Missing insulation in vaulted ceiling

[Buzz]

10 minutes ago, d87francis said:

Wow that's nuts, next you'll tell me they let the homebuilder pick which houses get inspected!

 

Depends on how big the envelope they leave on his front seat is .

[Kelvin]

My understanding is building regs in Scotland is changing such that every house must be inspected to address exactly this type of problem. 
 

House buying/building ought to be an exciting fun thing to do. It just seems so crap in the UK. 

 

You seem to have a handle on it so good luck in getting it resolved.
 

 

[saveasteading]

I don't think bco have the authority to demand a certain unit is inspected. 

The 'sample' units are agreed early, so will be done better.

 

I'd like to know how long is the chain of subcontracting. 

The site will have the developer's name, but they deny being contractors or project managers as soon as there is a problem.

There is seldom a board with the contractors' names.

I'm guessing there is a main contractor, but maybe it's all packages at the cheapest quote with little control.

 

They must pay the site managers a lot. Not for skill but for doing just enough, and without pride.

[ETC]

40 minutes ago, ProDave said:

Yes this is a big issue, big housing developments only a sample are inspected by building control.  That needs fixing imho they have proved they cannot be trusted so every single house needs inspecting and defects corrected before sign off.

Do you know where in the regulations it says that only a proportion of houses in a development need to be inspected for a completion?

 

Where I am we inspect all works for a completion. We do have approval type for air tests and sound tests but not completions.

[ProDave]

1 minute ago, ETC said:

Do you know where in the regulations it says that only a proportion of houses in a development need to be inspected for a completion?

 

Where I am we inspect all works for a completion. We do have approval type for air tests and sound tests but not completions.

No,I just know it is common knowledge the big house builders are only sample inspected.  There are no end of complaints and newspaper articles about defects, missing insulation being a common one.  As I say, they have proved themselves untrustworthy and whoever allows this sample inspecting should disallow it and make sure every single house is inspected.

[saveasteading]

7 minutes ago, ETC said:

where in the regulations it says that only a proportion of houses in a development need to be inspected for a completion

Equally: Where doesn't it?

Bco doesn't look at every thing on every part of a project. Choosing a sample is essential, but that can be samples of one, or several, or every unit.

 

Thinking back, we requested visits, so it wasn't random. I wanted any errors spotted, but the developes don't, and it will always be easy to fiddle unless random inspections, with clout,  are permitted. I should say mandatory.

[ETC]

1 minute ago, saveasteading said:

Equally: Where doesn't it?

Bco doesn't look at every thing on every part of a project. Choosing a sample is essential, but that can be samples of one, or several, or every unit.

 

Thinking back, we requested visits, so it wasn't random. I wanted any errors spotted, but the developes don't, and it will always be easy to fiddle unless random inspections, with clout,  are permitted. I should say mandatory.

I’m trying to find out where in the legislation it says that in a development a BCO need only inspect a sample of the houses built. I’m not in your jurisdiction so I do not know. Where I am we inspect all works at completion. There is no sampling for completions - that I am aware of.

[d87francis]

49 minutes ago, ETC said:

I’m trying to find out where in the legislation it says that in a development a BCO need only inspect a sample of the houses built. I’m not in your jurisdiction so I do not know. Where I am we inspect all works at completion. There is no sampling for completions - that I am aware of.

Yes this is what im curious about too. Feels like something they've just made up themselves. A bit like our developer tried to tell everyone that there was only a 1 year defect period where they were responsible to remedy, when it's written clear as day in the warranty certificate that it's 2 years. Sadly didn't stop most ownders believing them!

 

I'll be asking the LABC when they get in touch. Might have a wait mind as they warn of a big backlogue on the landing page for reporting breaches.

[joe90]

5 minutes ago, d87francis said:

I'll be asking the LABC when they get in touch. Might have a wait mind as they warn of a big backlogue on the landing page for reporting breaches.

They might move quicker if they are implicated in the papers!

[Roger440]

1 hour ago, ETC said:

I’m trying to find out where in the legislation it says that in a development a BCO need only inspect a sample of the houses built. I’m not in your jurisdiction so I do not know. Where I am we inspect all works at completion. There is no sampling for completions - that I am aware of.

 

As i understand it, for england and wales, they only to need to inspect the first of any specific design. So if 4 designs on the development, 4 houses get inspected. Rest are self certify.

 

I understand that loop hole is, or is about to be closed. They will now have to submit photos of each house. No scope for fiddling that at all !!!!

 

[Roger440]

1 hour ago, ProDave said:

No,I just know it is common knowledge the big house builders are only sample inspected.  There are no end of complaints and newspaper articles about defects, missing insulation being a common one.  As I say, they have proved themselves untrustworthy and whoever allows this sample inspecting should disallow it and make sure every single house is inspected.

 

It will never happen, because it physically impossible to do. There are not enough BCO's.

 

Given the woeful standard of the people building said estates, you would need as many BCO's as people doing actual work.

 

It cant happen, and wont happen. 

 

As long as there are private BCO's it definitely cant happen. And there is zero possibility of the council taking up the slack. Mind you, they are just as bad.

 

They signed off the extension and associated works on my last place. 2 increased size houses plus rainwater were all feeding a pre exsisting cesspit. Which had a hole punched in the side to let the water out. All signed off by the council BCO. Fortunately we picked this up on the suevey, negotiated accordingly and replaced with compliant treatment plant. Mind you, the same guy turned up to sign that off. Tried to give me a lecture on the discharge pipe not having concrete round it at the end. I pointed out it was lot better than the last installation he signed off. He was gone sharpish, sign off came in the post a few days later. 

 

As before, system is broken and pointless. 

 

 

[kandgmitchell]

Well when I was in Building Control I inspected every new house on completion and all other statutory stages. Upon the very first visit to the site I had been taught to make it clear to the site manager that BC needed to see every foundation excavation and every drain run. My colleagues and I would help them out by making two or three visits a day during the initial busy groundworks phase but we needed to see it. Inevitably one would find a plot concreted before inspection. Having to excavate down the side of the concrete to expose it usually meant it only happened the once.  Once the superstructure was up though I agree it's hard to see behind plasterboard and paint but I made a point of looking in every loft space because it's there you can see the bones of a building. We insisted on every plot having a drain test as well. You can usually get a feel for how well the site is run as it proceeds. A good site manager can be trusted more than a poor one but ultimately it was my name on the file as the officer signing off the plot. I should point out that this was across all the LA's I worked for. The change in style of the 1985 regulations made everyone's life easier, but the fragmentation of BC into private and public systems hasn't helped at all and the overall standard has fallen away over the years.

 

But a sample??? how's that work?

 

[Hughgo12]

BC know that at the end of the day people will go after the installer/contractor and designer for shoddy workmanship and detailing. Warranty and insurances works as a safety net for them and they would refer to the initial submitted plan as being complaint. 

 

The republic of ireland are ahead of the game with BCAR and the assigned certifier role. Risk going onto the assigned certifier who should be on top of things in the fear that their company gets sued. Still will be difficult to prove the lack of reasonable skill and care. 

[Hughgo12]

2 minutes ago, kandgmitchell said:

Inevitably one would find a plot concreted before inspection. Having to excavate down the side of the concrete to expose it usually meant it only happened the once.  .

 

That's an effective way of way of making standards improve. Still a lot of trust required for the things you don't see but you hope the fear of opening up stays with them. Unfortunately some inspectors wont make big calls for the fear of conflict, the bullish contractor wanting damages, lack of balls and just wanting an easy life 

[kandgmitchell]

We also prosecuted where it was appropriate. Oddly the local paper often got wind of when those cases appeared in the local court. This had the extra value of reminding the local contractors/developers that the rules were there.....

 

Mind you that was in the days when LA offices were properly staffed. My first had five teams of three under a chief officer as well as two dedicated admin, an ex. fire officer to check commercial and access to the Council's own structural engineering team in the architects department. I was one of two trainees on a properly constituted training scheme.

 

The LA area I live in now has two professional staff covering 1700 sq km.

[Jilly]

‘Independent’ inspectors have too much of a conflict of interest imo. How could you expect a BCO to be strict with a developer who is paying them and they want to secure further inspection contracts? The Council run BC’s are truly more ‘independent’. 

[ETC]

Can I just say that where I am a Completion Inspection is a comprehensive inspection of the complete building - dwelling - and inspectors do go into the roof space and do check insulation, lateral restraint straps and roof ventilation - and if necessary thermal image cameras and borescopes are readily available to help with any contentious inspection.

 

The insulation in the walls and floor is also inspected at certain stages and all inspections are logged for future reference. Where - for example during Covid - some inspections were prohibited inspections via Zoom were carried out and photographic and video evidence submitted and logged against the application.

[ETC]

16 hours ago, kandgmitchell said:

Well when I was in Building Control I inspected every new house on completion and all other statutory stages. Upon the very first visit to the site I had been taught to make it clear to the site manager that BC needed to see every foundation excavation and every drain run. My colleagues and I would help them out by making two or three visits a day during the initial busy groundworks phase but we needed to see it. Inevitably one would find a plot concreted before inspection. Having to excavate down the side of the concrete to expose it usually meant it only happened the once.  Once the superstructure was up though I agree it's hard to see behind plasterboard and paint but I made a point of looking in every loft space because it's there you can see the bones of a building. We insisted on every plot having a drain test as well. You can usually get a feel for how well the site is run as it proceeds. A good site manager can be trusted more than a poor one but ultimately it was my name on the file as the officer signing off the plot. I should point out that this was across all the LA's I worked for. The change in style of the 1985 regulations made everyone's life easier, but the fragmentation of BC into private and public systems hasn't helped at all and the overall standard has fallen away over the years.

 

But a sample??? how's that work?

 

I completely agree.

 

Where in the regulations does it say that BC can carry out sample inspections?

[kandgmitchell]

From what I can recall of the primary legislation there is not a requirement for BC to inspect, only a requirement for persons carrying out work to give notice at specific stages so that BC can inspect should they wish.

[d87francis]

Reply received today from LABC in responce to my report of a building regs breach:

 

"Morning

 

With regards to your attached enforcement received, an application for 105 new build residential units with 6900SQFT of commercial and associated parking/landscaping at Former xxxxx,xxxxxx was dealt with by Approved inspectors, xxxx xxxxx Building Control Ltd not xxxxx City Council.

 

Please contact them direct with your concerns.

 

Many Thanks"

 

My response:

 

"Hi xxxxx,

 

Thank you for your email. We have already spoken to xxxx xxxx who have said they only inspected a sample of the buildings and had they inspected ours they would have requested the insulation to have been rectified to meet building regulations. Please see our email from xxxx xxxxx attached as a pdf.

 

Our understanding is that as an approved inspector xxxx xxxx are not able to take enforcement action and that is down to the Local Authority Building Control. Residing in the building we are able to see (along with photos we attached with the initial report) clear breaches of part L of building regulations. As the LABC we are kindly requesting that you investigate in order to move towards enforcement action.

 

Kind regards,"

 

So it seems even the LABC are uninterested in clear breaches by our crappy developer

[saveasteading]

30 minutes ago, d87francis said:

even the LABC are uninterested

I don't think they are in any position to get involved.

However, as the fault could affect health, a different department of the LA could perhaps be able to do something. 

I would contact your Borough Councillor, as they are there to help you and will have the contacts. 

In turn they may ask their bco to advise.

 

If that developer is still working locally then they won't want the bad publicity.

[eandg]

I don't understand the English system at all but can't see why the LA would have an interest when they've not been paid to. From an enforcement perspective, if it's like Scotland then they'll only get involved if there is any imminent threat to public safety. I personally wouldn't waste my time with it all and would do as suggested above - line up local media and use it as leverage to get some cash from the developer and then do it properly yourself. 

[saveasteading]

I think it may be OK to tell us who the developer was. That is a matter of fact.

But it is up to you.

[MikeSharp01]

9 hours ago, saveasteading said:

If that developer is still working locally then they won't want the bad publicity.

Perhaps we should name them here in an appropriately constructed sentence so the crawlers / bots can pick it up  and get their name out there. This sampling approach is bonkers when it comes to being sure everything is done correctly everywhere by the larger developers. It seems that trust continues to be a thing even when trust has been shown to no longer be a two way street and redress is just a gapping hole in the system.

[MikeSharp01]

PS If the developer fixes your issue we can always make some edits and big them up for stepping up to the plate!