# What to do (Cowboy Builder)



## ninjaBob (25 Jan 2010)

I am currently doing a self build, so I am the primary contractor. I hired a "reputable" builder to construct the house. 

The only aspect of the build that I was responsible for were

Supplying Materials
Engineers
Heating
Plumbing
Electrics
Carpentry
Windows

The builder undertook all other aspects of the build. We have a signed agreement by the builder and a full detailed breakdown of each aspect of the build.

The engineers were hired to:

Prepare Construction Drawings
Perform 8 Construction Inspections
Building Regulations and Technical Advice Throughout
All Mortgage Stage Payments
Issue of Final Cert of compliance to building regulations and planning permission

So here we are at the end of our build, we noticed that our plastering was way off. All window, door reveals were incorrect. So we asked the engineers to confirm our fears, which they did. We informed the builder and asked him to address the issues. When the plastering was complete it was evident that he couldn't rectify the issues. 

So we consulted with the builder about fixing the reveals and arranged with the carpenter to do the necessary works.

Since the plastering has dried we noted defects in every wall in the house. Bellies, Dips, Non-Level etc. More worryingly we noticed that our ceilings were off by as much as 2 inches. This was confirmed by a laser level and we also got up into the crawl space to pin point where the flaws were in the ceilings.

I contacted our solicitor once it was obvious we had far bigger problems. He informed me that I should contact the builder and explain to him the issues we are having give him a complete breakdown of all the issues and then send a registered letter confirming these issues. I was also to instruct the builder that he was free to bring in his own engineer to confirm/dispute our claims. The builder was also instructed that the bill was increasing.

The builder has accepted responsibility for the job, and is willing to pay for part of the repairs. He is unwilling to fix the main issue in the ceilings, which is a very noticeable defect in house.

I am bringing in 2 independent engineers to confirm the issues I have noted. 

Legally I would just like to know for certain what the best course of action?

Given the builder itemized each element of the build and it was not 1 large / complete contract can I bring him to the smalls claims court for each item for damages up to €2000? (all items are broken down under €2000). 

Alternatively would it be more beneficial to bring him to the district courts and pay the relevant legal fees?

Finally to what role should the engineers have played in this? Should they have been checking the levels of the walls and ceilings? Ensuring that walls were plumb and the workmanship was up to scratch?

Obviously the builder is entirely to blame, but I hired a professional firm to oversee and give advice on the build and it's clear they have missed a lot. I have only talked about the plastering but the more I dig the more I find is incorrect and should have been spotted by the builder and engineers. So far I've been putting all my focus and attention on the builder in getting him to pay for his mistakes, but I suspect this will only get me so far.

Sorry for the long winded post, I just wanted to explain the situation in detail and as it has occurred from my perspective. Any advice or recommendations would be appreciated

Thanks


----------



## onq (26 Jan 2010)

Hi ninjaBob,

I have had a brief look over your previous posts, in particular that business with your plumber, as well as your post above. There is a limit to what one can and should advise people about on AAM and the information you requested approaches this in my opinion. You appear about to issue legal proceedings against your builder and possibly your engineer. You are asking specific questions about the administration of a building contract without telling us what contract you used. You are questioning the on-site duties of building professionals without telling us their terms of appointment.  Regarding the substantive issues, the alleged building defects, the building professionals posting here cannot comment on the level of defects because we cannot see them. You are effectively presenting only one side of a story. Please don't give the other or you may give out information that should be reserved for a trial, if it comes to that.

Accordingly, wading into this morass is not something I advise other regular posters to do unless they have direct experience of building disputes. I will however venture this much, which is offered remote from the situation, without benefit of inspection and with many unknowns:

Engineers know about structure, civil works and/or services installations, depending on their training. In my experience of them, they do not know much about internal plasterwork, finishing and "small scale" works. The ceiling being out 50mm might not hugely concern an engineer so long as the structure wasn't loaded too eccentrically or settling, but it would raise concerns with an experienced architect or architectural technician or surveyor and would probably have an interior designer upset about how the top of the wallpaper was going to look. THat having been said I know severla engineers who can tell if a crack is normal or evidence or  significant settling just by looking at it, they just won't comment on fishishes items. 

I would be concerned that the two independent engineers you say you have retained may not serve you as well as you might require. I think that you may need to retain someone holding an architectural qualification, preferably with experience of inspecting, preparing legal cases and offering sworn testimony in a court situations. He/she will be able to advise you on the duties and responsibilities of the engineers in this situation, who appear to have been providing architectural services. He/she will assist your legal team in preparing the case including compiling the necessary reports with photographs you will need to help convince a judge of your claim. He will also form a view as to whether you are being too "picky" or have a genuine claim and advise you accordingly. If you paid Mini prices don't expect a Rolls.

Alternatively, you might consider retaining a chartered surveyor with experience of dealing with building disputes. A surveyor may not see things with quite the same exacting design viewpoint that an architect will, but he may have the added benefit of being able to quantify costs of remedial work. Whether he will be au fait with the latest building technology in terms of variable vapour checks, MVHR systems, interstitial venting requirement and I couldn't say but their technical knowledge is usually sound. If you choose an alternative dispute resolution process below, you could do worse than agree on a Chartered Surveyor as your Arbitrator.

This appraisal of how the different disciplines might view building defects somewhat limited, but setting up your legal case involves choosing your team with care. There is no point having competent professionals on board who may feel they are acting beyond their qualification and/or ability. You will need to ascertain this with your solicitor should you go forward and take advicefrom him/her on which professionals to retain to give evidence. Going into Court the Self-Build idealism gets put to one side and you take advice from your legal people. Documentation, Reports and Photographic Records may help support your position, especially correspondence.

Your description of the defects suggest they lie in the main with the plasterwork. A bad plasterer can ruin a good house. However you may have difficulty in getting a Court to agree with you that this in and of itself constitutes a serious defect. You may find a Judge will consider anything other than imminent collapse as a "snag item" and may not see the defects in the same way you do, even with an architect's testimony.

Your description of the defects also suggest surface faults, but these could betray underlying issues. At the moment the house may be non-compliant under Part D Materials and Workmanship, but I would be more worried about compliance at a deeper level - for example Part C and Part L - in relation to the continuity of your vapour checks on the warm side of your insulation, or in extreme cases, the non-existence of your vapour checks. Part A compliance may be in question in relation to your 50mm ceiling misalignment, which could be a flaw in the superstructure or could betray settlement or foundation defects. Even where such defects are proven, a Judge without experience of technical matters may not understand the issues raised and may rule accordingly.

It looks like you may be heading for the High Court, not the district Court because it is all under one job and your solicitor should advise you on this. 
Before you go to the Court I think you should consider an alternative dispute resolution method. Given that the builder has tried and failed to remedy the defects, there are four main options available to you: negotiation, conciliation, mediation, arbitration - in increasing order of authority, technical ability and input of the person conducting the resolution, the level of binding agreement and usually, the cost, arbitration being the dearest and most adversarial, similar to a High Court.

Here are some links which can help you familiarize you with the concepts involved; -

http://www.goodbyecourts.com/
http://www.mediate.com/articles/sgubiniA2.cfm
[broken link removed]
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/area...tions/conciliationmediationandarbitration.htm
[broken link removed]

Here is a link to a website of an Irish Mediator:


I've worked with Joe Behan in his capacity as an Engineer.

However if things fall out between the parties, I think you may need to bring this to Arbitration:

[broken link removed]

I realise this isn't the detail of the advice you were seeking, but I think it would be most unwise to advise you in any further detail because of the remoteness of the situation, the lack of full information, the nature of the defects, the willingness of the builder to try to put things right and the potential exposure of your engineers to claims.

My best advice is (i) to retain a competent and appropriately qualified building professional to advise you, in this case an architect or chartered surveyor with experience of building disputes and (ii) to consider engaging in a process of alternative dispute resolution.

Best of luck with it and you might let us know here how you get on.

FWIW

ONQ.

[broken link removed]


----------



## ninjaBob (26 Jan 2010)

Thanks Onq

It's the internet and as such I was not looking for detailed advice, but rather realistic unbiased advice (even in the most general of ways). conciliation, mediation and arbitration are not something that I have considered. First reaction is always to go to the engineers then the solicitor.

Obviously everyone I have hired has a vested interest in this and those responsible will do their best to cover their own asses, while those giving me advice would benefit from additional $$$$. Especially solicitors and I'll be honest the only winners here will be the solicitors.

The two additional engineers I have brought on board are merely there to confirm that the plaster work is crap, but at the same time there is nothing deeper. The last thing we want is to find out the foundations are crap... and run the risk of subsidence. But given how bad the plastering is and how much the ceilings are off it is definitely something I want checked out.

With that said we have a crap finish to our house and the builder is only interested in fixing the easy / cheap parts. So something will need to be done to fix this. I'll see about getting Surveyor and/or architect on my side as well.

Cheers


----------



## onq (26 Jan 2010)

Hi ninjaBob,

You're very welcome.

This kind of thing is difficult to deal with when, from what you've posted here, you've obviously been committed to getting this project done right.
With an engineer conducting limited inspections as you describe I would be hopeful that the structure is compliant, but the 50mm misalignment of the ceiling raises some questions.
In addition, given that most houses are finished internally using plasterboards instead of 3 no. coats of wet plaster these days, if the structure is sound I wouldn't have expected to see irregularities in the wall surfaces.
Unless the ceiling is intentionally laid to a fall [supporting a flat roof] of someone placed tapered joists upside down or fixed firring pieces to the underside of the ceiling joists between the inspection dates your engineer [assuming its a blockwork build] should have seen that; -


 the floor joist hangers were higher on one side of a room than the other
  different length steel hangers were used on either side of the room
 the level of the coursing varied by 50mm around the perimeter
the bottom faces of the joists sloped relative to the coursing.
  Exclusions due to design aside, the the 50mm discrepancy in the ceiling sloping should normally have been picked up.
The only other reason that comes to mind is you used a timber frame manufacturer and the frame was mismatched.
That having been said, I have inspected a semi-d years ago where the ceiling sloped 50mm for no good reason.
You have to develop an eye for seeing this in a white painted room or else take measurements everywhere.
Its easier to spot befor plastering when you have the bedding joints running below the line of the joists.
This is why an inspection just before plastering is vitally important - you can sight along all elements.

HTH

ONQ.

[broken link removed]


----------



## ninjaBob (26 Jan 2010)

It's cavity block house with hollow core.

We have 3 ceilings

1. Is a suspended ceiling, the main track and rails for these are not level. So a small gradual slope over 6m's adds up.

2. Timber Joist Ceiling (this is where the roof structure). There is a massive belly in the ceiling. I put this down to how the slabs were put on the ceiling, not enough screws holding the boards up and basically when the wet skim was applied it sagged.

3. The Landing, which was a retrofit because the original stairs design was not suitable. The landing itself is not level which leads to issues with ceiling looking off, but again there is a massive belly.

These are my own observations on it (and in my own words which may not be accurate), but the eye and level don't lie. In total there have been 15 inspections on site at this point. 13 of them occurred prior to plastering. at least 4 of them occurred between slabbing and plastering.

I also requested that the engineers visit the site to inspect the slabbing as I considered it sloppy (Lots of joints, small bits of boards used around sockets etc.) I was advised by the engineers that this was all normal and standard practice and that everything was ok. It's clear the slabbing is not ok as this the root of all our problems. Even if the walls were not plumb correct usage of bonding compound and a level would have fixed this to some degree. Instead it was all put on the long finger for the plasterer to fix and unfortunately the plasterer only has a few mm to work with when skimming and there is only so much he can bond out.

The ceilings should be flat.

Thanks for all the tips.


----------



## Sconhome (26 Jan 2010)

Ninjabob,

How were the sizings of the timber in the ceilings and floors specified? This could also be a source of problems especially regarding the sagging in the ceilings.

I agree with you in regard the bonding and fixing of plasterboards. There is no excuse for this to be out when such a forgiving system of attachment is being used.

I would suggest going the mediation route using the facilities of any professional organisation your contractor is a member of. It reads to me that the only solution you are considering is the removal and reslabbing of the entire property and checking the structural timber sizing.

My guess is that you are not considering a financial contribution to help you "live" with the situation, you are not happy and want this put right. Again presuming you have proper contracts in place with defects libility and the protocol to be following in the event of dispute.

I note your builder is accepting part liability. Where exactly is the line being drawn on this? What is the issue with the ceilings that he is shirking responsibility for? You may get somewhere with an offsite coffee or meeting to discuss where things have gone wrong.

It may become evident that there are design issues that are only being manifested as you get closer to completion.


----------



## ninjaBob (26 Jan 2010)

The engineers specified everything in construction drawings, I was not informed of any issues by the engineers during construction from their various inspections. So I can only assume that everything is fine.

With regards to to the slabbing.

We accept that the walls will be off, and that we will have Bellies on the walls, what we do not accept are certain walls, if you place a level on the wall you can fit your fingers behind the gap. Thankfully these are all at joints between boards, so the boards can be removed in isolation.

We are also willing to accept the builder to source another plasterer to come in a bond / skim out the dips. This will reduce the amount of bellies in the walls leaving the vast majority of the walls in SoSo condition. Our only concerns are that Skirting, Architraves, Cabinets, Stairs etc. are not impacted by poor workmanship. So we are flexible and not trying to force the entire job to be redone because we are being "picky"

We also do not accept the ceilings. They are simply wrong and will be shown up when painted, if we put coving on it or if we put up curtain poles. They are noticeably wrong. the ceiling above our chimney is sagging so much it looks like an oriental arch....

When you walk down from the stairs you see massive bellies in the ceiling. This is something we have to look at for the rest of our lives and it's not acceptable.

The builder is willing to give €3500 to fix the issues. The current bill is over €14,000 and increasing. He argues that he simply can't afford to fix it. I have offered that he comes back and fixes it all himself which would reduce the cost drastically but he has declined to do so.

Unfortunately we have paid to have a job done and while we don't expect it to be perfect we do expect an acceptable level of workmanship. The builder has accepted responsibility for the quality of the job but is not willing to touch the ceilings.


----------



## onq (26 Jan 2010)

There is always a risk involved in going to Court
Because the amount exceeds the circa €6,300 limit of the District Court, I think you may be into a superior court and probably legal representation.
I don't know what the costs for mediation or arbitration are, but the last estimate I heard for a legal team in the High Court ran to €20,000 - per day.
This is why I say, think twice, take the best legal advice you can get on how to proceed, based on your own records and correspondence and phone records as well as a report issued by a competent investigating building professional and choose an appropriate means of dispute resolution.

You may find this page useful when considering Court awards and limits.

[broken link removed]

HTH

ONQ.

[broken link removed]


----------



## Sconhome (26 Jan 2010)

ninjaBob said:


> The builder has accepted responsibility for the quality of the job but is not willing to touch the ceilings.



Why? What has caused the ceilings to belly?


----------



## ninjaBob (26 Jan 2010)

onq said:


> There is always a risk involved in going to Court
> Because the amount exceeds the circa €6,300 limit of the District Court, I think you may be into a superior court and probably legal representation.
> I don't know what the costs for mediation or arbitration are, but the last estimate I heard for a legal team in the High Court ran to €20,000 - per day.
> This is why I say, think twice, take the best legal advice you can get on how to proceed, based on your own records and correspondence and phone records as well as a report issued by a competent investigating building professional and choose an appropriate means of dispute resolution.
> ...



This is the main reason I am posting here, because the solicitors would love for me to take this all the way. While I would also love to take this all the way, I'm not a gambler and want to resolve this. The fear of court is certainly more striking for the builder.

We'll see how it pans out.



Sconhome said:


> Why? What has caused the ceilings to belly?



I'm not a professional but I would believe 1 of two things happened:

1. The plasterer put up too much skim and didn't even it out. Thus the ceilings are off.

2. The builder didn't fix the boards correctly and with the weight of the boards they became loose and the plasterer simply skimmed over it.

At the end of the day the builder was hired to do all of this (ceilings, walls, slabbing, plastering etc). It's a poor job and I just wanted to know other peoples views on it (Obviously pretty hard to get an idea of it visually without seeing it first hand). As to set my mind at ease to the direction I want to take it.


----------



## Complainer (26 Jan 2010)

ninjaBob said:


> The builder undertook all other aspects of the build. We have a signed agreement by the builder and a full detailed breakdown of each aspect of the build.
> 
> The engineers were hired to:
> 
> ...


Would it be usual that the builder is contracted to inspect his own work? Surely the inspections should be independent.


----------



## aelig (4 Mar 2010)

Hi, I am interested to know what happens to your story now, we are dealing with same type of cowboy builder at moment, a lot of upset and headache. Please post your proceeding, it will be great help for us. thanks!


----------



## aelig (4 Mar 2010)

would possible the same plumber we hired?


----------



## onq (4 Mar 2010)

Complainer said:


> Would it be usual that the builder is contracted to inspect his own work? Surely the inspections should be independent.



I only noticed your reply to this thread with a query today Complainer - sorry if you werewaiting on a reply from me - its been a busy and difficult month.

On a small project with a budget to allow for it, there are usually a minimum of two building professionals - the architect and the engineer.
Both are in a position to inspect and comment on the works independently.
These inspections form part of the normal checks and balances.
I never operate without an engineer, even on extensions.

On more well-funded jobs there may be a mechanicla end electrical engineer and a quantity surveyor to assess services and costings respectively and advise on contracts [both].
The M&E advises on mechanical and electrical work, tenders and appointments and the QS advises on these and everything else.
Together this forms a network of design and contractual oversight which tends to focus a cotractor on doing his work well.

These days, with the prevelance on costs savings and self-buiild, the first thing to be cut back is this net of professional oversight, which can result in unfortunate consequences.

HTH


ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon                       as a defence or support - in and of itself -  should       legal        action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in                       Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports   on     the         matters    at      hand.


----------



## Complainer (4 Mar 2010)

onq said:


> I only noticed your reply to this thread with a query today Complainer - sorry if you werewaiting on a reply from me - its been a busy and difficult month.


Thanks for the update. To be honest, I was asking the question to the OP rather than to 'the ONQ',  for two reasions.

1) I don't think it is fair for anyone here on AAM to have an expectation of an answer from anybody within any time scale. This isn't work.
2) I was curious as to why the OP spoke about engaging 'two independent engineers' at a late stage. Isn't the first engineer independent of the builder?


----------



## onq (4 Mar 2010)

To be sure, to be sure, perhaps?

And I agree with your sentiments, but people get used to someone answering them.

Also its good etiquette not to ignore other posters.

----------------

"The ONQ".

Heh.

ONQ.


----------

