Can a barrister be wrong/say something that is not true/correct?

Hannaho

We are suing our engineer at th emoment in HC. We are claiming for remedial costs of 75k plus devaluaiton of our house to tune of 100k. So, we are confused! We thought that you get both the remediation works costs - all certified as necessary by a Chartered Engineer and costed by QS, and that we would also get the amont that our house has been devaled by, but we had a Barrister say that we would only get either our remediation costs, or the devaluation of our house, whichever was the greater. This seems quite mad, as we are supposed to be put back in the position we should have been had none of htis happened, i.e. having 75k in savings, rather than having had to spend it on remedial works, and also having our house valued at the correct amount, rather than 100k less, as remedial words did not cover the fact that the original engineer made mistakes with building regulations and certificaiton, which wouldn't really be corrected without redoing the whole house.

Has anyone hear heard of the above, i.e. that you can either have the cost of the remedial works on your house, or the devaluation, whichever is the greater, but not boht?? I had another quetion re the barrister's advice but can't remember it at the minute1

Samuel T. Cogley

Surely the remedial costs prevent the devaluation, no?

Hannaho

No, unfortunately the remedial works don't prevent the devaluation, as we could only remediate where the opening up works revealed problems, there are so many areas we just couldn't open up - but in any case, we have incomplete certificaiton for the property as the original engineer should have put it through BCAR but didn't through his mistake on planning, so unless we tear the house apart again, our house will never meet the requirements of BCAR, and all our everyone in the locality knows what happened to the house - it's really mostly local people who buy in our area.

Dandelion6

Barristers are just people you know, they can make mistakes like everyone else.

You can always ask for a second opinion.

Victor

Hannaho wrote: »

the original engineer should have put it through BCAR but didn't through his mistake on planning, so unless we tear the house apart again, our house will never meet the requirements of BCAR

Isn't this your choice?

4ensic15

Hannaho wrote: »

our house will never meet the requirements of BCAR, and all our everyone in the locality knows what happened to the house - it's really mostly local people who buy in our area.

Doesn't that just lead to a diminution in market value?

Hannaho

Thanks to both of you for the replies. Viktor, it wasn't our choice to not go through BCAR, basically the engineer made a mistake on the planning - he told us we could build slightly beyond a previous exempted development, and we woudl be within the 40sq metre rule, but you can't built slightly - I mean a foot - beyond exmpeted development. The house already had a 40sq meter extension to the side, so no other 40 square metere deelopment was allowed, unless it was within previous expemted development. Our house had clearly been extended 40sq metres to the side with planning by previous owner 20 years ago, but the guy said a planning search never revealed this. Yet, I went into our Council archives and immediately found it - baiscally he didn't do planning search. He led us to believe also that he was a chartered engineer and wasn't - he was only an associate. An associate engineer cannot work with anything more than 40sq metres - so it was deception and negligence from beginning to end, which wasn't our choice/fault - we paid him what would be considered in hindsight, as slightly more than the going rate - 12k to ensure everything compied with building reuglations, but nothing did. Engineers are not a protected title in Ireland, so I would urge people to be extremely careful in their choice of engineer.