Jump to content

Recommended Posts

What's your opinion on this?

 

If you look closely there is one beam on top of the main one in the photo, out of the shot there are 2 more beams running into the large one that is stacked on top of the one in the photo. 

So in all there are 4 upstairs walls sitting on this point. 

 

Do do you like it?

 

IMG_0241.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not what I call "precision" work there. For a start the timber the beam is sat on is too short and the beam is too short. And what's that blob of cement for? I would have preferred the packer to have been re made the right thickness.

 

Can we have a more general zoomed out shout?

 

Has this only just been done?


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Packers under steel need to be incompressible over time, so NOT cement board or similar! Slate was the traditional packing material, but steel shims work OK.

 

As above, the timber is too short and the bearing block isn't located properly, the idea is to transfer the load vertically down into the post below, and having it off-axis like this reduces the bearing capacity and introduces an out-of-axis load component, which is not good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be having very serious words with your builder, to the point I would stop all further work until this is sorted.

 

Those packers are wrong, they have to be changed.

 

At the left hand end it has been designed to sit on a stack of 6 uprights to support it, but because the timber and the steel beam are too short, only 4 of the uprights are taking the load.

 

The builders should have realised this was wrong when they came to put the first steel in, but they have swept it under the carpet hoping nobody will realise.  If they don't offer a solution  at their cost I would tell them I will be getting the building inspector to look at it and let him say what needs to be done, then they will have to do it.  I would definitely want the SE to look at it and propose a solution.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ProDave said:

I would be having very serious words with your builder, to the point I would stop all further work until this is sorted.

 

Those packers are wrong, they have to be changed.

 

At the left hand end it has been designed to sit on a stack of 6 uprights to support it, but because the timber and the steel beam are too short, only 4 of the uprights are taking the load.

 

The builders should have realised this was wrong when they came to put the first steel in, but they have swept it under the carpet hoping nobody will realise.  If they don't offer a solution  at their cost I would tell them I will be getting the building inspector to look at it and let him say what needs to be done, then they will have to do it.  I would definitely want the SE to look at it and propose a solution.
 

Not my place Dave, group of houses about a mile up the road, I popped in to see who had made the frame and had a nosey around. 

Plot of land £300,000 plus £500,000 to build them I really feel for the poor sod who will end up with this. 

Not sure if I can inform someone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Russell griffiths said:

Not my place Dave, group of houses about a mile up the road, I popped in to see who had made the frame and had a nosey around.

Plot of land £300,000 plus £500,000 to build them I really feel for the poor sod who will end up with this.

Not sure if I can inform someone.

Well if you do use the same builder, keep a VERY close eye on them.

 

I don't know what it is with builders and steel beams, but on a new build I wired last year, the builders put two steels in the wrong way round, meaning most of the holes that had helpfully been drilled in them went nowhere, and me and the plumber were fighting over space in the only 2 holes that were of any use.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ProDave said:

Well if you do use the same builder, keep a VERY close eye on them.

 

I don't know what it is with builders and steel beams, but on a new build I wired last year, the builders put two steels in the wrong way round, meaning most of the holes that had helpfully been drilled in them went nowhere, and me and the plumber were fighting over space in the only 2 holes that were of any use.
 

 

 

Who won? :D

 

Bet it was the plumber.....................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Russell griffiths said:

Not my place Dave, group of houses about a mile up the road, I popped in to see who had made the frame and had a nosey around. 

Plot of land £300,000 plus £500,000 to build them I really feel for the poor sod who will end up with this. 

Not sure if I can inform someone. 

 

Therein lies the rub - years ago you'd have just called the building inspector, who'd have been all over it like a rash.  Nowadays, with inspections mainly privatised, the inspector will most probably be the building companies tame one, and you have know way of finding who they are, easily.

 

It's beyond being just poor quality, though, it's probably in the category where it's putting the future stability of the building at risk, as at the very least the shoddy construction has eaten away a big hunk of the structural safety factor, and over time those bits of packing will compress and cause settlement, for sure..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, JSHarris said:

Who won? :D


 

Bet it was the plumber.....................

We had one hole each, but yes, the plumber got to choose which one he had as "pipes need to be short" so the cables had to take a longer route. Some of them quite a bit longer than they would have been if the steels had been put in correctly where there would have been at least 4 holes available.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JSHarris said:

Therein lies the rub - years ago you'd have just called the building inspector, who'd have been all over it like a rash.  Nowadays, with inspections mainly privatised, the inspector will most probably be the building companies tame one, and you have know way of finding who they are, easily.


 

It's beyond being just poor quality, though, it's probably in the category where it's putting the future stability of the building at risk, as at the very least the shoddy construction has eaten away a big hunk of the structural safety factor, and over time those bits of packing will compress and cause settlement, for sure..

That's an argument in favour of The Scottish system where it's still only the council building inspectors that can do the inspections.

 

I made the point in my new house of getting the "completed frame" BC inspection done before I paid the builders their final instalment, so if there had been any BC issues they would have needed to be sorted. As it happened, BC were quite happy with the frame.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ProDave said:

That's an argument in favour of The Scottish system where it's still only the council building inspectors that can do the inspections.

 

I made the point in my new house of getting the "completed frame" BC inspection done before I paid the builders their final instalment, so if there had been any BC issues they would have needed to be sorted. As it happened, BC were quite happy with the frame.
 

 

Yes, it is.  I'm no fan of the system we have, where the inspectors are employed by the builders, in effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had no idea until coming on here that you could have private building inspectors in England.

 

The PFI school scandal in Scotland I believe was partly due to the builders being able to self certify their work.

 

My current house we had to get commercial surveyors to write a report before the builders would put right some serious defects. These had not been spotted by council BC and they weren't interested in helping when the issues were pointed out. I believe that they area lot more lenient with large builders.

 

This has made me consider whether it is worth paying for a full structural survey on the completed house to find any defects. Hopefully between me and the architect and the main contractor everything will be kept right. It must be very difficult when people have no interest in construction and just want a house built.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mass builders here self-certify around 90% of the houses they build, as only one house on any type on a development is usually inspected, and then it'll be inspected by the mass builders tame building inspector, paid by the mass builder.  How many inspectors in this situation are going to tell the company paying them that they have to redo some work?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JSHarris said:

Mass builders here self-certify around 90% of the houses they build, as only one house on any type on a development is usually inspected, and then it'll be inspected by the mass builders tame building inspector, paid by the mass builder.  How many inspectors in this situation are going to tell the company paying them that they have to redo some work?

 

.... and the warranty is supplied by the "other business arm" of the self same building inspection company that obviously has no vested interest .....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, PeterW said:

 

.... and the warranty is supplied by the "other business arm" of the self same building inspection company that obviously has no vested interest .....

 

You do have to wonder at the intelligence of the government department that came up with that, don't you?  I mean, it doesn't take a genius to see the flaws, and all I can think is that a complete f'wit in the government department  just agreed to an industry proposal without reading it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...