Are builders lazy and senseless?

Seanie M

Well, if you have read my other 2 posts in this forum, I'd like to see other poeples opinions,not to ensure that I am certified paranoid as I am about to buy a house, but to also see what other peoples experience is, and perhaps if any builders see this, they can give their own opinions too.

No trolls please, I am not starting a builders versus buyers war here, just looking for some consistency (or not) in my other rantings about the builders' trade's inadequacies.

Thanks,

Seanie.

Seanie M

Those that casted a vote, any comments about any builders' experience?

Romer

I'm having my second house built in seven years. The first builder, although a bit on the slow side (18 months) on a 3 bed semi brick house, The build quality was excellent and alot of consideration and extras went into the house.

The builder working on my current house is a joke. Timber frame, 12 months over due and he needs constant reminding of everthing. Each time I talk to him regarding something I also have to type it up and send it to him. Just so he can remember not just what was said but that we even had a conversation in the first place. Other than that he is an ignorant, rude man.

So I got a good one. Then I got a bad one. Luck of the draw really.

Seanie M

Romer wrote:

So I got a good one. Then I got a bad one. Luck of the draw really.

Bad luck really, seems to be alot of that with builders. Friends of mine seeing this post are telling me their stories too, from first-hand experience... it seems in Ireland we have a registered charter of Cowboys, and not Builders.

babaduck

Seanie,

I don't think you're being particularly fair in your assessment of us evil people. Fair enough you are having problems with a SECOND HAND house, not a new build, but the best thing you can do in your situation is to walk away if you're not happy. Freedom of choice is what makes life so good

The builder I bought my (our) house from was good - concrete built and very well finished. Fair enough we couldn't change the spec in any way so no different tiles, leaving off skirtings, changing paint finishes... all of which we offer to purchasers of new homes (not apartments because of pressure of completion dates), but the development was well finished with a foreman who was fairly personable. I also come from a family in the trade & I know the schemes the lads work on are also finished to a great standard.

On the other hand, there are some builders out there (and you know who you are... you giver away of apartments) who are dreadful to deal with and poor in finishes. In the town where we live, there's a fairly profilic local builder who should be strung up by his balls....

No final finish on the roads so weeds are breaking through the surface
Piping sewage into the water main
Leaving commons areas unfinished (i.e. a big pile of rubble)
Squashing 2 extra houses onto a small plot & then applying for retention

Don't tar all builders with the same brush

Seanie M

Thanks for that babaduck, feedback appreciated.

My generalisation or 'taring' is based on what I have heard. Apart from renting, I have yet to experience the trials and tribulations of house building. so far from what I have heard, I don't want to now. At the same time, while our potential new home is a second hand house, it is only 4 years old.
I was kind of hoping to also draw out if anyone actually knows of the builders that built the house, Glenrue Ltd, based in Tullamore. One poster here pm'd me to say that of an estate in Kilcormac for which they were responsible for, most of the house are now presenting many different faults with no consistencies. This would suggest that inexperienced labourers are being employed, and that even the skilled dont appear to be so. They have left the estate in an atrocious condition, and are not fulfilling aspects of the building of the houses properly, which is leading to faults now popping up. And yet, with so many complaints against builders and contractors, and the fact that Homebond is not worth the steam off my pee, why isn't there a State Moderator for this industry?

Also, my taring is due to the fact that for the best part of stories told to me on building in Ireland in recent years (up to 6 or 7), all have been a shambles - contracts seem to mean nothing as long as the most amount of money can be screwed out of the purchaser for a half-arsed job, or so it seems.

I am NOT looking forward to buying my first home. :mad:

ToxicPaddy

To be honest its pot luck with people in the building trade and I know this from experience. A lot of my relatives work in the building trade and even they will tell you, the standard of work varies greatly.

You might buy a house from a developer who has a good reputation but then
find that the quality of the building work doesnt seem up to scratch, this
could be down to the foreman on the site, the contractors used or even the
people working for the developer.

Most developers take on brick layers, carpenters, plumbers and electricians
as sub contractors and these vary over time depending the quotes they
get for each development and these sub contractors usually have high enough
staff turnovers as with the money being made in the building trade these
days their staff want a piece of the action so they leave and setup on their own.

The best bet is to get a contractor to build a house for you. Smaller contractors usually use the same people over and over as they normally only build small developments or even one off houses. At least when the house is being built you can observe it from start to finish, you can make slight changes when required and also spot any problems early and have them rectified. Its also easy enough to see small local builders work and ask them for them before you choose them, call around to other people who have used that builder and ask to see their work. If you explain the situation, Im sure most will be more than happy to accommodate if they have had good dealings with the builder/developer.

If you arent lucky enough to be able to do this then it looks like you will have to really do your homework.

Tox

Seanie M

Thanks Tox. As was mentioned in the other Glenrue thread, I'm going to ring them and see if I can getany sort of wall plans, as if I was going to make a slight alteration and would like to know whats load bearing and whats not. it'll give me an idea of conformity.

Seanie.

magpie

Builders have been making out like bandits since the late 90s. Bring back the days when they actually needed the work...

Sleipnir

The problem is not that there are cowboys in the building trade but that you can be a complete cowboy and get away with it for your entire career.
You can rip people off, destroy their homes and you really have very little comeback.

Let's not go into the fact that some brickies can earn 175,000 a year!
(But I'm just mad jealous of them)

lomb

babaduck wrote:

Piping sewage into the water main

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? :eek:

magpie

Let's not go into the fact that some brickies can earn 175,000 a year!
(But I'm just mad jealous of them)

That'll teach you for passing your exams in school.

MorningStar

magpie wrote:

Builders have been making out like bandits since the late 90s. Bring back the days when they actually needed the work...

Of course in the 70s and 80s many had to move out of the country. Others were in financial ruin as it was next to impossible to make a living. Some people managed to make it through the lean times only to be constantly abused later on. The toll bridge is a fine example how a risk taken in the 80s is now seen as extortion. THe deal has turned out to be bad for the public but that was the governments fault for not putting in restrictions.

magpie

Of course in the 70s and 80s many had to move out of the country. Others were in financial ruin as it was next to impossible to make a living.

Just like everyone else. Are you suggesting they should have got preferential treatment?

lomb

MorningStar wrote:

The toll bridge is a fine example how a risk taken in the 80s is now seen as extortion.

what a crock of ****, there was never any risk in building the toll bridge, bribes were involved, and that has been proven.

RainyDay

lomb wrote:

what a crock of ****, there was never any risk in building the toll bridge, bribes were involved, and that has been proven.

And your proof is?

Seanie M

Guys, for the sake of my predicament, please don't spoil this tread with bickering! open a new thread on the tool bridge!

lomb

RainyDay wrote:

And your proof is?

http://www.politics.tcd.ie/courses/undergrad/BCPOL/thunderer/irish/irish_detail_85.html

thousands of articles, there were 'consultation fees payed' to people who might have a 'conflict of interest' comprende?

these payments have been proven in the tribunals.

MorningStar

Seanie M wrote:

Guys, for the sake of my predicament, please don't spoil this tread with bickering! open a new thread on the tool bridge!

Sorry didn't mean people to flip out about the toll bridge.

Some builders are crap but the whole method of finance due to the historical risks in property make builders take high profits. It may be hard to believe in the current climate but the construction industry has been traditionally risky and transiant. Right now it makes sense to do 90% of the work and move to the next. Some builders hire clean up crews to finish off places and/or do snag lists rather than do the work themselves.
It maybe a similar arguement that the insurance industires use but that's because effectiveluy they use the same financial model.
The building trade is a lot more vunrable to economic threats. It is a common indicator of financial strength.

RainyDay

lomb wrote:

http://www.politics.tcd.ie/courses/undergrad/BCPOL/thunderer/irish/irish_detail_85.html

thousands of articles, there were 'consultation fees payed' to people who might have a 'conflict of interest' comprende?

these payments have been proven in the tribunals.

It seems that I have a higher standard of proof than you. It would take a bit more than an article in a college magazine where the only substantial payment is qualified as 'alleged' to convince me.

lomb

i have linked to it before and im not going to search for it. i am telling u it has been a proven fact that liam lawlor recieved 75 grand in consultancy fees and george redmond 15 grand.This is a PROVEN fact.not big money but these were small time nickel and dime hoods. they had a conflict of interest of the worst kind. back in the 80s and 90s in this country no major government contracts were awarded 'without greasing the wheels'

it is true that general building was depressed (only a good thing many would say) but the M50 was not a project involving any risk. The contract was lock tite, and it is today. no one can do anything without paying ntr 500 million for a poxy bit of concrete that cost 25 million or less.

MorningStar

lomb wrote:

i have linked to it before and im not going to search for it. i am telling u it has been a proven fact that liam lawlor recieved 75 grand in consultancy fees and george redmond 15 grand.This is a PROVEN fact.not big money but these were small time nickel and dime hoods. they had a conflict of interest of the worst kind. back in the 80s and 90s in this country no major government contracts were awarded 'without greasing the wheels'

it is true that general building was depressed (only a good thing many would say) but the M50 was not a project involving any risk. The contract was lock tite, and it is today. no one can do anything without paying ntr 500 million for a poxy bit of concrete that cost 25 million or less.

And when you were in the offices when the deal was going on did they ever ask you leave? Or did they want you to stick around with your crystal ball to tell them what was going to happen to the irish economy? :rolleyes:

babaduck

lomb wrote:

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? :eek:

Oh yes indeed... and this moron is a "pillar of the community". But we got a new engineer who is commonly known as ROBOCOP and takes no **** from anybody - lovely chap too!

RainyDay

lomb wrote:

i have linked to it before and im not going to search for it. i am telling u it has been a proven fact that liam lawlor recieved 75 grand in consultancy fees and george redmond 15 grand.This is a PROVEN fact.not big money but these were small time nickel and dime hoods. they had a conflict of interest of the worst kind. back in the 80s and 90s in this country no major government contracts were awarded 'without greasing the wheels'

Ah - I get it now. Writing 'proven' in UPPERCASE made all the difference. That's all it takes to convince me - a bit of uppercasing. :rolleyes:

Don't get me wrong - I do believe that it's very likely that there was something underhand going on here. I just wasn't aware of any public domain proof of this - and It looks like there still isn't any.

Victor

Locked.

Feel free to open another thread that stays on topic.