Builder almost brought the house down..literally

[Cogcog]

mikeiow said:

I think getting it safe and talking to a solicitor to avoid it costing any money makes more useful sense than 'naming & shaming'.
Crack on, OP, I think you have taken the right approach through this nightmare!

She spoke with a specialist solicitoir last week who says let them carry out the remedial work under the direction of the engineer. Continue to emphasise that the 'fix' will not end the matter. Once the final engineers report is done go back to the solicitor.

[Cogcog]

joshcowin said:

Don't see how this will help you resolve the issue in the slightest tbh, focus on that as its enough on its own!!

It's just another thing we may use to get them to redress the damage and delays it has caused. Legal action and his reputation are the big levers along with HSE and HMRC. At the mpoment w eare making sure the 'fix' is done well.

[Robertj21a]

Cogcog said:

It's just another thing we may use to get them to redress the damage and delays it has caused. Legal action and his reputation are the big levers along with HSE and HMRC. At the mpoment w eare making sure the 'fix' is done well.

Quite right too.

Remember to take photos as they 'correct' it - in case there are further disputes over *how* it was done.

[Cogcog]

Update:

Following legal advice the builders have been asked to only stablise the building and repair consequential damage (the floorboards) then to get off the site.

The plaster is off one wall and it looks like the damage is only to the joints and not the stonework. Good news if this is the case on the 1st floor. Engineer is coming as soon as the 2nd wall has the plaster taken off, hopefully with a surveyor to give an early opinion on the implications for resale value.

I honestly think the builder thought they could patch this up and still get paid as the foreman has been pointing out that if he took the plaster off any cracks (some old settlement cracks had widened) that turned out not to be down to their proppping, they would be charging for it.

Found out some really interesting stuff about the builder and the staff which it is best I not share at this point!

[SAB888]

This thread proves that:

" Not wanting to take risks with the key work they employed a large and reputable (and expensive) local builder to do the key work,"

Well it doesn't really count for much. Been following this thread, and you've had awful luck with this builder. Hope that too much damage hasn't been done.

[dmsims]

Have you considered the risk that if they are a Ltd company they might simply disappear?

[Cogcog]

dmsims said:

Have you considered the risk that if they are a Ltd company they might simply disappear?

They have been about for 40+ years, family business with about £400k in the bank but we have asked for their insurers details.

Having seen the damage under the plaster in the first room and the second being knocked off tomorrow, they are feeling a bit more positive that this can be resolved.

[Gary C]

Good luck.

[BlackLabel]

dmsims said:

Have you considered the risk that if they are a Ltd company they might simply disappear?

If a Ltd company building firm just liquidated to avoid dealing with a fallout of a bodged job could you still claim off the insurance that they had in place at the time?

[Muncher]

BlackLabel said:

dmsims said:

Have you considered the risk that if they are a Ltd company they might simply disappear?

If a Ltd company building firm just liquidated to avoid dealing with a fallout of a bodged job could you still claim off the insurance that they had in place at the time?

Very few builders have insurance against defective workmanship.

[mfmman]

Muncher said:

BlackLabel said:

dmsims said:

Have you considered the risk that if they are a Ltd company they might simply disappear?

If a Ltd company building firm just liquidated to avoid dealing with a fallout of a bodged job could you still claim off the insurance that they had in place at the time?

Very few builders have insurance against defective workmanship.

Wouldn't this scenario be covered by Professional Indemnity insurance, I would be looking for any builder I hired to have adequate cover for that

[big ant]

Assuming a UK Ltd Co, wouldnt the cloak of protection drop duże to their unprofessionalism and the Directors become liable, not the Ltd Co ?

[Muncher]

big ant said:

Assuming a UK Ltd Co, wouldnt the cloak of protection drop du?e to their unprofessionalism and the Directors become liable, not the Ltd Co ?

Absolutely not.

[dmsims]

The "law" around this kind of scenario can prove amazingly slippery hence raising it as a risk

[silentbrown]

dmsims said:

The "law" around this kind of scenario can prove amazingly slippery hence raising it as a risk

Indeed. I'll lob this in here as it's possibly relevant further down the line: After a long and protracted dispute with a developer we ended up accepting a compromise settlement, in part because we hadn't followed appropriate dispute resolution protocols. Your solicitor is hopefully on the ball with this, anyway.

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/...

[Cogcog]

Update;

Last of the plaster removed, including the walls they didnt want to take the plaster off a sthe cracks were 'old cracks'. Luckily task No 1 when they moved in was to photograph the whole house so they can show which cracks are new. The worst crack (has cracked the brickwork) is actually in a wall they were denying was their problem. Ceremoniously chucked off site.

Engineer due Friday and then they expect to helibar the cracks.

Still have to sort the twisted door.

[elanfan]

What a nightmare for your daughter and her family. How are they bearing up? Moving/house purchase are stressful enough with it all this. Once all physically sorted out I hope her solicitor will go in with a claim for all her costs, engineers costs, and a bloody big claim for the stress, diminution of value etc etc and push for a quick out of court settlement to avoid all the bad publicity etc. The last thing she will need is the hassle and worry of a long drawn out claim.

[surveyor]

I was thinking about the diminution. I don't think it is all bad news.

In my valuation days if I came across stitching / cracks I would be asking for a Structural Engineers Report. If that had come back as historic:fixed I probably would not have down valued for that reason. If it was not a clear report then obviously that is a different story...

I suppose it may put off some buyers, but I think it's the sort of thing where people will either.walk away, or carry on regardless

[hyphen]

surveyor said:

.

In my valuation days if I came across stitching / cracks I would be asking for a Structural Engineers Report.

Am I right in saying that, if the house was rendered after repair, a surveyor wouldn't be able to guess stitching/cracks and that the most that would be put in the report would be "Historical movement observed"?

[Vaud]

hyphen said:

surveyor said:

.

In my valuation days if I came across stitching / cracks I would be asking for a Structural Engineers Report.

Am I right in saying that, if the house was rendered after repair, a surveyor wouldn't be able to guess stitching/cracks and that the most that would be put in the report would be "Historical movement observed"?

But under the new rules, the seller would have to declare as a material fact?

There was a thread on this a few weeks ago about this in relation to a probate sale - but I think it has been deleted.