Over cautious warranty surveyor?

[Gaz Bancroft]

I have appointed self build zone as my warranty provider. I had my first inspection this afternoon now that the foundation trenches have been dug. Whilst the local authority building control inspector also visited and raised no issue the surveyor appointed for self build zone has raised concern about the close proximity of an existing hawthorn hedge given the clay soil and potential shrinkarge influence. The hedge is in situ at the moment and is close to the foundations to be fair, but the hedge will be getting removed in due course. 

 

The warranty surveyor has advised that the advice of a structural engineer is sought. I am on a tight budget and I'm not for spending money on extra consultant fees. It is a two storey house and the strip footings have been dug to a metre depth in virgin clay, I can't see how relic roots from a hawthorn hedge that is being removed can cause any structural issues! There is no evidence of the roots impinging on the trenches dug. 

 

I appreciate they are acting in my best interest but given the local authority surveyor raised no issue and my builder who has decades of building experience thinks this is overkill I am of the opinion that the services of a structural engineer are not required!  

 

Anyone had experience of over cautious warranty provider surveyors?

[Temp]

When you remove the hedge it no longer removes water from the soil and you can get heave. Lot depends on the type of clay. In some areas it's deemed to be non-shrinking and no special precautions are required. In others you need deeper foundations, expansion boards to line the trenches or even piles.

 

We had to get a soil condition report done and then input from an SE who said we just needed expansion  boards. A house 100 yards away were told they needed piles and they ended up pretty deep and expensive.

 

Can you find out from local builders if they know what type of clay is in your area?

[SimonD]

37 minutes ago, Gaz Bancroft said:

Anyone had experience of over cautious warranty provider surveyors?

 

You should be grateful you're not with Protek. Their in house assessors are a nightmare and don't even trust the BCO. I just had a defect notice telling me my exterior wall eaves at the back door are a cold bridge because I don't have a separate liner. They've missed the fact that the wall they're referring to isn't an exterior wall anymore and the exterior doors are installed in very thick EWI to prevent the cold bridging. I'm trying to draft a polite email following the other 4 where I've told them each time I've already sent them the information, drawings and documents requested, along with an email from the BCO saying everything complies building regs and Protek are saying the email is unclear!

[Gaz Bancroft]

Hi Temp - had a soil sample taken previously which concluded 'Reddish brown slightly sandy slightly gravelly CLAY. Gravel is fine to medium.' It also advised 'Foundation depth for strip and mass-fill concrete foundations where trees are nearby to be 1.26m' So I am going to respond tomorrow and state that surely if we adhere to this that should suffice. 

 

Simon - sounds frustrating so hopefully Self-Build Zone are easier to deal with. This is my first interaction as this was first inspection so let's see! 

[nod]

We had a similar issue raised by BC 

I simply requested a drawing of that section of foundation with a few calcs from the Structural engineer He will of already allowed for this hedge in his foundation design As Temp as pointed out Removing often causes problems 

[Blooda]

On 20/03/2024 at 21:17, Gaz Bancroft said:

..................   I am of the opinion that the services of a structural engineer are not required!  

 

Anyone had experience of over cautious warranty provider surveyors?

As you go through the build process, you will become familiar with the fact that it is all about who owns the risk.

 

You have made the decision, you do not have enough knowledge/qualifications to own the risk of assessing the foundations yourself, so you have employed a building control officer and warranty provider to own that risk.  

 

BCO is happy to own the risk. but..

 

Warranty provider is not prepared to own that risk, so it is your job to get someone else to own that risk, on behalf of the warranty provider.  You can try to discuss with them, but essentially you will have to employ someone else to own that risk.  That body will be a an expert in the field [ie Structural Engineer].

 

As you say you are on a tight budget, but this will linger. [We were still trying to remove a defect with the aforementioned Protek on foundation depth, two years later when we were trying to get it signed off].

 

Ideally you need to find a local independent ticketed SE, pay for a report, do any actions, clear the defect with the Warranty provider.   

 

Examples of our warranty provider being over cautious [not willing to own the risk] - most of which the root cause is COVID

 

1)  Not accepting the foundations were dug to the correct depth.  May 2020 [height of COVID unknown], they did not come to the inspection of the foundations. Gave me a list of photos to take.  Sent them, and got a verbal phone call saying we were ok to pour [bank holiday 8th May].  When the next report came in we got a defect, saying there were no photos showing the depth of the foundations, with a tape or staff.  This went on for two years, 

 

2)  CO₂ Barrier - We had to use another provider than the original detail - Visqueen weren't answering the phone as all there staff were on furlough sunning themselves in their hot tubs.  So we used another provider CordenEPS who were very good.  So the warranty provider simply said this barrier material is not a BBA certificated product.  So we had to go back to CordenEPS, who had to send us an email, stating the product does not have to be BBA approved, and it complies to BS8485.  The defect was cleared, as CordenEPS now owned the risk.

 

3)  Cut roof on part of building above the garage, was built to previous rev drawing, worth doubling up in the wrong place. [again COVID problem, discussing drawings at 2m and just letting the guys into site in the morning and locking up after they had left].   We got the roof supplier / truss manufacturer to confirm the changes from the design [luckily someone who worked for the architect we used knew the designer at the supplier, and had his mobile number, else we would have been stuck with the company message ...  Due to unprecedented times].  The roof supplier now owned the risk.

 

4)  No eaves vents, but we were using breathable membrane and vented ridge. Again we used a different [but equivalent] product than the original spec due to supply issues.  Warranty provider said there was a risk of condensation, as there were no eaves vents.  Has to get our architect to contact our SAP provider to carry out a condensation risk analysis, to say it was ok, so they owned the risk.

 

Sorry for the ramble, just offloading the pain of times past.

 

[SimonD]

10 minutes ago, Blooda said:

Sorry for the ramble, just offloading the pain of times past.

 

Sounds a bit like my story and I'm sure many others too - it is pain that needs offloading! But what irks me is when a desk jockey doesn't believe the BCO and it goes round in cicles.

[Blooda]

1 minute ago, SimonD said:

 

Sounds a bit like my story and I'm sure many others too - it is pain that needs offloading! But what irks me is when a desk jockey doesn't believe the BCO and it goes round in cicles.

 

So sharing the same provider, did you get any of these?

 

1) Green Oak not being covered for movement.. no green oak in our porch, it was kiln dried,

2) Problems occurring from the failure of the MVHR not being covered.

3)  the external ground level not being finished.  It was and when I spoke to them, they said they could not see on the photos that their inspector took.

 

And don't mention the fact they would not pass the house off without the garage door being fitted [this was on "6 weeks" delivery from Germany, and took 8 months] . [BCO was quite happy with the ply-wood shuttering]

 

We need to go to the pub....

 

 

[Alan Ambrose]

Ah, the old 'pass the buck' thing. Of course the warranty supplier wouldn't want to take any risk (they are an insurance business after all) and would prefer you spend your money to cover their arse.

 

The modern way...

[Gaz Bancroft]

I think you have summed it up perfectly that it is all about passing the risk to someone else! I have ended up having to employ a structural engineer who have advised that if we go with a raft foundation then they will certify it so effectively taking the risk away from the warranty provider. We've now proceeded with this so all the soil that was between the trenches has been dug out and replaced with hardcore and we're waiting on steel frame to be made and delivered before we can pour the concrete. I don't know the exact cost implications yet, but my main contractor builder has suggested in the region of 10k and this has delayed us by about 3 weeks. All due to a 1.5m high mixed species old farm field hedge that is being removed anyway! I'm not a structural engineer but my builder, local authority building control and everyone I've spoken to that has been to site have said this is overkill but get to get someone to put their name and insurance to it I guess you have to over engineer it! 

 

Not a great start but I guess the main unknown is always the ground so hopefully once we get over this hurdle there won't be too many other major cost extras!