Poor perculation test - who's liable?

[pkelly]

Bought a new-build house this year and moved in during July. After heavy rain of this last month or so, the water level in the toilet bowls will rise considerably (almost over the bowl!) during and after a downpour.

My builder checked the percolation area this morning and reckons the problem is down to not enough soakage on the site. He is contacting his engineer as he says that percolation testing was done (in 2001) prior to him buying the site. He told me that if the percolation test was inaccurate, that the local county council will be responsible (have since learned that the original applicants engineer would be responsible) and will have to rectify the problem. He also stated that he had heard of other sites in the area having a similar problem and that he suspected that some tests were performed in favour of the land seller!

Now bearing in mind the red-tape that this could entail, does anyone know in a legal sense, who is actually liable if the percolation test was inaccurate.

And more importantly, what possible solutions are they to fixing the problem?


Any help, greatly appreciated

 

[MOB]

This is potentially a very serious problem, with a bill of anything up to €20k to make good. Get on to your solicitor asap.

 

[nutty nut]

Sorry MOB but I think thats a bit OTT. Personally I cant see why 3 or 4 grand wouldnt sort it but it will depend on the site and the surroundings.

The question of liability will lie with whoever carried out the percolation test but there has been a lot of water under the bridge since 2001 (I just love the puns )and he/she could claim that outside factors over the last 5 years have reulted in the water table becoming higher thus leading to the present problem.

The local council will not be reponsible in any way as their ass is covered because they would have condioned all these matters in the grant of permission.

In my experience the builder is responsible for this so dont be fobbed off by him. Talk to him again and get him to sort it out

 

[MOB]

"Personally I cant see why 3 or 4 grand wouldnt sort it"

It may be that this sort of money will sort it I certainly hope so. The nightmare scenario is that the existing effluent solution is an ordinary septic tank and that the ground is simply unsuitable for a septic tank.

This could mean:

1. Remove existing septic tank and sterilise (say €2.5k)
2. Install puraflow, biocycle or similar (say up to €13k incl. normal civil works)
3. Bring in many lorryloads of soil and create a mounded percolation area to make up for poor on-site percolation, with effluent being pumped to this (say €4.5k extra civil works).

 

[ironballs]

Nutty Nut, I have to agree with MOB, in terms of the cost of rectification...sorry pkelly! For my sins I have quite a bit of expertise in the whole area of site assessments and wastewater treatment, having worked in this field for several years, so I may be able to give you some background info!

pkelly,
firstly, the builder was wrong to state that the County Council was responsible. The Local Authority can specify a testing format for site assessments. Presently, most Local Authorities require tests to be done in accordance with Appendix A of Wastewater Treatment Manuals Treatment Systems for Single Houses, published by EPA, 2000. Web address: [broken link removed]
Considering the test was done in 2001, there's a good chance that the tests were carried out using S.R.6: 1991, published by NSAI, 1991. Some Local Authorities in fact still use this document, because it's refered to in the Building Regulations. In any case, both of these documents are very flawed, but they do contain a section where the site assessor makes recommendations. If you can go into the County Council offices and access the planning application for your site it could shed some light onto the situation. I was involved in an arbitration before where a builder and his mate the engineer falsified reports to get planning and build a house...one look at the site assessment report and then at the site and I instantly knew it was a fake!

The next point, and probably more important than the issue of falsification is whether or not the site assessor had sufficient insurance cover (if any) for the work he was doing? To carry out a site assessment, it is vital that you have Professional Negligence Indemnity Insurance. This is insurance to cover you in the event of you being negligent in carrying out your work. A copy of the insurance cert should be submitted with every report, but this very rarely happens! Find out who the site assessor was and make a phone-call to him (presuming he's still in business!), singing-dumb and claiming you need to get an assessment carried out...ask if he has Professional Indemnity insurance. If he's out of business his PI insurance could still be open for a claim from you!

As for nutty nut's statement that he could claim that outside factors over the last 5 years have reulted in the water table becoming higher thus leading to the present problem, I don't really buy it! I have never come accross such a thing happening. That's not to say it couldn't happen, but for it to happen to the extent where it leads to the problems you encountered are hard to imagine. Be careful here, because the builder might have played some part in your present situation! The site assessment could have been perfect, but the builder may not have constructed the percolation area as per the design, e.g. he might not have located it in the correct area, or he could have used poor materials in the construction (i.e. heavy subsoils, such as clay, rather than looser topsoil). It's also not unheard of for guys installing septic tanks to put them in backwards!

You need to get onto your solicitor, as MOB said. But remember, your solicitor, at best, knows the law! He is most definately not experienced in dealing with drainage issues on sites! For that reason you will need to contact an experienced engineer who can carry out a full post-mortem on the site assessment, the installation of the septic tank/perc. area, and the present problems. If the engineer is experienced in dispute resolution, he may also be able to apportion the blame, to assist the solicitor. The solicitor will also need to check the contract documents for the construction of the house (if there are any!)...there may be an arbitration clause, meaning dispute resolution will be by that method!

Clear as mud, eh?!