How would you stop cowboy builders before they cause problems?

no1catman wrote: »

When I moved house the survey said -'get the ridge tiles fixed' mortar missing in places.
After a few years, with a few chunks coming down I thought i'd better get something sorted.
Had a couple of quotes, one about £750, and the other more like £150. I just thought the later too cheap. Though the former did have scaffolding put up.
At the start everything look great, guy on the roof did more than I expected. The only thing - about six months later chunks of cement started to come down. 'Phoned the guy - not interested.
Had an insurance surveyor in - for an internal problem - asked his opinion of the work, not impressed.
'Phoned the guy again, wouldn't answer, but picked up after trying via mobile number!

Why the problem - believe, the cement in the centre of the bucket was okay, but that scraped off the bucket sides, wasn't mixed well enough.

Problem solved, by a handyman, who used a ladder - no problem since!!

It's just funny, all the number of small jobs the guy would've have got since!

Not a good situation - I fully agree there. But it raises points. Your post suggests you chose purely based on price. What checks did you do on the roofer? What Specification did you draw up? What check did you do on his bag of cement looking at the date stamp? Why were you not looking for an electric mixer? What did you inspect and monitor? You will get my drift here. People need to be savvy, street wise, and competent before engaging people to work on their homes. If they do not they run the risk of being taken advantage of.

Annie1960 wrote: »

I assume your second comment is as sarcastic as your first one.

I have never yet encountered a builder who has spent years at college. If this was a requirement, then it would solve most of the problems consumer have with cowboys.

My comments were aimed at Mr R Sole, neither of us are "builders" but work on the professional side of the industry and probably both share the same exasperation at clients who have over inflated opinions of there own ability to manage a project.

As comeandgo quite rightly pointed out most building trades do spend many years at college and go through very vigorous training. One of the problems with the general public's understanding is there is no such trade as "builder". Most "general builders" should have a trade qualification, in my experience the best are carpenters although you get bricklayers, plasterers etc. Multi-trade operatives usually fulfill the old adage of jack of all trades master of none. But hey, if you find some random stranger off a dubious internet lead generating site with a string of glowing recommendations from other random strangers what could possibly go wrong? He might have been picking cabbages last week but this week he is a "builder". There are a few people on here who claim to be builders but I suspect they do not have a formal trade qualification.

With your project did you bother to ask your "architect" what his professional qualification was, get a copy of his professional indemnity insurance and check how long he had been trading? Did you ask your errant builder what his qualifications were and those of his sub-contractors? Did you check how long they had been trading? When you visited the previous jobs did you really understand what you were looking at or did it just look nice and tidy and the builder himself was nice?

Regulation is not the answer, just educating the public to make sure they follow the widely available advice or better still seek professional help.

Checking the mix is a step too far. No one needs a control freak looking over their shoulder.

Trust goes a certain way and if that doesn't exist then the relationship is just as likely to break down or never get started.

Things do go wrong, the measure then is how it is dealt with.