Poor Workmanship

agoc2809

Hi,

We completed a renovation just over a year ago. We have noticed a number of issues such as bad plastering, poor outside rendering, drainage issues, roof issues etc. With covid the builder was unable to visit the property and when we raised these issues over the phone he dismissed them as us being too picky. When restrictions have lifted the builder has said he will visit the property. However Im concerned that he won't take our greivances seriously. Therefore I would like to have an independent party inspect the property and provide a report.

Can you please let me know what the best options here are? Do I require a structural survery or would a snag list be sufficient?

Thanks

Hoof Hearted2

agoc2809 wrote: »

Hi,

We completed a renovation just over a year ago. We have noticed a number of issues such as bad plastering, poor outside rendering, drainage issues, roof issues etc. With covid the builder was unable to visit the property and when we raised these issues over the phone he dismissed them as us being too picky. When restrictions have lifted the builder has said he will visit the property. However Im concerned that he won't take our greivances seriously. Therefore I would like to have an independent party inspect the property and provide a report.

Can you please let me know what the best options here are? Do I require a structural survery or would a snag list be sufficient?

Thanks

Have you paid him in full already? if so then there is very little you can do if he is unwilling to remedy any issue you may have.

Gumbo

Did you have an independent professional over seeing the work at the time?
Architect, engineer or surveyor?

agoc2809

Hi, he has been paid in full and we didn't have an independent professional over seeing the work.

Hoof Hearted2

agoc2809 wrote: »

Hi, he has been paid in full and we didn't have an independent professional over seeing the work.

In that case, I'd be extra nice to him in order to get him to tidy up any work that needs doing.

Gumbo

agoc2809 wrote: »

Hi, he has been paid in full and we didn't have an independent professional over seeing the work.

Unfortunately then you as the owner became responsible for oversight, sign off and payment. Once you paid him, you declared you were happy.

Be nice to him. Ask him to call around and look and just see if you can come to an agreement on the issues.

agoc2809

We have been more than nice with him, however Im concerned that he will refuse to remedy all of the defects and I would therefore like to get an independent report together.

Gumbo

agoc2809 wrote: »

We have been more than nice with him, however Im concerned that he will refuse to remedy all of the defects and I would therefore like to get an independent report together.

Engage a Building Surveyor to prepare a list of defects. Then engage a contractor to price fixing them.

agoc2809

ok so I require a building surveyor rather than a snag list.

Larbre34

agoc2809 wrote: »

We have been more than nice with him, however Im concerned that he will refuse to remedy all of the defects and I would therefore like to get an independent report together.

You can do so at your own expense of course. But as your contractual relationship with the builder is finished, a report is of no consequence to him at this stage and doesn't compel him to do anything.

If he values his reputation and customer satisfaction for onward recommendations locally, then he may look favourably on remedying the problems, but thats only a maybe.

Hoof Hearted2

agoc2809 wrote: »

We have been more than nice with him, however Im concerned that he will refuse to remedy all of the defects and I would therefore like to get an independent report together.

Unfortunately in your case, that is his prerogative, the time to address any snagging list is before you had over the final payment, not after.
Your best hope now is to be extra nice to him (you don't have to mean it BTW), and hope you can appeal to his better nature.

TheBoyConor

He will refuse to do any remedial work. There is no question of that. Why would he when he is paid up in full?

You slipped up bad by paying in full for a job you weren't happy with.

Gumbo

agoc2809 wrote: »

ok so I require a building surveyor rather than a snag list.

You can’t carry out a snag list now. The time for that was at practical completion and before final funds paid.

Unfortunately we have been polite by saying be nice to the builder, but to paint it in plain English, it’s your fault the faults are there as you should have engaged a professional to over see the works.

Now I don’t mean to be a d1ck here, I just wanted to get the point across is clear and concise language.

TheBoyConor

I agree.

You're trying to close the stable door after the horse has bolted. Definitely.

I'd be inclined to suck it up and save yourself the hassle of chasing after a builder who hasn't a notion of coming back to you.

You'd be better at this stage to and engineer in to inspect it, draw up a schedule of necessary remedial works, and appoint another contractor to do it. Even appointing a contractor to come in and fix odds and ends and snags and the like will be very difficult. It is not a job many will be interested in as there will be loads of hassle and they have enough straighforward jobs on their books.

agoc2809

The renovation wasn't anything complicated, a standard kitchen extension and rear extention. We had seen previous work the builder had carried out and were happy to proceed. However in our case he underpriced the job and cut corners.

Hoof Hearted2

OP Don't mind these d1cks, they are just been arseholes for the sake of it.

It's nobody's fault, it's just one of those things that you learn from.

Lesson learnt been, in future if you decide not to engage an architect, engineer or surveyor, then you assume all responsibility and have to make sure the job is completed to your satisfaction before parting with final payment.

Gumbo

agoc2809 wrote: »

The renovation wasn't anything complicated, a standard kitchen extension and rear extention. We had seen previous work the builder had carried out and were happy to proceed. However in our case he underpriced the job and cut corners.

You mention extension.
So planning issues? Certs of compliance with building regulations and planning regulations??!?

TheBoyConor

Well it is someone's fault. The fault is shared amongst everyone involved in this case.

It is the contractor's fault for pricing at a level he could do the job properly at. It is his fault for cutting corners and doing a substandard job. But then it is also the OPs fault for not ensuring proper supervision and oversight of the job. OP also cut corners to save a few quid by not appointing a competent person to oversee and supervise the works.

You live and learn sure.

In addition to the BCAR and planning issues, did OP make the necessary H&S appointments I wonder?

agoc2809

It didn't require planning permission

TheBoyConor

What about BCAR?

Gumbo

agoc2809 wrote: »

It didn't require planning permission

Of course. But you still need a cert of compliance with building regulations. You also need a cert of compliance with planning regulations (exempted development section).

Gumbo

TheBoyConor wrote: »

What about BCAR?

If planning exempt then no Commencement Notice required and therefore no involvement with BCAR.

TheBoyConor

oh!

agoc2809

We didn't require as extension was smaller than 40 sqm

Gumbo

agoc2809 wrote: »

We didn't require as extension was smaller than 40 sqm

Your not listening.
Even exempted development require these certs. Does it comply with the other requirements? Area of garden space remaining? Window distance to boundary?

You are only exempt from the process of applying for planning permission. You still need to comply with building regulations and planning regulations (exempted development).

This is further evidence of not having a professional involved in the project unfortunately.

seamus

Get the independent surveyor to snag list but to also advise you on what's normal and what's not. Some people can be too picky or not understand what's to be expected.
With an extension for example, you will likely start to see plasterwork (inside and out) develop cracks along it due to settling. This is normal, but many people worry that it's poor work or something wrong with the building.

The surveyor will help you separate the "that's not right it needs fixing" from the "that's normal/unavoidable".

RandRuns

This should be shared to the thread about the guy looking to do his house direct labour.

"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur.”

Unfortunately, as mentioned by others, these issues should have been picked up either during the build or during snagging, and would have been if there had been a professional in charge. Now you are at the mercy of the builder and whether he will help as a geture of goodwill - if this was a "lowest possible price for everything" job then it is unlikely he made much margin, and this may affect his willingness to put more time into it.

ElderWanderer

People here have very odd ideas as to what a contract is. Just because you've handed over all the money doesn't mean that you've no rights to redress or leverage for bad workmanship. The terms of the contract- whether implied or explicit is irrelevant- were that the work you paid for would be done to the appropriate standard. Paying over the cash doesn't mean you legally recognised the work as being acceptable- you're just a punter, what do you know? And anyway, many issues around construction are only apparent months or years after substantial completion- google pyrite or Western Building Systems for examples. You have 6 years from the date of final payment under contract law to seek redress.

Asking nicely should always be Option A, that's 100% accurate. Option B is asking not nicely. Option C is a solicitors letter, Option D is legal proceedings, Option E is getting the sheriff to execute judgement.

Aside from your legal rights, once legal proceedings are issued it becomes public effectively. That means your local newspaper can run headlines saying Builder X sued for crappy workmanship. Also, you seem to have hired the builder based on word of mouth & reputation- that cuts both ways, and practically every builder knows it. Don't be afraid to use it.

Whether it's actually worth going past Option A depends on your own preferences- depending on the workmanship issues, it may not be worth going to court, or you could lose if they're cosmetic. But you definitely have options beyond "ask nicely, get told no, live with it".

Gumbo

ElderWanderer wrote: »

People here have very odd ideas as to what a contract is. Just because you've handed over all the money doesn't mean that you've no rights to redress or leverage for bad workmanship. The terms of the contract- whether implied or explicit is irrelevant- were that the work you paid for would be done to the appropriate standard. Paying over the cash doesn't mean you legally recognised the work as being acceptable- you're just a punter, what do you know? And anyway, many issues around construction are only apparent months or years after substantial completion- google pyrite or Western Building Systems for examples. You have 6 years from the date of final payment under contract law to seek redress.

Asking nicely should always be Option A, that's 100% accurate. Option B is asking not nicely. Option C is a solicitors letter, Option D is legal proceedings, Option E is getting the sheriff to execute judgement.

Aside from your legal rights, once legal proceedings are issued it becomes public effectively. That means your local newspaper can run headlines saying Builder X sued for crappy workmanship. Also, you seem to have hired the builder based on word of mouth & reputation- that cuts both ways, and practically every builder knows it. Don't be afraid to use it.

Whether it's actually worth going past Option A depends on your own preferences- depending on the workmanship issues, it may not be worth going to court, or you could lose if they're cosmetic. But you definitely have options beyond "ask nicely, get told no, live with it".

The “punter” here is the one that’s responsible for compliance with the regulations associated with the works. Would that have any bearing on it?

You can’t be a “punter” on one hand and be the “designer” on the other hand in order to save money on professional fees.

RandRuns

ElderWanderer wrote: »

People here have very odd ideas as to what a contract is. Just because you've handed over all the money doesn't mean that you've no rights to redress or leverage for bad workmanship. The terms of the contract- whether implied or explicit is irrelevant- were that the work you paid for would be done to the appropriate standard. Paying over the cash doesn't mean you legally recognised the work as being acceptable- you're just a punter, what do you know? And anyway, many issues around construction are only apparent months or years after substantial completion- google pyrite or Western Building Systems for examples. You have 6 years from the date of final payment under contract law to seek redress.

Asking nicely should always be Option A, that's 100% accurate. Option B is asking not nicely. Option C is a solicitors letter, Option D is legal proceedings, Option E is getting the sheriff to execute judgement.

Aside from your legal rights, once legal proceedings are issued it becomes public effectively. That means your local newspaper can run headlines saying Builder X sued for crappy workmanship. Also, you seem to have hired the builder based on word of mouth & reputation- that cuts both ways, and practically every builder knows it. Don't be afraid to use it.

Whether it's actually worth going past Option A depends on your own preferences- depending on the workmanship issues, it may not be worth going to court, or you could lose if they're cosmetic. But you definitely have options beyond "ask nicely, get told no, live with it".

All very well in theory, however, unless the client appointed someone as PSDS for the project, then the only person they will be suing is themselves, as they took on responsibilty for ensuring everything was done correctly and to standard.

Treppen

TheBoyConor wrote: »

Well it is someone's fault. The fault is shared amongst everyone involved in this case.

It is the contractor's fault for pricing at a level he could do the job properly at. It is his fault for cutting corners and doing a substandard job. But then it is also the OPs fault for not ensuring proper supervision and oversight of the job. OP also cut corners to save a few quid by not appointing a competent person to oversee and supervise the works.

You live and learn sure.

In addition to the BCAR and planning issues, did OP make the necessary H&S appointments I wonder?

People are being very harsh on the OP with this type of blame.
It would appear that OPs issues have come to light recently, these issues could have easily been hidden after the job had been complete, and the OP took it on face value that the builder was good at their job.
If you get a guy to install a boiler and it explodes a year later, is it your fault because you didn't oversee and check out the work after?

Also, Underpaying doesn't come into it, if he says he can do X for y price then he should do it to a proper standard, not 70% standard because his wages or materials have gone up.

But yes OP we've been in this situation before but the window fitter refused to respond until we went small claims. When I went to find out his company details we could see he dissolved the company as often as he changed his underpants, we foolishly spent money on engineers reports. We should have just hired another fitter to fix the job and pay them the money. Luckily when we got the house painted one of the guys could see the issues and patch them up for a few quid extra.

What we did do though is went back to the original customers who gave us the recommendation and told them (builder will obviously use them over you). One of the customers was related so hopefully it'll bring a modecum of shame to his reputation! You could also find out where they got their recommendation from if you want word to get back to the builder!

So only thing you can do is sweet talk them in the hope. Maybe find a handy plasterer who could fix the issues and roof if it's not too bad.
Engineers reports will only tell you what you already know, unless there's other issues lurking.

But no it's not your fault for bad workmanship.

Gumbo

Treppen wrote: »

People are being very harsh on the OP with this type of blame.

Its not harsh, its true unfortunately.
The OP took on the responsibility of designer based on the info posted. Normally, people with no construction experience will appoint an Architect, Engineer or Surveyor.

Who confirmed Planning exemption status?

If I had no experience with cars, id ask a mechanic to take a look at one for me, I would not assume myself into that role.

Its may seem harsh posting this info but its the reality.

ElderWanderer

RandRuns wrote: »

All very well in theory, however, unless the client appointed someone as PSDS for the project, then the only person they will be suing is themselves, as they took on responsibilty for ensuring everything was done correctly and to standard.

Yes, that logic works perfectly in the mind of any builder who wants a reason not to fix their crappy workmanship. Not so much in a court though- the law has much lower expectations of the guy getting a house extension as compared to Google building an office block, for example. Same way the law has lower expectations of the punter buying a car Vs the US miilitary buying 1,000 tanks. Depending on the buyer, if they explode after 6 months they will either be fully compensated or can sing for it...(spontaneously explode, rather than by intent of a 3rd party I mean!)

But the real leverage is probably reputation, in fairness- if asking nicely doesn't work, asking not nicely plus promising to tell everyone you meet about the issues you had with him if he doesn't sort them out is potentially taking an order of magnitude more cash out of his pocket than it would take for him to fix it.

RandRuns

ElderWanderer wrote: »

Yes, that logic works perfectly in the mind of any builder who wants a reason not to fix their crappy workmanship. Not so much in a court though- the law has much lower expectations of the guy getting a house extension as compared to Google building an office block, for example. Same way the law has lower expectations of the punter buying a car Vs the US miilitary buying 1,000 tanks. Depending on the buyer, if they explode after 6 months they will either be fully compensated or can sing for it...

But the real leverage is probably reputation, in fairness- if asking nicely doesn't work, asking not nicely plus promising to tell everyone you meet about the issues you had with him if he doesn't sort them out is potentially taking an order of magnitude more cash out of his pocket than it would take for him to fix it.

You're misunderstanding. Unless the client appointed a professional to the role of PSDP/PSCS, they assumed the role themselves. It would be like a self-employed person bringing their employer to court because they are unhappy with the work they've done.

Makes no odds to me, but I'm afraid the OP is unlikely to get any joy other than by the goodwill of the builder.

TheBoyConor

Another thing here is that there was probably no clearly defined Contract of what was or was not included, and no defined defects period wherein the contractor had to rectify any faults arising from defective work, and no retention to hold over on the contractor.
I get the impression that was all a pretty casual type job between the OP and the builder, with the OP relying on the builders opinion on technical matters.

In the absence of a construction contract, is there legislation that can be applied? Would the supply of goods and services legislation apply here? Could the OP pursue them on the basis that the service/goods provided were not fit for purpose, or not as promised?

Bullocks

agoc2809 wrote: »

Hi,

We completed a renovation just over a year ago. We have noticed a number of issues such as bad plastering, poor outside rendering, drainage issues, roof issues etc. With covid the builder was unable to visit the property and when we raised these issues over the phone he dismissed them as us being too picky. When restrictions have lifted the builder has said he will visit the property. However Im concerned that he won't take our greivances seriously. Therefore I would like to have an independent party inspect the property and provide a report.

Can you please let me know what the best options here are? Do I require a structural survery or would a snag list be sufficient?

Thanks

Any chance of a few pictures of the plastering /rendering and roof/drainage issues?
Did you notice anything you didn't like before he was paid? And did you say it then?

agoc2809

Yes we pointed issues out, we were told "do you realise what you got here, I did the job on the budget you gave me, it would have cost another 50k". We were made feel like we were nitpicking. A neighbour of ours pointed out the ridge tiles on our roof and said they don't look right, we then noticed a leak in our kitchen ceiling. The builder couldn't make it out, as well as covid restrictions his wife was also very sick so we didn't put pressure on him. He sent out roofers who said it needed a patch job but rather than take their word for it we got a few roofers of our own to take a look.

It turned out that the roof didn't need just a patch up job. All the valleys had to be replaced, the morter was also of poor quality so ridge tiles had to be removed and replaced. We argued for a number of weeks with him and he eventually agreed to cover the cost using our own roofer.

Gumbo

agoc2809 wrote: »

Yes we pointed issues out, we were told "do you realise what you got here, I did the job on the budget you gave me, it would have cost another 50k". We were made feel like we were nitpicking. A neighbour of ours pointed out the ridge tiles on our roof and said they don't look right, we then noticed a leak in our kitchen ceiling. The builder couldn't make it out, as well as covid restrictions his wife was also very sick so we didn't put pressure on him. He sent out roofers who said it needed a patch job but rather than take their word for it we got a few roofers of our own to take a look.

It turned out that the roof didn't need just a patch up job. All the valleys had to be replaced, the morter was also of poor quality so ridge tiles had to be removed and replaced. We argued for a number of weeks with him and he eventually agreed to cover the cost using our own roofer.

It would be beneficial to get a definitive list prepared and try to sit down with the builder.
Something might come of it, nothing might come of it, but best to get it done, sort it out and move on as you don't want this hanging over you long term, get on with enjoying your new space.

ElderWanderer

TheBoyConor wrote: »

Another thing here is that there was probably no clearly defined Contract of what was or was not included, and no defined defects period wherein the contractor had to rectify any faults arising from defective work, and no retention to hold over on the contractor.
I get the impression that was all a pretty casual type job between the OP and the builder, with the OP relying on the builders opinion on technical matters.

In the absence of a construction contract, is there legislation that can be applied? Would the supply of goods and services legislation apply here? Could the OP pursue them on the basis that the service/goods provided were not fit for purpose, or not as promised?

Without getting into needlessly boring detail, there is a contract. Whether it's written down is irrelevant; if it is written down, the written terms are to a certain extent irrelevant- long story short (unless the OP has a fair few legal and/or construction qualifications they haven't mentioned yet) the power & knowledge imbalance between the OP and Builder X is such that the terms will generally be interpreted in favour of the OP, and that includes implied terms which may or may not directly contradict & overrule some written terms.

The enforceable terms of the contract are basically that the OP engaged the contractor to do agreed work of the appropriate standard for an agreed price. The price is agreed, the work is agreed, and the appropriate standard is basically that standard which the OP had a legitimate expectation of being done.

For more detail please see Contract Law & Equity for a few semesters.

The only real question legally is whether the work was actually done to the appropriate standard. It sounds like it wasn't, but what the hell do I know about that in fairness?

But also in fairness, it's my opinion & experience that if you end up in a courtroom arguing the law & facts or any case of any kind, everyone there except the lawyers has already lost. It should be the last resort, but still a source of leverage which can be used if necessary.

Metric Tensor

The post above is very good. Explains the legal situation quite nicely.

A few comments:

First the terms PSDP or PSCS are the wrong ones to use here - they are defined roles under the health and safety legislation and have very little to do with quality of construction except where it directly applies to construction and residual risk. These roles are often assumed by people who's job also includes design, quality control, building regs compliance, etc. but that's not what the legal aspects of the terms PSDP and PSCS mean. Better to talk of designer and contractor for this case.

To the OP: You've gotten enough lectures about having an independent professional represent your interest. It's "penny-wise pound foolish" not to employ one but hindsight is 20/20 so it's no use dwelling on that.

You were entitled to expect that a professional builder would carry out their work to an appropriate standard and just because he is fully paid does not mean you can't still expect that standard - however, the fact that he has all "his" money will make it harder to get him to come back to rectify things. Likewise you need some professional advice on whether your expectations are too high or not. (Your description of the roofing would make me thing the expectations are not too high but only a professional can guide you.)

You need a list of things that need to be rectified prepared by a professional. Then you need to massage and gently coerce the builder back because if you have to go down the legal route you have already lost and the solicitors are the only ones happy. The builder is not going to be too thrilled because he both underpriced the job and then had to pay towards the roof repairs so feels like it has already cost him money - this shouldn't matter to you but if you are going to rely on a non-legal route you need to have that at the back of your mind during negotiations.

tabby aspreme

OP, can you put up some pictures of the work done, particularly the roof and any internal finishing , it will give people commenting an idea whether it was penny pinching or poor workmanship by your builder, there are plenty of supposed builder's around, and no matter how much money you gave them it would still be a botch job, because they, and their employees don't have the knowledge or skill to do things correctly.

mickdw

Gumbo wrote: »

Your not listening.
Even exempted development require these certs. Does it comply with the other requirements? Area of garden space remaining? Window distance to boundary?

You are only exempt from the process of applying for planning permission. You still need to comply with building regulations and planning regulations (exempted development).

This is further evidence of not having a professional involved in the project unfortunately.

Interesting question. Where a homeowner takes on a planning exempt extension, does everything correctly as in actually meet the requirements of the planning exemptions, are they legally bound to hold a cert of compliance / exemption for the property - I dont see how they would be. Sure they will need it if going to sell but otherwise i dont think so.
In relation to Building Regs, it would clearly make sense to keep as much record as possible to prove compliance.

Treppen

Gumbo wrote: »

Its not harsh, its true unfortunately.
The OP took on the responsibility of designer based on the info posted. Normally, people with no construction experience will appoint an Architect, Engineer or Surveyor.

Who confirmed Planning exemption status?

If I had no experience with cars, id ask a mechanic to take a look at one for me, I would not assume myself into that role.

Its may seem harsh posting this info but its the reality.

You're missing the point, if you had no experience of cars and the mechanic says ya I'll fix it, would the owner be at fault if he didn't get an experienced mechanic to wire up the dash cam properly and your battery ran flat. He put the young lad who changed the tyres on the job.

Oh well that's the owners problem for not checking the work! They took on the role of electronic engineer.

At this stage you'd think builders know how to build extensions properly if they've done others. Also they should stand over their work and be available if issues come to light. I wouldn't blame the OP.
In saying all that I hired an architect technician to supervise my extension and it's solid after 10+ years, but that's because I don't trust any tradesman, the op did.

Sleeper12

Gumbo wrote:

Your not listening. Even exempted development require these certs. Does it comply with the other requirements? Area of garden space remaining? Window distance to boundary?

Without these certificates might operate have difficulty selling the property in the future? Would the buyers solicitor allow to close without them. Would a lender be happy to proceed without the correct certs?

booooonzo

very interesting to see both sides here.
are those putting blame on the OP in the building game by any chance?

Bullocks

Treppen wrote: »

You're missing the point, if you had no experience of cars and the mechanic says ya I'll fix it, would the owner be at fault if he didn't get an experienced mechanic to wire up the dash cam properly and your battery ran flat. He put the young lad who changed the tyres on the job.

Oh well that's the owners problem for not checking the work! They took on the role of electronic engineer.

At this stage you'd think builders know how to build extensions properly if they've done others. Also they should stand over their work and be available if issues come to light. I wouldn't blame the OP.
In saying all that I hired an architect technician to supervise my extension and it's solid after 10+ years, but that's because I don't trust any tradesman, the op did.

As a tradesman I'd hate to work for someone that doesn't trust me . I know you have to earn someone's trust too but it must create a bit of tension on a build when you start out not trusting any of the tradesmen.
We seem to be in a bit of a boom at the minute and it's hard to get lads but are reputations that bad at the minute?

iColdFusion

I can see both sides of this but OP just wanted their extension for reasonable money, if they paid a builder to do work and that work is defective then I would assume they have a clear case to get that work rectified and I don't see any legal body siding with the builder in this case if it comes to that irrespective of sign off certs etc
Its not as if an architect is going to pick up on every possible issue that could raise its head anyway, they're not on site every day and some things only arise when you are living in the space, even if they kept some retention it probably wouldn't have been large enough to fix the issues the OP is talking about.

In reality I would hope the builder sees the potential legal costs and reputation damage long term as being far higher than just fixing the issues but that also kind of depends on where in the country you are OP, is this a local builder in the countryside or are you in a major city?
Any local builder I know in the countryside values their reputation as work is few and far between, if you were in Dublin far higher chance of them telling you to jog on as they will always get work no matter what.

TheBoyConor

I agree that there absolutely is a contract in place, however, it may just be verbal or implied, and correct, there would be the reasonable expectation that the job would be done to a standard of workmanship that would be acceptable in the industry. However, since the contract or a specification is not written down with clearly defined terms of what is or is not covered, it leaves an awful lot of grey areas that can be argued to and fro.

I only mentioned PSCS and PSDP in the context of H&S not quality. Since that is the only relevance those terms have. OP would by right have needed to appoint them, but I am guessing they didn't. However, your PSDP is usually your designer anyway, and it seems there was no real designer here, just a homeowner and a builder doing the job ad hoc.

seamus

agoc2809 wrote: »

It turned out that the roof didn't need just a patch up job. All the valleys had to be replaced, the morter was also of poor quality so ridge tiles had to be removed and replaced. We argued for a number of weeks with him and he eventually agreed to cover the cost using our own roofer.

One thing that's worth noting about professionals is that they'd often rather redo the work their own way than patch someone else's.

This is the old joke that a workman will always tell you someone else's work is shoddy and needs to be redone.

It's an understandable thing; if they try to fix someone else's work, then they're on the hook if the fix doesn't take. But if they pull it out and redo all the work, they can be more certain that's it done right/their way.

This is where the surveyor is again your friend. They'll tell you whether something actually needs to be redone from scratch or if it can be patched up.

onrail

RandRuns wrote: »

This should be shared to the thread about the guy looking to do his house direct labour.

"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur.”

Unfortunately, as mentioned by others, these issues should have been picked up either during the build or during snagging, and would have been if there had been a professional in charge. Now you are at the mercy of the builder and whether he will help as a geture of goodwill - if this was a "lowest possible price for everything" job then it is unlikely he made much margin, and this may affect his willingness to put more time into it.

I think that's me. Having read the thread, still not 100% convinced that going the contractor route rather than direct labour would prevent poor workmanship.

I'd still plan to appoint a designer, who presumably would oversee and 'sign-off' on workmanship...?

[Note the word 'presumably' - I obviously haven't a bull's notion]