Accountability of developers in Ireland

taxdither

Hi,
I have paid advance for a house in one of the major development by a well known developer (not putting the names as I am not sure if allowed) in the last October based on a show house. All along it was nice and sweet words that the houses will be exactly as per the houses - not even colour of the will be changed even at our own cost. We expected the house will very close to the show house.
When we inspected it for snagging, inside the building was as per the show house but there was a steep slope in the garden with the formation of valley and water pond in the middle of the garden, and two randomly placed big manholes. There was no mention of these issues either at the time of the booking the house or in the contract document.

The developers agent quite curtly said over the phone that they will not do anything and I am free to take my money back. They wont even give the safety file of the property which would give details of how they addressed the above two issues. They neither responded formally to my snag report.

I am dealing it through my solicitor. If I don't get a positive response, I don't want leave it there but pursue it on my own. As a customer paying 300k, I would like to know what rights do I have and where to start - citizens information, consumer court, county council.
Appreciate any guidance.

athtrasna

If your solicitor can't sort it, what makes you think you can do it on your own? Your solicitor's job is to protect your best interests within the law.

Have you gone through the contract? I'd be very surprised if the developer hasn't covered themselves.

And finally, legal advice is not permitted on boards so posters are reminded not to cross that line. Thanks

taxdither

I am told by a frd that the solicitors standard remit is mainly contract signing, transfer of money and registry works. Enforcement of contract will be outside their standard fee remit. That's the reason I am exploring it in parallel. I am only asking do I have to succumb to the developer's bullying or do I have any rights. If so where to start.

wirelessdude01

Well I would imagine manhole covers have a purpose and possibly the garden just isn't finished yet? What does the contract state re finish on garden?

C3PO

What sort of "rights" are you looking for? You have already been told that you can have your money back if you don't want to complete the purchase. You can be fairly sure that the manholes are not "randomly placed" but serve a specific purpose around drainage. It is not realistic to expect each plot to be exactly the same as the show house.

Samuel T. Cogley

This is exactly where a 'cheap' sometimes recommended by the developer solicitor will come back to bite you and a slightly more expensive good, we'll recommend solicitor will pay dividends. It may be beyond the fee even in the latter case but no one works for free. Have your solicitor sort this as it should have all been in the contract. If contracts aren't signed then there is very little you can do.

Also sorry to sound harsh but forget this 'I'm paying a lot of money' lark. It Belongs in consumer land where there are reams of consumer protection. This is reality and needs a good solicitor to navigate. You've seen the prevailing attitude of agents and developers.

Lumen

I would not consider manholes in my garden acceptable unless they solely serviced my own property and I knew exactly what they were for.

I don't think that's unreasonable.

The developer should be able to tell you what they're for. If they're temporary then get agreement to remove them. If they'er permanent then WTF.

ThisRegard

We had a set of manholes in our first house we bought, never knew anything about them until it came close to moving in. They were quickly forgotten about as we kept big plant pots on top of them, and when the kids came along, rubber matting for the play area.

They did slightly limit what we wanted to do with the garden at times, but there wasn't a whole lot we could do about it really other than cover.

Marcusm

Lumen wrote: »

I would not consider manholes in my garden acceptable unless they solely serviced my own property and I knew exactly what they were for.

I don't think that's unreasonable.

The developer should be able to tell you what they're for. If they're temporary then get agreement to remove them. If they'er permanent then WTF.

You do realise that adjacent houses will share sewers, i.e. there is not a single pipe from each house back to the mains connection. At some point on an "estate" there will have to be access to permit remediation works in the event of blockages etc. If that's not the house you want, you'd need to choose one of the two there.

Gumbo

Lumen wrote: »

I would not consider manholes in my garden acceptable unless they solely serviced my own property and I knew exactly what they were for.

I don't think that's unreasonable.

The developer should be able to tell you what they're for. If they're temporary then get agreement to remove them. If they'er permanent then WTF.

No new houses have their own manholes unless you build a one off.
The drainage system in this scheme is a private system and will hit an outfall manhole in one of the gardens and then out to the public system.

It can have its pros though, if there's a blockage the op can easily access them for rodding etc

The manholes will not be displayed on any sales books etc, they would have been on the engineers drainage plans and is often overlooked by buyers.

If you don't want the manholes, then you would have to hand back the house and get your deposit back.

Samuel T. Cogley

Marcusm wrote: »

Lumen wrote: »

I would not consider manholes in my garden acceptable unless they solely serviced my own property and I knew exactly what they were for.

I don't think that's unreasonable.

The developer should be able to tell you what they're for. If they're temporary then get agreement to remove them. If they'er permanent then WTF.

You do realise that adjacent houses will share sewers, i.e. there is not a single pipe from each house back to the mains connection.  At some point on an "estate" there will have to be access to permit remediation works in the event of blockages etc.  If that's not the house you want, you'd need to choose one of the two there.

To be fair I think that's exactly what he was saying. He wouldn't want them if they're shared - my house has it's own sewer access etc. (and a very odd arrangement of the boundary wall) because every time there was a blockage it was my vendors job to sort it out and try and get payment from the rest of the row. Now I assume private estate there would be a management co. but still. Is there a reason they can't be on the road? Genuine question - I've a feeling there will be!

More practically, they don't give me that much bother.

Lumen

Marcusm wrote: »

You do realise that adjacent houses will share sewers, i.e. there is not a single pipe from each house back to the mains connection. At some point on an "estate" there will have to be access to permit remediation works in the event of blockages etc.

kceire wrote: »

The drainage system in this scheme is a private system and will hit an outfall manhole in one of the gardens and then out to the public system.

Does that access have to be in one of the back gardens? Why don't they use a public area?

There are obvious problems with having service access to common infrastructure in someone's back garden. What if the property is locked up and they're away on holidays when access is required? It imposes an unreasonable burden IMO.

Mellor

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Is there a reason they can't be on the road? Genuine question - I've a feeling there will be!

The manholes would be useless in the road, and the sewer that they are servicing runs under the OPs garden.


OP, what was shown on the draining plan when you were purchasing? This would also have shown the levels of the garden. Planning drawings may have shown it also.
If it's not there and turns out to be an change after contracts were signed. What is your preferred resolution?
(FYI if there are there you have no legs to stand on. The shouse plan is a typical and means nothing on a site by site basis).

C3PO

Lumen wrote: »

Does that access have to be in one of the back gardens? Why don't they use a public area?

Probably doesn't "have" to be but in my experience this is very often the way new estates are laid out!

seagull

What does it say in your contract about the garden? All ours had was that it would be levelled and seeded. If your contract has that, and it has a major valley running down the middle, you have a comeback, and can ask them to level it.

Mellor

seagull wrote: »

What does it say in your contract about the garden? All ours had was that it would be levelled and seeded. If your contract has that, and it has a major valley running down the middle, you have a comeback, and can ask them to level it.

I'd imagine not if it was on the plans.

antoinolachtnai

What do you want the builder to do for you? He can't move the sewers now. Have you inspected the sewers? Have you any reason to think that there is ever going to be a problem? Most sewer covers in the world never get lifted in 30 years (and the ones that get lifted tend to be on flat ground, not sloped ground).

If you don't know about drains and sewers yourself, and you are concerned about this, you are going to have to get an engineer to look at this for you.

If he moved in some earth would that solve the problem? Could he get access with earthmoving equipment to do this?

At the end of the day, the property market is rising, there is very little supply and the developer is in a strong position. The developer is not making a whole lot of money on a 300k house. He would be as happy if you walked away and he can get someone else to buy it.

If you can put a proposal to him in conjunction with your engineer, he might be able to resolve the issues.

The solicitor is really the last resort. We don't know all the specifics of your contract, but it is unlikely the solicitor can do much for you to resolve the issue unless you have ten grand handy to go to the High Court with, and you would have to first get advice from counsel and consider the likelihood of winning (there are technical legal reasons why you might not win, or you might not win much of a concession).

From a legal point of view, if you had strict and specific requirements in relation to things like this, you should have supervised the build to a greater extent, or appointed a professional to do it. It is too late to complain after concrete is poured and everything is nearly finished. As it is, the builder might even be able to compel you to take the house as long as it substantially complies with the contract.

Samuel T. Cogley

I think some posters are being very critical of the OP. This is a very simple one, what's in the contract - and it's entirely in the remit of the solicitor to ensure that's complied with before funds are released. If it requires enforcement, it can go to court, which would be the last resort but in a rising market an order for specific performance may very well be cheaper than finding somewhere else and the counter to the like it or lump it attitude of the agent.

antoinolachtnai

That is another way to look at it, and it is worth considering but an order for specific performance is just as likely to end up going the other way. A building contract is a strange thing and you'd want to have your wits about you.

For starters, the OP may not even get to court but could end up in arbitration. The next thing is that even if the judge agrees there is something wrong, the judge is limited in what he can do to compensate you by the law on restitution, which is complicated to understand.

It is certainly worth looking at the contract, but I'd be surprised if what has been built does not substantially comply, or comply well enough to make it difficult for action to be taken against him. It is not the developer's first rodeo.

The best way to force the builder to change something is if it isn't compliant with some statutory provision, i..e, doesn't comply with the planning or building regs, or there is a health and safety issue. But if there is something simple the builder can do to settle you down, they will probably do it with a bit of cajoling.

Samuel T. Cogley

All of this will be advised upon by the solicitor - we have no idea how reasonable or unreasonable the OP is being. However none of it really matters - what's in the contract - the solicitor will advise if it's worth pursuing; they're certainly not the last resort.

antoinolachtnai

It is a very important point in the OP's life and the developer should do more to recognise and honour that, I agree, and it is is a great pity this situation arose. It is certainly a very difficult situation. The OP needs to get the best advice they can so they can hopefully move into their new home and be very happy there.

taxdither

Thank you all for the positive and critical responses - both equally valid and convincing. Let me respond to all the responses.
1) Solicitor is from a reputed organisation and assured me in perusing the case. I don't know how far this will go.
2) The contract document advices me to consult the council at only one place - drainage layout. The drainage layout submitted to the council doesn't show any manholes in my back garden.
3) The contract document does not mention anything about the garden finishes apart from generic word "specifications", which are not included in the contract. When queried I am told specifications of show house and brochure which shows/calls ceded garden.
4) Engineering drawings were not made available at the booking time, nor at the contract signing. They are not even willing to give me the safety file (including drainage drawings to know the upstream and down stream connections, pipe and manhole sizes).
5) The garden is small enough and randomly placed manholes will further restrict the space utilisation. Of course its maintenance will need way leave thus further restricting the land use. If it is to be maintained by the management company or the council how will they gain access to it through my free hold land?
6) I would have tolerated one issue but not both sloping garden and manholes. It was a shocker for me after paying premium over the other houses available at the time.
7) I tried to discuss with the developer to work out a mutually agreeable arrangement but they were curt and said they will not do anything.
8) I know it is the developers market and they can easily say I can withdraw (essentially bullying). Would they have allowed me if I wanted to withdraw for whatever reason if it was a buyers market. Doesn't it mean the contract has no sanctity and its one sided.

taxdither

Would arbitration involve legal charges or I can pursue on my own?
Regulations very generic and would not go the extent of sloping garden or not having manholes etc...My strong point is it is not as per the brochure/show house or the contract that I have signed.

antoinolachtnai

You really are doing the right thing in discussing this with the solicitor. You have to get him to explain the bottom line to you on this.

I think your solicitor might agree with you that the contract is quite one-sided! But ask him.

antoinolachtnai

taxdither wrote: »

Would arbitration involve legal charges or I can pursue on my own?
Regulations very generic and would not go the extent of sloping garden or not having manholes etc...My strong point is it is not as per the brochure/show house or the contract that I have signed.

This would arise if it is provided for in your contract. You would need to pay the arbitrator's fee for starters. This would be thousands of euros. Realistically you would also need to be represented by solicitor and counsel, because the builder would be. You would also need an expert witness.

If you are planning to rely on the brochure or the show house you are going to be in a weak position. If the contract has a lot of specifics about your specific site and your specific house, that might be ok, but there probably aren't a lot of specifics and that is going to be the problem. Losing might have serious consequences too, beyond your costs.

I know this is a tough thing for you. All your hopes and dreams are wrapped up in this. But for the builder and the other people involved, it's a business deal. Unfortunately you have to look at it that way too. It's not nice, but that's the way it is. You should get some professional engineering advice and find out if there is any way to assuage your concerns. It just might not be as bad as you think.

I would suggest you get this advice before you go too much further with the solicitor or with the developer.

Samuel T. Cogley

OP you are massively over thinking this. If it's not in the contract then you can't do anything about it. If it is in the contract then you need to engage with your solicitor for advice. Contract advice is part of the conveyancing solicitors fee as long as it doesn't start getting silly.

What is the issue with speaking to your solicitor re your concerns? Have they suggested there will be an hourly fee?

godtabh

From experience its next to impossible now a days to get back yard services ok'd as an developer. If you do you have right of ways/leave ways and probably knock €50k off the asking price.

antoinolachtnai

godtabh wrote: »

From experience its next to impossible now a days to get back yard services ok'd as an developer. If you do you have right of ways/leave ways and probably knock €50k off the asking price.

OK'd by City/Irish Water?

Just noticed https://www.water.ie/connections/Code-of-Practice-for-Wastewater-Supply.pdf - page 40, might be of help.

I do think that the way to approach this is through having some sort of engineer.

Mellor

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

OK'd by City/Irish Water?

Just noticed https://www.water.ie/connections/Code-of-Practice-for-Wastewater-Supply.pdf - page 40, might be of help.

I do think that the way to approach this is through having some sort of engineer.

I imagine he meant ok'd by council.

Irish Water requirements apply to public sewers. The OP is likely dealing with a private sewer.

taxdither wrote: »

2) The contract document advices me to consult the council at only one place - drainage layout. The drainage layout submitted to the council doesn't show any manholes in my back garden.
3) The contract document does not mention anything about the garden finishes apart from generic word "specifications", which are not included in the contract. When queried I am told specifications of show house and brochure which shows/calls ceded garden.

There would probably be a landscape plan showing levels and finishes. The site plan might show levels also.

The planning stage drainage drawing with the council might not show every manhole. But it should show sewer runs. If the completed works is non-compliant with planning, that is probably your best angle.

If you want I can take a look at the PP drawings and conditions. PM if you'd like. Or not, completely your discretion.

Lumen

If you pull out they're going to have to sell it to someone else who will be able to see the manhole covers and slope for themselves, so they can't make this problem go away.

If you buy it without a fight this will annoy you forever.

beauf

Manholes in the garden is pot luck. Unless you've a very reasonable developer. Which is highly unlikely.

It's amazing how in Ireland when buying for most people the most expensive thing in your life, there's no consumer protection. No bond to force the builder to fix problems in a house. Buy the house or walk away seems like the only options.

Madness.

Samuel T. Cogley

beauf wrote: »

Manholes in the garden is pot luck. Unless you've a very reasonable developer. Which is highly unlikely.

It's amazing how in Ireland when buying for most people the most expensive thing in your life, there's no consumer protection. No bond to force the builder to fix problems in a house. Buy the house or walk away seems like the only options.

Madness.

While the bond is a good idea - but may deter house building etc. so won't go anywhere while supply is like this, consumer protections isn't needed as parties are both armed with solicitors. I know I've said it already, but this is why you should not skimp on the solicitor when purchasing a hose, especially from a developer. What shouldn't be allowed is developers recommending their house cat pet solicitors to purchasers - hardly independent advice.

chickendinner

beauf wrote: »

Manholes in the garden is pot luck. Unless you've a very reasonable developer. Which is highly unlikely.

It's amazing how in Ireland when buying for most people the most expensive thing in your life, there's no consumer protection. No bond to force the builder to fix problems in a house. Buy the house or walk away seems like the only options.

Madness.

Whats amazing is when people get a house built, they 90% of the time go
for the cheapest builder, never do they consider why said builder is cheapest.
People do not buy the cheapest phone and then wonder why it is a piece of ****

beauf

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

...consumer protections isn't needed as parties are both armed with solicitors...

The cost of that route makes it uneconomical for most. Builders and Developers know this, which is why they act as they do.

You're point about pet solicitors is a good one. When I was buying my house the solicitor seemed to have the builders interests at heart, and we actually switched solicitors because of this. Which made a night and day difference.

beauf

chickendinner wrote: »

Whats amazing is when people get a house built, they 90% of the time go
for the cheapest builder, never do they consider why said builder is cheapest.
People do not buy the cheapest phone and then wonder why it is a piece of ****

Consider then the Samsung Note 7 recall ....

Even the cheapest builder should be held to certain standards. But inspections and reporting and enforcement is really non existent in this country.

Manholes and gardens are interesting. When we were buying the OT stressed about getting a garden without them. Wouldn't have bothered me as long as they were to the edge of the garden.

chickendinner

beauf wrote: »

Consider then the Samsung Note 7 recall ....

Even the cheapest builder should be held to certain standards. But inspections and reporting and enforcement is really non existent in this country.

Great example, Samsung are refunding customer etc, Now if you bought a samtung, goodluck getting a refund

Even the cheapest builder............... I have no words, Do your research when spending 200k, When I buy anything over 100euro, I spend quite a while researching said product. The cheapest "builder" is probably not a builder at all, more likely one of those brokeback fellas, leaving you in a similar position

beauf

They are obliged to refund because a 800 phone has consumer protection but a 800,000 house doesn't. Also the phone was tested and checked many more times than the house will ever be.

chickendinner

beauf wrote: »

They are obliged to refund because a 800 phone has consumer protection but a 800,000 house doesn't. Also the phone was tested and checked many more times than the house will ever be.

You are the one who brought up samsung broke phone to counter my point about buying a reputable phone instead of a cheap one, now you are doing a flip saying they are getting a refund because of reputation of said phone:pac:

Listen if you are getting an 800k house, you get the following

An architect, A solicitor, A quantity surveyor, An Engineer, An Assigner Surveyor, These are representing you, and then A Builder

• You get your builder to get a bond, ie if builder goes bust, payment received (do reseach to avoid this)
• You get a contract, which your solicitor should go over
• An Assigned certifier which will ensure your building is confirming with new strict building regulations.
• Then you get Homebond or CRL type of warranty on your property also.

Your house is built in stages and paid in stages too as per QS, Architect and Assigned Certifier Instruction, ( Sometimes is Architect also)
Final Payment is a year after house is complete to ensure any snags are adhered to.

Now as a consumer doing your research and hiring a reputable builder is the most sensible thing to do, as they are responsible for ultimately building your house, I can assure you if you hire a cheap shoddy builder, that price saving a person made will not make up for the years of mental potential legal turmoil to follow over the next ten years.

jamesthepeach

My parents had a manhole cover in their garden.
My mum spent about 15 years squiring a fantastic well kept garden with all sorts of expensive plants. There was a problem in the manhole, jcbs and all sorts of heavy equipment came in. The whole garden was ripped up and became a garden sized hole.
When they were finished they raked the soil and planted grass seed and left.
Garden gone. My mum tried to get something done about it but it seems you can't and that was that.

athtrasna

The issue here appears to be what the OP was TOLD they were getting, not being what the OP got. If it's not in the contract there's not a lot that can be done. Everything needs to be in writing.

jimmycrackcorm

I've two manholes in my garden. At the time of buying our solicitor advised us to check. However it was in the days when people queued to get houses and I wasn't going to take a chance on not getting a house and on top of that pay extra thousands if I found an alternative.

I simply planted grass on top of the manholes to make the garden consistent.In almost 20 years they haven't been a problem. Perhaps someday access might be required and of so they will have to have grass laid again after. I'm not sure if access is needed who knows about then and I'm not sure about the ownership of them.

My parents also had a manhole on their front garden, that part was converted to a tarmac drive and good luck to anyone trying to find and open that.

The slope in the middle of the garden is unacceptable though, but as mentioned it is down to the conditions in the contract.

Samuel T. Cogley

Thanks Jimmy! I need to cut some turf out to make beds - I know where some of it is going now! :pac:

beauf

chickendinner wrote: »

You are the one who brought up samsung broke phone to counter my point about buying a reputable phone instead of a cheap one, now you are doing a flip saying they are getting a refund because of reputation of said phone:pac:...

You said expensive = quality.

My point is you should have consumer protections regardless of price.

Germany

...The warranty period for goods that have been used for a building structure in accordance with their usual manner of use and that cause a defect to occur in such building structure is five years. This applies not only to new building structures but to renovation work and remodelling work on already erected building structures. The goods in such cases must be firmly fixed to the building structure....

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/mar/11/why-are-britains-new-homes-built-so-badly

Then you have the whole idea of retaining % of the purchase price which is only released to the build after a period of time, 6 months, or 5yrs if theres been no problems.

Not that this is any relevance to the OP, you'd need to have things like the garden and manholes in the agreed contract. Most people don't think if it. That information isn't always available when you have to make a purchase decision.

athtrasna

Can we get back to the OP's issues please, this thread has gone wildly off topic, a phone has nothing to do with their manhole covers or sloped garden

beauf

How do you confuse a builder. Put three shovels in a corner and tell him to take his pick.

I think the OP has to see if the issues with the manholes can be disguised, and the garden corrected. If all else is ok with the house.

TBH they put so much clay in backfilling the garden it would be worth re filling it yourself and Putting in drainage, especially if their will be issues with drainage and run off to other gardens or pooling in your own. This also happens if you put in a patio.

chickendinner

op issue is pretty simple.

The developers are happy to for you to reject house as likely will get better offer in todays market, so put up or shut up.

Sad but this is what happens when people are desperate

beauf

taxdither wrote: »

...They neither responded formally to my snag report.....

I expect many people will find getting anything on their snag list done these days an uphill battle. Its a sellers marker.

If I was buying now, I wouldn't compromise. Because if a builder isn't that interested in the minor details (part of the iceberg above the water) what confidence do you have that other stuff you can't see is done right. You could end up with years of DIY and remedial work that you are fixing for years.

If its just the garden and you are sure of that, then that is relatively minor issue in itself.

Mellor

beauf wrote: »

Then you have the whole idea of retaining % of the purchase price which is only released to the build after a period of time, 6 months, or 5yrs if theres been no problems.

That's a completely standard condition everywhere, including Ireland.
Defects liability period. Standard is 12 months. After which the retention money is released. The staged release is factored into the contract price.

But it's a condition in the construction contract. Between the developer (owner) and the contractor. Same as if you employed a builder to build a house.

A house purchase contract is (usually) between a buyer and the developer. It doesn't involve the builder. You pay them up front, then hope they'll hammer the builder on your behalf - they are earning interest on the retention so it's in their interest to have these issues to waive at the builder.
But when the developer is also the builder, it's a different situation. In that case the purchase contract better be perfect.

Not that this is any relevance to the OP, you'd need to have things like the garden and manholes in the agreed contract. Most people don't think if it. That information isn't always available when you have to make a purchase decision.

At the very least, planning documents were availible. I always advice anyone buying off the plans to be very familiar with planning permission and related conditions.

taxdither

athtrasna wrote: »

The issue here appears to be what the OP was TOLD they were getting, not being what the OP got. If it's not in the contract there's not a lot that can be done. Everything needs to be in writing.

Guys, thanks for all the responses. sorry for not responding to each of them.
Athtrasna, My issue is on getting something that negatively affects the use of the property which is not WRITTEN in the contract.

In nutshell can I conclude that the contracts are written to safeguard the developer and the buyer will not have resources to fight the small issues.

Mellor

taxdither wrote: »

Athtrasna, My issue is on getting something that negatively affects the use of the property which is not WRITTEN in the contract.

Not being expressly written in the contract doesn't mean it's not in the contract. Generally laypeople can't read full construction drawings, so they get shown pretty drawings in colour that show a rough plan.
There would have been a planning permission that included some details of drainage. The contract would probably refer to the planning somewhere, but they aren't going to go out of their way to get you to review it either.

If there sewers aren't in accordance with the plans, you could have grounds for enforcement. For example, if the council were to taking the drainage in charge, they might not accept a situation where you could deny access.

At this point its a huge job to move the sewer, that's not going to happen unless its substantially non-compliant. But I'd be trying to get them to improve the situation as much as possible. For example, accept the manhole on the condition that they finish it with a concealed cover.



Not totally invisable, but considerably better than the alternative.