way nearing completion

20180217_114714 by Stephen Anstiss, on Flickr

I saw this on the BBC and thought you should see it:

High rise Cardiff hotel fails cladding fire safety test - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-sout ... s-43059208

Well I think this is pretty obvious!

Well it *is* pretty obvious I suppose, but why can't the article name and shame? It's kind of ridiculous. Imagine, heaven forbid, that there was an incident and it turned out that news organisations had pointlessly, unilaterally decided to censor this information for some inexplicable reason.

Oh sorry. Should say that I'm assuming that the finger is pointing at Radisson Blue here, right?

I saw this on the BBC and thought you should see it:

High rise Cardiff hotel fails cladding fire safety test - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-sout ... s-43059208

Well I think this is pretty obvious!

Well it *is* pretty obvious I suppose, but why can't the article name and shame? It's kind of ridiculous. Imagine, heaven forbid, that there was an incident and it turned out that news organisations had pointlessly, unilaterally decided to censor this information for some inexplicable reason.

I suppose it would be in the Hotel's interests (particularly around the 6 Nations) to prevent that information being in the public domain due to potential loss of earnings? Is it therefore possible that they have obtained some sort of court order preventing it being publicised?
Or perhaps the police don't legally need to name them because they're not a residential block of flats or apartments?

Not sure, clutching at straws here...

I suppose it would be in the Hotel's interests (particularly around the 6 Nations) to prevent that information being in the public domain due to potential loss of earnings? Is it therefore possible that they have obtained some sort of court order preventing it being publicised?
Or perhaps the police don't legally need to name them because they're not a residential block of flats or apartments?

Not sure, clutching at straws here...

Regardless of the commercial implications, there is clearly a serious moral issue here. To me it seems unconscionable that the public would not be made aware of a safety problem with a hotel where they may decide to stay. Have we really come to the point as a society where the potential lost earnings outweigh the potential hazard to paying guests?

The added risk to any single short term occupant is probably less significant than earthquake threat . If you lived there long term granted it would be a bigger concern.

I have to agree that a court order would seem bizarre. I can't imagine a restaurant that had a food poisoning scandal would be able to hush it up? Or maybe I'm just naive.