# Direct Labour proposal & writing a scope of works for tendering



## Corner (18 Jan 2010)

Hi, I am going down the self-build/direct labour route and am considering the following approach in principal:

1.employ a groundworker direct to carry out the following-

site clearance
site excavations inc foundations
dig all trenching & install all pipes required for foul & storm drains, ducts for services e.g. electricity, telecoms and water.
remove & store all topsoil on site and remove subsoil to off-site loction
create avenue up to house (rural site) and spread hard core on same.
installation of external storm & foul networks
treatment plant installation
liaise with building contractor
2.employ a building contractor to carry out the following-

setting out of the house & foundations & levels
co-ordination of & pouring of the foundations
dead building
external walls up to eaves level
internal walls
floors: co-ordinating the setting in place of pre-cast hollow core slabs (ground & 1st floors)
upstands/sockets for service connections to house e.g. foul, ducts for elec, water etc.
liasing with groundworker
The builders remit above takes the construction of the dwelling from foundations right up to eaves level and means that only one contractor is responsible for this and avoids a blame game that may arise if one sub-contractor poured the founds, another carried out the dead-building and another built the rising walls. This I feel would take some of the risk out of going the direct labour route and in a sense creates a mini "main contract" within the overall project and requires the builder to co-ordinate the build up to a certain stage. It also gives me freedom to choose the trades people (sub-contractors) I prefer for subsequent tasks such as plastering, roofing, plumbing and electrical and avoids a mark-up on each trade.

At this point I would employ a roofing contractor direct to carry out this part of the project and so on. With this approach, the builder is charged with getting the building up to eaves level apart from the groundworks. I would however be a little bit nervous that a "gap" may exist between the builder and the groundworker; a break in communications & an unwillingness to work together when they are employed independently. Obviously, the builder would prefer to employ his own ground worker and if he could produce a suitable cost for this, then I may consider this to avoid co-ordination problems. In any case, where should the groundworkers remit stop and the builders remit commence? 

I would be grateful for opinions & views on my proposal and recommendations regarding same. The scope of works document I intend to put together (and issue along with construction drawings for pricing) is much more detailed than what I have briefly described above and I also intend to include in my tender documents a tender breakdown for completion by each tendering builder so I can see how much each elements of the works is costing me. (I assume the groundworker will only work on an hourly rate as this part of the works would be difficult to measure?) 

And as there will need to an be a certain amount of overlap between the two, I intend to highlight this in my scope of works document which I am hopeful will serve the purpose of making it clear to the tendering builders what my intentions are and what I expect of each party. 

Please be constructively critical of my approach as it costs nothing to make changes at the "thinking" stage!


----------



## onq (19 Jan 2010)

I see lots of good writing, but I'll point out  some items you need to consider before you start. This is a non-exhaustive list of comments, remote from the events and without certain knowledge of the project as a whole or in detail. This advice assumes you are building your own home and thus are not a Client under the health and safety legislation. May I direct you to the self-build fAQ on this forum - its a work in progress, but you may benefit from it, in particular the health and safety section.

For work not carried out under the main contractor, i.e. direct to you, you are deemed to acting as a Contractor under the health and safety legislation by the HSA.
Arranging insurances, checking the competence of persons on site, scheduling deliveries, site organisation, scaffolding and attendances are amongst the contractors duties falling to you if there is not a contractor appointed. 

For design work not carried out by a competent designer you may also be acting as the Designer under the health and safety legislation - this is unclear.
Although not required for your sole domicile [as opposed to your holiday villa in Kerry] you should consider having someone competent draw up a preliminary health and safety plan to help foresee and avoid the worst pitfalls. There appears to be a loophole in the legislation which allows private houses to be built without this document or the developed safety plan and with no Project Supervisors in place. My view is that its the most vulnerable who would most benefit from the joined up thinking such a plan promotes - like amateur self-builders.

You appear to make no mention of installing the Radon Gas collector box, the Radon Gas membrane or the draw off pipe.
You don't appear to have mentioned the sealing of the envelope or the scheduling the Blower Test during the building programme.
An engineer should be retained to design the structure, including the foundations, beam sizes, piles and suspended ground floor on poor ground, wind loading esp. in open countryside and roof fixing details.  Roofs have blown off apartment buildings in South Dublin relatively recently.

You will need a Trial Hole to investigate soil conditions, percolation and water table. You will probably need a Percolation Test if you are installing a Treatment System with percolation areas or a soakaway. You should  ensure your ground is in good condition, with no made up ground or deposits or waste material or contaminated soils, Ensure the site it isn't subject to Flood Risk and check if new regulations require a Flood Risk Assessment.

To ensure compliance with the building regulations you need a set of general arrangement and detail drawings. You will also need these for pricing. You will need certification of monies and the completed building. A competent architect may be required or an architectural technician if the institutions involved will accept his certs.

Before you commit to this build you should have a BER assessor check the design.
He offer advice on how best to comply with the requirements of Part L of he Building Regulations.
He should be asked to supply a BER cert which should be sought on completion to avoid later hassle.
Its an easy thing to obtain at this stage, but difficult if you go to sell or let years afterwards.

My best advice is that you retain a competent professional to advise you.

HTH

ONQ.

[broken link removed]


----------



## Corner (20 Jan 2010)

onq said:


> This advice assumes you are building your own home and thus are not a Client under the health and safety legislation. May I direct you to the self-build fAQ on this forum - its a work in progress, but you may benefit from it, in particular the health and safety section.


Hi ONQ, firstly, can I extend my appreciation for your detailed response and positive comments. I have also scanned through your FAQ section and must commend you on an excellent piece of work. And please forgive me for multi-quoting your post as follows below!

This is indeed my own dwelling (or will be when it's built!) and as I will be employing various sub-contractors direct, I have already sought quotations for self-builders insurance. I also welcome your comments on considering a prelim H&S plan and clearly see how this would serve to give me an extra degree of protection.

I am hopeful that my experience working in the construction industry for a number of years, both in a practical and professional capacity, will be of benefit to my project managing of this project and will see me through. My job does give me a degree of flexibility that will allow me to attend site during working hours on a regular basis to keep an eye on things and an unannounced visit or two will not do any harm in the initial stages of the build!



onq said:


> Arranging insurances, checking the competence of persons on site, scheduling deliveries, site organisation, scaffolding and attendances are amongst the contractors duties falling to you if there is not a contractor appointed.


 
The list of bullet points in my initial post are not meant to be in anyway extensive nor conclusive and my proposed scope of works document will include much more detail, description and what I expect from the building contractor. I have specified that the contractor shall supply his own scaffolding and provide his own labourers. When you refer to attendances in your post, do you mean labouring alone or are there other elements to this that I should note?



onq said:


> For design work not carried out by a competent designer you may also be acting as the Designer under the health and safety legislation - this is unclear..


 
Thankfully, all of my design work has been carried out to a decent standard by an architect and the construction drawings I have received are highly detailed. A standard details drawing is included in the package which illustrates numerous construction details refering to various elements of the build e.g. eaves, chimney flashing, roof, to name but a few. My architect (or engineer) will be signing off on the building and at the 6 stage payments.



onq said:


> You appear to make no mention of installing the Radon Gas collector box, the Radon Gas membrane or the draw off pipe.
> You don't appear to have mentioned the sealing of the envelope or the scheduling the Blower Test during the building programme.


 
The radon sump & barrier and draw-off pipe is illustrated on my floor plan and a construction detail is included on the standard details drawing but I have also made mention to this within my scope of works document just in case there is any doubt that I did not want to builder to price it. The airtightness test is something that I have not stipulated but I have made a note of this for inclusion and welcome your comments. My query here would be; can the builder still be expected to stand over the airtightness of the building if another sub-contractor is employed by me directly to do the plastering, and another to install the windows? (As these are all part of the envelope.) I would appreciate your views on this ONQ. 




onq said:


> You will need a Trial Hole to investigate soil conditions, percolation and water table. You will probably need a Percolation Test if you are installing a Treatment System with percolation areas or a soakaway. You should ensure your ground is in good condition, with no made up ground or deposits or waste material or contaminated soils, Ensure the site it isn't subject to Flood Risk and check if new regulations require a Flood Risk Assessment.


 
We had the site test done prior to planning and have to install a small bio-cycle treatment plant to look after the foul discharge from the dwelling. The treatment unit is shown on the drawings and I had thought the installation of this unit and associated pipework would best be part of the groundworkers remit. I would be appreciate any views on this element of my approach. Or is it better to leave this and the installation of ALL the other underground pipe network (e.g. foul sewers, stormwater, electricity, gas, telecomm, site services) to the builder and stipulate that he must work in tandem or liaise with the groundworker? There will be a necessary level of overlap between the remits of both the builder and the groundworker so it is difficult to know where to clearly draw the divides so that there is no doubt over who is contracted to do what. Any views wlecome?




onq said:


> Before you commit to this build you should have a BER assessor check the design..


 
I note this and will seek quotations for a BER assessment on the design and fully concur with your views on this. Thank you.



onq said:


> My best advice is that you retain a competent professional to advise you...


 
Ah, another dilema! I am undecided whether I am going to retain my architect for the site construction stage of the project. While their drawings were impressive, I have experienced alot of short comings in their general professionalism. I had considered obtaining quotations from other architects or structural engineers to oversee the build and sign off at stage payments & on building regs certification but I'm slightly nervous this could produce more problems. What are the potential pitfalls of changing professional at this stage? Should I retain the professional who brought the dwelling from inception through planning to site?

Also, any views from other self-builders?


----------



## TripMeUp (21 Jan 2010)

"Ah, another dilema! I am undecided whether I am going to retain my architect for the site construction stage of the project. While their drawings were impressive, I have experienced alot of short comings in their general professionalism. I had considered obtaining quotations from other architects or structural engineers to oversee the build and sign off at stage payments & on building regs certification but I'm slightly nervous this could produce more problems. What are the potential pitfalls of changing professional at this stage? Should I retain the professional who brought the dwelling from inception through planning to site"

Hi Corner

I, like you, had reservations about retaining my architect/engineer for the construction element of my project and so have went with another Engineer for checking work,signing off etc etc....
No issues at all in doing this for me so far....

Hope this helps..


----------



## onq (21 Jan 2010)

Hi Corner,

I didn't realise you had experience in the building industry.
I also didn't realise you had an architect appointed with a good set of drawings.
The below comments are intended constructively, but cannot be deemed exhaustive, being offered remote from the action, without full facts and with many unknowns.

I have to say it makes no sense to me to employ separate groundworks and roofing contractors, as well as a main contractor - this hugely complicates the insurance issue and fudges the issue of liability. Questions of attendances and overlap arise because of your arrangement with the Groundworks operative,  the Contractor and the Roofinf Contractor. These questions always arise and normally the Contractor deals with such issues - whether everyone is domestic to him or nominated by the Employer attendances may be required and overlap/handover is always an issue where separate trades/specialists are involved.

If everyone is direct to you you're deemed to be the contractor and you decide. If the other guy is employed as a main contractor make everyone domestic or nominated to him and let him decide. The use of an H&S Plan allows Designers to fully assess the design and methods of production and modify them before tender to include options which are designed to lessen risk. The use of the H&S Plan on site prompts the Contractor to fully consider the scope of works both on and off the site, including interaction with the public domain [parking, waste disposal, noise control, cleaning of roads and paths], co-ordination of deliveries, induction and training of staff and operatives, marshalling of visitors, new operatives, tradespeople and professionals and so on. More importantly the H&S Planin conjunction with the Builders Programme focuses the Contractor on periods of congestion and lead in period, where co-ordination brings benefits in terms of time, risk avoidance and costs. The fact that you are not a Client and no PSDP or PSCS are appointed doesn't stop anyone from formulating an H&S Plan which is an excellent tool. for hte above purposes

The confusion on site with too many cooks, may be compounded by your suggestion that you'll use an architect OR an engineer on site. You should retain an engineer as well as an architect and this will not result in too many cooks on the design end of things. Professionals are intended to function as a team.  The engineer deals specifically with structural matters [Part A] and offers a Schedule A certificate for inclusion with the Opinions of Compliance. Architects certify everything else, except the specialist work, for which assurances etc are requested. 

Sealing the building usually falls to whoever is co-ordinating the contruction. How and when you seal buildings depends on how its detailed and is normally within the Main Contractor's control. He may have a trained operative to do this using the correct tape or sealant or he may bring in a specialist firm. 

However in your case, where you have multiple contractors directly but separately  employed by two different people, the internal sealing may not be be encompassed by work done under the auspices of one main contractor. He may have control of work to be carried out by the mechanical and electrical contractors, leaving penetrations by other specialists to be dealt with by you [Smart Homes, security cabling, phones, intercom, etc]. Add to this the fact that you control the windows and plasterers - a main trade and a main supplier whose work between them most affects air-tightness - and you effectively have two main contractors on this site, you and the other fellow.

I am concerned that with no clear line of command, co-ordination and responsbility its possible you're have problems.  With the greatest of respect - for its a brave endeavour to build any building - I strongly suggest you think again. Streamline your site hierarchy - either he or you takes control with no "indpendents" - appoint the professional team, keep the chains of command, co-ordination, design and control simple and the project should proceed well.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]


----------



## Corner (21 Jan 2010)

Hi ONQ, thanks again for your constructive feed back and I take on board your comments with great appreciation. Apologies if I am repeating myself but can I briefly clarify for you, & for others reading this thread who are in a similar predicament to me, how I am proposing to procure the build: 

I will employ a groundworker direct to carry out all excavation works associated with the site and to dig the foundations.
I will also employ a builder to (1) set out the footprint, (2) pour the foundations, (3) the dead-building, (4) build the rising internal & external walls up to eaves level and (5) pour/install the floors. His contract will stop at that point. The key advantage I see in putting these 5 main tasks under the one umbrella is that it will avoid a potential blame-game which could happen if I was to employ a different sub-contractor to do each task. (Friends & colleagues have warned me against employing more than one subbie on this part of the superstructure.) The air-tightness is something that will fall to me...and as they say, the buck will stop with me!
I will employ the builder on the condition that he is willing to liaise with the groundworker and vice versa. I will also make it clear to him that his contract entails setting out the house and the pouring of the foundations.
I suppose the bottom line is; I will be responsible for overall co-ordination, I will employ all sub-contractors and all instructions will come from me.
Thankfully, the practice who designed my dwelling also have structural engineers in house and I will ask them to confirm they can also certify the structural elements. Thank you for highlighting this ONQ.

Any further comments also very much welcome.

Corner.


----------



## TripMeUp (22 Jan 2010)

onq said:


> TripMeUp,
> 
> I didn't realise you had experience in the building industry.
> I also didn't realise you had an architect appointed with a good set of drawings.
> ...


 
ONQ,

What are you directing this at me for ?? and in a seemingly condescending manner....

The OP suggested that he may go the route of seperate Engineer from Architect and stated he was nervous about it....This forum is for people to share their experiences and I (like many others) have benefitted from it...

I went the route the OP is thinking about (only in terms of seperate Engineer from Architect) and I am sharing my experience with him that it is working well so far....

Whilst I will bow to your undoubted knowledge on these matters, I am as entitled to make a post here as you are...

regards


----------



## onq (22 Jan 2010)

TripMeUp,

Apologies - not intended for you at all but OP.

You're quoting attributes in the post made it look like you had made the comment not Corner.

ON closer reading this morning I see it was Corner not you.

Posting while tired does this.

Sorry again - will edit it.

(Not BTW intended to be condescending at all, just experience.)

ONQ.


----------



## onq (22 Jan 2010)

Corner said:


> Hi ONQ, thanks again for your constructive feed back and I take on board your comments with great appreciation. Apologies if I am repeating myself but can I briefly clarify for you, & for others reading this thread who are in a similar predicament to me, how I am proposing to procure the build:
> 
> I will employ a groundworker direct to carry out all excavation works associated with the site and to dig the foundations.
> I will also employ a builder to (1) set out the footprint, (2) pour the foundations, (3) the dead-building, (4) build the rising internal & external walls up to eaves level and (5) pour/install the floors. His contract will stop at that point. The key advantage I see in putting these 5 main tasks under the one umbrella is that it will avoid a potential blame-game which could happen if I was to employ a different sub-contractor to do each task. (Friends & colleagues have warned me against employing more than one subbie on this part of the superstructure.) The air-tightness is something that will fall to me...and as they say, the buck will stop with me!
> ...



Hi Corner

I have corrected the unforced error I made in directing my previous post to TripMeUp - I tripped myself up! 

In relation to what you write above that makes more sense, but that's a protocol that won't hold in reality unless you make it hold - people will defer to the more experienced man on site naturally. Its not a peeing contest, its the way it is. If you're taking overall co-ordination on board you have to become the contractor, a bit like an actor taking on a role.

This will include knowing your working drawing details inside out, understanding what each line means on a drawing and interpreting them for blockies who may or may not be literate or able to read drawings. This is particularly true for vapour checks, breather membranes and radon gas barriers. 

"Oh I thought that was just a thicker line" as you realise the vapour check is missing on a timber frame isn't funny. If you haven't had this experience before, enjoy. Better still, avoid.

The contractors duties are onerous, even compared with the architect - he stands over the entire job and issues the cert saying the work is built in compliance with the building regulations. The only exclusions from his cert are specialist subbies and suppliers such as the electrician, plumber, MVHR installer, FD&A installer, etc.
I think that to cover yourself, your cert should include certs from your sub-contractors saying their element of work has been carried out in compliance with the building regulations. If you don't issue this cert, there will be a big hole in the documentation at sell on, and solicitors are getting more into the detail, not less, in my experience over the past 20 years or so.

Don't assume that anyone on site knows what they're doing, including yourself. That's not intended as an insult. The job rolling along nicely, everybody happy - that's just when you should be checking things in my experience. Check things all the time. Your suggested strategy noted below may not be enough:

*"I will employ the builder on the condition that he is willing to liaise with the groundworker and vice versa."*

Your role is to ensure that proper risk assessment are done and "liaison" isn't a very strong term. You need to get beyond liaison into *control, checking, co-ordination  and compliance* - and make all on site equally responsible for it. Couch any and all contracts in terms that reflect everyone's obligations under the law in relation to the Planning, Building and Health and Safety Regulations and any other your solicitor may advise you on. As a first time contractor, as well as seeking advice from seasoned contractors, you should take advice all your legal documents and obligations. This may be a once-off undertaking, but its covered by several branches of law and you owe it to yourself to be covered on all of them. A useful exercise will be to ensure your contracts are up to date and reflect current practice H&S for exampe, but there may be other things a contractor should do. If you retain and architect - and I strongly suggest you do - make sure he goes through your obligations under whatever contract you choose to employ and explains how the whole document hangs together, the checks and balances and our obligations to subbies, etc.

*I'm not a contractor, so I couldn't say with certainty.*

Before commencement, perhaps under the guise of running through their work, go through the whole drawing and specification set with the other workers, contractors and sub-contractors - initially all together, later in focus groups for trades/suppliers that will be on site together - and agree handover points and co-ordination points. Issue a note of this to all of them, using the Building Programme to set dates for arrivals, deliveries, work and departure. Any slippage in the contract - notify all. Empower at least one operative who will be onsite at all times to be your eyes and ears - a spy if you will - to ensure people don't put themselves and other at risk. He can also watch for sharp practice. You might hconsider appointing a site foreman to carry out this role. A senior man, but one who knows the regs and the H&S duties. This part of your H&S Duties - proper risk assessment exercises, solutions brought forward and co-ordination or implementation.

Your biggest risk may be that you're a contractor with an untried team that's unused to working as a team. Think of yourself like a football manager. You wouldn't let them out without practice. H&S exercises are just like that - practice for the real thing to avoid mistakes and help the job run well and smoothly. You're also the ref, and the other teams manager BTW, and this metaphor is running out of control!

Possibly the most onerous job the Contractor does these days is comply with the H&S requirements, which is why I raised it. Merely getting someone to sign off that they'll look after their own health and safety protocols doesn't absolve you from yours, which as a minimum will involve co-ordination, foreseeability, checking and control. All operatives have to be competent and all should have their safe site passes at this stage. You get these from a one day course depending on the level of skill and training required. I have one. I was the only professional there that day - the rest were contracts managers,  tradesmen and general operatives.

You'll need safety barriers, lighting, staff facilities, signage and all the equipment appropriate for the work to be carried out - hard hats properly adjusted, hi-viz jackets, safety boots, concrete boots, gloves, ear protectors, goggles. Don't skimp on the goggles, BTW and watch out for loose clothing like "hoodies" being worn near machinery. This is important. I learned before Christmas of one operative who suffered head injuries fom an angle grinder that got caught in his hoodie. Nasty, and could have been avoided if he'd been wearing his safety goggles. Hoodies also impede peripheral vision - potentially a lethal disability on a high risk environment like a building site, expecially if ear protectors are being worn as well. 

As well as specialist training in operating machinery, make sure your operatives are all fit to work. Watch out for people with disabilities/restrictions that aren't visually apparent including deafness, vision impairment,  depth perception and physical relation to objects [obscure genetic disorder] alcoholism, ill-health, drug addiction, former poorly healed injuries, bad back, burns and lesions on the feet [concrete work] illiteracy and an inability to speak or read english. Make and obligation to disclose any or all of these or other issues part of any contract to help cover you [see what I mean about the legals?] in event of an accident in the workplace.

An engineer only certifies structure. That's Part A of the building regulations. Yes, this is an important part of any building, but there are 11 other regulations. Some will be covered by the work of the specialists noted above, and they have design elements in that work. For example the architects plans might show the position of a lightswitch and a swooping line from it to the light fitting, but it won't show the exact route of the wiring.

*A note on Certification and H&S documentation*

The architect's cert is what pulls the documentation together, although some H&S "experts" will have you think its supposed to be the Safety File. I don't agree with this view. It becomes part of the file, but the architect certifies overall design compliance. He and the engineer are the professionals whose files the H&S inspectors trawl through when someone has an accident.  They're not the only ones though, because the buck stops with the contractors and in particular the Main Contractor. The architect's cert includes Schedule A assurances from the engineer, from you the contractor, and the certs you offer with yours, as noted above.

The literature and magazines in the shops for Self-builders, suggests that they their colloquial advisors seem to have missed the seriousness of their H&S obligations. it seems that the most popular magazine is published outside this jurisdication in Northern Ireland and matters may be different there. Whatever the reason, with Self-build comprising between 30-40% of the housing market annually, and the only sector that's holding up in this recession, we need to improve on this position. Site assesment reports should be available for review to prove you did your job to avoid hazard.

With a nod to TripMeUp, I don't mean to sound lecturing or condescending. I offer advice and am often asked for more. Its free advice, remote from the action, that's not exhaustive and given in the presence of many unknowns. If I include more than what someone asks about I'm not being a know it all - its partly to cover me and partly for the information of readers of this forum who may not wish to ask questions publicly to clarify matters but take it all in nonetheless. A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

Its why I say my best advice to people is - always retain and take advice from a building professional who's  competent to give it.



FWIW

ONQ.

[broken link removed]


----------



## TripMeUp (22 Jan 2010)

Hi ONQ,

That’s fine..no worries...we all make mistakes...!!

Your posts are always very informative and useful to many (myself included)....

Re your nod to me above, I would not think you sound condescending in what are very detailed posts....rather another word beginning with c..................wait for it......complete (as in the advise you give..!!)

regards


----------



## onq (22 Jan 2010)

TripMeUp said:


> Hi ONQ,
> 
> That’s fine..no worries...we all make mistakes...!!
> 
> ...



<bows>

Thanks for taking it so well TripMeUp, and also for keeping me in line when I made my error.
Please do not stand back in amazement though - please comment, and that goes for all our readers.
Comment and questions are invited from readers in order to improve our responses and help us give clearer answers.

Because while I may claim that I'm competent to the standard of a normal practitioner in the profession of architecture, I'm not omnescient - no professional is.
Even Supreme Court rulings get revisited over the years and bodies of law change and develop over time and as our culture changes.
So please feel free to put forward contrary or alternative views to mine [although you can  support them as well!]. 

The object of these forums is to inform, and while too much information can be confusing, a well rounded set of views combined in a thread in no way denigrates the quality of the information on offer as long as each post in itself is "competent", as opposed to "complete" and "on-topic" so people can get the message more easily.



ONQ.


----------



## Corner (22 Jan 2010)

TripMeUp said:


> I, like you, had reservations about retaining my architect/engineer for the construction element of my project and so have went with another Engineer for checking work,signing off etc etc....
> No issues at all in doing this for me so far....


 
Hi tripmeup, thank you for sharing your experience. Can I ask what stage of the build you are at and what pitfalls and experiences you have encountered to date? Have you gone the self-build route & employed all your contractors direct?
corner.


----------



## Corner (22 Jan 2010)

Hi ONQ, thank you again for your advice and also for the input from tripmeup. Stating the obvious; the great thing about this forum is that no matter what your query there is always somone else in the same predicament and it's great to get straight-talking, practical & professional advice. A bit of constructive debate along the way is also priceless and really helps you to think things out.

This thread has been very helpful to me and I leave it open for other contributors. 

Probably like every other self-builder out there, I have loads and loads of queries and will pick your brians in the very near future!! And of course, print off a copy of the FAQ's devised by our cyber buddy professional ONQ! Chat soon with all!! 

corner.


----------



## BICIP (23 Jan 2010)

hi would suggest that the groiund worker's remit finishes at ground floor slab, with builder taking over from there. further suggest you employ an engineer (ona hourly or day rate) to supervise foundations, do setting out and check tolerances before handover to builder..cos you are the contractor (self build), otherwise you will have the age old blame game between different subbies......would get a engineer if i were u - arch gnerally better at conceptual stage.- cvould also employ one at finishes stage on a day rate if u wanted....prelim safety plan only covers you to design stage, you need to provide the subbies with relevant info therein...they need to supply you with safe work method statements for all elelemtns of work undertaken (in theory), in practice they will be small time guys without that expertise...just be aware that as main contractor and client you fulfill both psdp and pscs roles....just be sure all is done to safe and accepotable standard as a minimum iguess or try and get some sort of written method statements off each subbie prior to commencement. if you want any more info give me a shout - sorry about spelling and punctuation!


----------



## onq (23 Jan 2010)

BICIP,

I see you're a relative newbie and I don't want to discourage active posters, but the information you've given is not correct regarding the OP's role under the current H&S legislation. It would be great if that were his role, but its not and this may lead to difficulties in practice. My above suggestion that a preliminary H&S plan be produced regardless was because its a useful exercise but its NOT required by law.. 

May I suggest you familiarise yourself with the Self-Build FAQ on this forum and read these links before you offer advice on this subject again:

Guidance for homeowners undertaking construction work
[broken link removed]

Please also read; -

Clients in Construction - Best Practice Guidance
[broken link removed]

Page 4 is particularly important - this sets out the current position, which is onerous enough - any self builder is deemed to be the *Contractor*.

Several items become clear from these guidelines.
Self-builders by current legal definition cannot be *Clients*
With no Client, there can be no appointments as *PSDP* or *PSCS*.
With neither of the Project Supervisor available, there is no-one to create the *Preliminary Health and Safety Plan *or to implement or updated the *Site Safety Plan*.

This puts a huge hole through the process as the seminal documents are not there and the Supervisors are not there to co-ordinate.
The Roles of Designer and Contractor are still available but their duties  under the legislation do not amount to their being Supervisors.

Its important to be clear about this.

The Preliminary H&S Plan suggested by me was to help the Designers and Contractors get their head around the project. It cannot by definition be a "real" Preliminary Plan, since there is no Client or Supervisors, but such a document is needed in my opinion to record, monitor and assess the project in relation to the discharge of the duties of Designer(s) and Contractor(s), regardless of anything else

And yes, I have brought this matter to the attention of the HSA but have not received any comment other than the Designers and Contractors duties still apply. 
The HSA's  function is executive, to ensure we all operate within the legislation, not legislative, to make or amend legislation or even judicial, to interpret or issue judgements based on it.
Running any project without Client, Plan or Supervisors is a bit like trying to running the Jordan team without Eddie Jordan, the chief mechanic, the physio, co-ordinated preparation or a strategy for the season, but we'll see what develops.

HTH

ONQ.

[broken link removed]


----------



## BICIP (23 Jan 2010)

fair enough self build not my bag......BTW who was suggesting "Running any project without Client, Plan or Supervisors is a bit like trying to running the Jordan team without Eddie Jordan, the chief mechanic, the physio, co-ordinated preparation or a strategy for the season, but we'll see what develops."....certainly not me! 

withdraw my H&S advice but firmly stand by the rest re conflicting subcontractors


----------



## onq (24 Jan 2010)

BICIP said:


> fair enough self build not my bag......BTW who was suggesting "Running any project without Client, Plan or Supervisors is a bit like trying to running the Jordan team without Eddie Jordan, the chief mechanic, the physio, co-ordinated preparation or a strategy for the season, but we'll see what develops."....certainly not me!
> 
> withdraw my H&S advice but firmly stand by the rest re conflicting subcontractors



Your other advice was sound enough 

ONQ.


----------



## consol (4 Feb 2010)

I'm just at the finishing stage of a self-build. I had very little experience with building, had bought a new house in an estate previously. I work as a Project Manager in a different industry so have experience managing people/projects but I found the self build process very difficult.

My advice would be to get a builder to do the whole lot, agree your spec and shop around for a good price. In this climate you should get competitive quotes. That way you have 1 person to deal with instead of trying to manage all the different trades.

I would not go direct labour/self build again......


----------



## onq (4 Feb 2010)

consol said:


> I'm just at the finishing stage of a self-build. I had very little experience with building, had bought a new house in an estate previously. I work as a Project Manager in a different industry so have experience managing people/projects but I found the self build process very difficult.
> 
> My advice would be to get a builder to do the whole lot, agree your spec and shop around for a good price. In this climate you should get competitive quotes. That way you have 1 person to deal with instead of trying to manage all the different trades.
> 
> I would not go direct labour/self build again......



<nods>

Many people choose self build for reasons of cost and personal satisfaction at building their own home.
Both are sound aims, but the reality can be a case of "be careful what you wish for..."
You at least had project management experience to draw on.
You may possibly have been unprepared for the fever pitch that can arise on a building site as opposed to the relatively saner office environment.
If you also had a good set of drawings you were at least prepared.
However, the urge to cut costs usually means self builders omit professional guidance after planning has been achieved and this means they end up going to site with only planning drawings.
"Self-Build" becomes "Design-Build", but without the necessary professional input and no seasoned contractor on board - hell on earth!
30-40% of new builds this year will be self-builds undertaken under these conditions. 
At some point there may be a lot of non-compliant houses to sell on...

ONQ.


----------



## TripMeUp (5 Feb 2010)

Hi Coner et al,

Sorry for delay in replying to your questions...I am at the stage of internal plastering, with this due to commence next week.....
Things have gone well so far BUT the big thing to remember is that if you go the self build route, you are probably adding at least another 5 or 6 months onto the time it would take a builder to build.
So if time is of the essence, then.....

Apart from that, well as ONQ says, it depends on your knowledge and who you have around you etc....
I went the route of getting a very experienced and reputable tradesman to manage the build, along with me and obviously the Engineer also...
So far so good, with only minor issues that have all so far been easily resolved...

HTH


----------

