Builder or Engineer at fault

A

Al_Spa

Registered User
Messages
9
Hi,

I got water damage in my house a year and half ago and I hired a builder do repair the damage and also an engineer to supervise the works.

Now the walls in two of the bathrooms are starting to comb. I got 3 contractors to look at it and was quoted circa 2 k to fix the issue. They all agree that there is a problem with the partitions and the way they were screwed onto the studs.

The builder is gone busted and closed the company he was trading under, and the engineer is saying that the house is safe to live and there is no structural damage; it is a tiling issue and not his fault.

What do I do? Do I fix it and pay for it myself and then claim? Or do I claim first and then fix it? But from who?

Any advice anyone can provide will be welcome.

Thank you.
 
It is natural, given that the builder has gone to the wall, for you to turn to the Engineer to find a home for the liability for the problems that have arisen.

Whether this will be successful will depend on the level of supervision that you agreed with the Engineer.

If the agreement you had with the Engineer was such that you could reasonably expect him to supervise the operation to screw the plasterboard to the studs, then you may be successful. However, it would be unusual and very expensive to have this level of supervision. In most cases, it would be assumed that the builder would be competent to do this type of work without supervision.

In spite of what the other builders have said, is it possible that the problem is with the tiling (which I presume was not in the remit of the Engineer's supervision.)

I think it will be difficult to lay liability for this issue at the feet of the Engineer.
 
Why is the engineering saying it's a tiling issue when your 3 builders say it's the partition wall problem.

In any case it's the builder who is at fault and you cannot sue him. Whether you can sue the engineer and whether that is worthwhile, probably not. He seems to be using the get out clause of it not being structural damage. And it doesn't sound structural.
 
Thanks for the replies.

What annoys me the most is that the engineer was hired to supervise the works and make sure the house was again safe to live in. There was no agreement on paper, and he visited the site a couple of times while the works were being done. We had an issue soon after the works were finished; the builder had to change the floor tiles in one of the bathrooms but he wouldn't do it until the engineer told him to. At that point I hadn't paid them all the money, that's why it was easier to convince them to fix the issue.

But now we are not talking about a wall being crooked, we are talking about a potential safety issue. If the walls collapse while someone in my family is using the bathrooms I would never forgive myself.

Yes, I see what you both mean, I think it will be difficult for me to get something out of the Engineer even though I hold him responsible. And with the builder out of business I guess my options are limited, meaning I will have to pay the bill myself.

Thank you again.
 
Did the builder provide you with insurances at the time? This may be an avenue even if the builder is bust.
 
As there was no written contract with the engineer, I don't think you'll have any luck pursuing him as you can't prove the level of supervision agreed. A couple of visits suggests he really wasn't supervising.

The way the partitions were attached to the studs may already have been obscured by the time the engineer visited, and so all he would have been able to do was seek assurances from the builder that all was in order.
 
3CC - No, the builder didn't provide me with anything. As I made a claim through my insurance policy, I know he was asked to provide some documents to the loss assessor before the Insurance company released the final payment to me. Do you think i could claim from his insurance company? I thought they wouldn't cover bad workmanship...

Leo - I think that is the case. I never signed a contract with the Engineer but he gave me a letter after the job was finished. I don't remember the exact wording he used. I will have a look when I get home and let you all know. But for what I remember, he only confirmed that the damage had been repaired and there was no structural damage, which is true.

Thanks one more time
 
kkelliher said:
they dont cover bad workmanship but they must cover any consequental loss as a result of the bad workmanship.
Click to expand...

That's interesting and you're a quantity surveyor.

Al Spa what I suggest you do is tell your engineer you think he should pay for the repairs quoting Kkellihers post and if he says no tell him you're going to sue him, that might make him pay, and if that doesn't you could try a solicitor, an initial letter from a solicitor might just do the trick and that shouldn't cost too much. But I wouldn't go any further than that, going to court for 2K is not worth it and the legal costs probably outweight the potential gain. Never mind the stress and bother.
 
Bronte said:
Al Spa what I suggest you do is tell your engineer you think he should pay for the repairs quoting Kkellihers post and if he says no tell him you're going to sue him, that might make him pay,
Click to expand...

I believe Kkelliher was referring to the builder's insurance.
 
Bronte said:
That's interesting and you're a quantity surveyor.

Al Spa what I suggest you do is tell your engineer you think he should pay for the repairs quoting Kkellihers post and if he says no tell him you're going to sue him, that might make him pay, and if that doesn't you could try a solicitor, an initial letter from a solicitor might just do the trick and that shouldn't cost too much. But I wouldn't go any further than that, going to court for 2K is not worth it and the legal costs probably outweight the potential gain. Never mind the stress and bother.
Click to expand...

I was just looking through my paperwork and I found the letter that I asked the engineer to write. In the letter he confirms he came on several occasions to visit the site - I know he only came twice - and he also confirms that the house was reinstated to it's original condition using materials of even better quality than before.....

Based on this I think I may have a case. I know that going to court for 2 K is not worth the hassle, so I was checking the small claims court instead, but this would be my first time doing this, and I think that even if I win, I may not get my 2 k back from the engineer.

Thanks for the advice though.

My next move is to contact the engineer. I will keep everyone posted on how the issue develops, and hopefully this will be useful to someone in future.

Thanks again.
 
kkelliher said:
they dont cover bad workmanship but they must cover any consequental loss as a result of the bad workmanship.
Click to expand...

But I haven't lost anything yet. My understanding is that the insurance would pay for the damage caused by the walls when they collapse, but they wouldn't pay for the actual walls/partitions?

Thank you.
 
Your best place to start is probably to contact your own insurance and let them know that there are issues with the work that was carried out.
 
Hi everyone.

I just wanted to give everyone an update on about my case.

After talking again with the engineer, he chased up the builder and they both agreed to come down and open up a small hole in one of the walls to determine what exactly is causing the issue and the cost to fix it. This should happen within the next few days.

As per Seagull's advice, I also rang the insurance company who told me they can send a loss adjustor to determine whether this will be a new claim or part of the previous one. I told them to wait a few days to see if the issue is fixed by the engineer and the builder.

Thank you.
 
Hi Everyone,

The saga continues....

The Engineer and the builder admitted the issue is caused by the quality of the plywood used in the bathroom walls. Apparently they have had the same issue in other jobs...

So, even though the builder is out of business he agreed to repair the damage for free, but because he doesn't have money, he is asking me to pay for the tiles.:mad:

Question for you guys; what would you do?

A: Pay for the tiles ( 400 eur ) and hopefully put the matter to rest? The Engineer has agreed to supervise the works to make sure the issue is rectified once and for all.

B: Push back, and risk the builder will do a runner, get someone else to finish the job, pay the 2k, court, etc? Or maybe the builder will agree to do the job but very poorly?....


Thanks again for al the advice.
 
Is option B really an Option when you read Option A? I think you have well and truly answered your own question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top