Opinions please - plasterboard overhangs skirting - photos

h.cowell

Hi, we're having some renovation done to our (small) conservatory and it includes some insurance work for a slight subsidence problem. The walls were originally rendered, which was hacked back, various works done, and then plasterboard applied. The plasterboard now overhangs the original skirting and we are being asked to pay for more skirting.

The insurer says that new skirting is not covered by the insurance claim, despite the extensive insurance work that in itself necessitated the removal of the render.

The building contractor says we need to pay for the new skirting (about £200) to move the project forward, despite the original quote saying 'new sand & cement render to internal walls and skim' would be applied i.e. no mention of plasterboard & skirting.

I know in the grand scheme of things it would probably be easiest to pay up, but what do you think? I have no experience of this kind of work, but to my eyes the level of workmanship isn't too great....

Photos:


Corner where the plasterboard overhang is worst (skirting is blue)


Corner with a door on either side, showing thickness of attached plasterboard


Top to bottom: radiator (blue), wall (partial plasterboard), skirting (blue), floor

bigdic

h.cowell wrote: »

'new sand & cement render to internal walls and skim' would be applied i.e. no mention of plasterboard & skirting.

If that's what the quote said then they are trying to cut corners from what I can see. To my mind they should not have put any plasterboard up at all if there was none there in the first place.

The original skirtings should be carefully removed and the wall re-rendered/skimmed with the skirtings replaced.

I'd contact the insurance company and inform them that the work done does no match what was quoted and see what they say.

Doozergirl

I'd sack someone if they did that. That is a total bodge-job. I'd query whether it should ever have been boarded at all. But it's not just the overhang on the skirting, I can see that the plasterboard on the top picture on the right is not even lining up with each other and the left looks totally wonky - you can't cover that with skim! Also that corner where the doors meet - that's ridiculous - is that supposed to be finished ready for skimming? There should be tape as well covering the gaps between each piece of board.

I can't even work out how they;ve come that proud of the skirting if render had to be hacked off the wall in the first place.

As for the skirting, plasterboard needs to come down over where the top of the skirting will go. They should have removed the skirting with the aim of replacing it - either with the original or replacement skirting. And then, whilst not touching the floor, the boards should have been placed so that the skirting sits against it and totally proud of it.

It is their fault you need new skirting now. The old skirting should not be on the wall still.

It might be a bit of a challenge reboarding a room that has suffered from subsidence but the skirting board issue is a basic, basic error and the rest of it really doesn't look clever either. The contractor has put you in the position of needing new skirting because they've left the old stuff on there. It's not your fault - to get to that skirting now you'd have to remove the boards (wonder if that's such a bad idea from the photos I'm looking at)

That is a quailty of workmanship issue, in my opinion, not a 'was skirting on the quote' issue.

Meadows

As 'bigdic' says the skirting should have been removed first, any damaged plaster should have been removed and then re-plastered.
Contact insurance as they are paying to get the job done, don't accept this mess.

h.cowell

Thank you for your comments and I'm very happy to know I'm not the only one who would be unhappy with the job that has been done so far.

I agree that to do the job properly they should have removed the skirting, and then put the plasterboard up, replacing the skirting after that. As it is, I don't see how they can securely attach another skirting, if (and it's a big 'if') that's the route we go.

The problem is that the insurers (who I have spoken to) won't accept responsibilty for the skirting because (a) it wasn't covered by their original plans (b) as a rule they don't cover skirting unless it is damaged by the subsidence, which ours wasn't (c) they have spoken to the building company who have told them that the need for skirting has arisen from the extra works we wanted doing. Basically, for the crack repair work alone a LOT of render needed to come off, but because we said we would pay more to have it ALL taken off they are claiming that point (c) applies. This is despite redecoration being included in the insurance work.

I need to go back to the building company and read the original quote to them ('sand and cement render', not plasterboard) and point out some of the useful things mentioned in this thread. Doozergirl, you are right in that it is wonky and totally patched together if you see the complete area. Bigdic, I do think they are trying to cut corners and increase their profit. Meadows, I will pursue the insurers if the building company don't cooperate. I'm really annoyed about this! Thanks for your help

leveller2911

It does make you wonder if the subsidance work was done properly if they can't get the basics right.What exactly did the subsidence work entail???, it wouldn't be "just take off the render and re-do and then skim coat "as that is not solving the problem.The skirting boards should have been taken off, shoddy,shoddy work.You can get an awful lot of skirting fitted for £200 even including materials.
My advice would be to put a hold on any further work and pay a surveyor /structual engineer to look at it.No point letting it continue if you have problems in the near future..........Ive been in the building industry for 24 years and I see shoddy work like that all the time, they are NOT builders i'm afraid they are cowboys...

I agree with Doozergirl, anyone carrying out work to such a poor standard should be shown the door, You don't have to accept the work .

Just for interest how many metres of skirting is there to fit???

27col

I thought that I had seen some awful bodged jobs on MSE, but this one takes the main prize.
Even if the contract had said that the walls could be dry-lined, which apparently it does not, the application of the plaster board has been totally cocked up. They could have easily boarded right down to the floor and just stuck new skirting on with No-nails. This has to be one of the nastiest bits of bodgery that it has been my misfortune to see. Do not let them get away with it. Any company that thinks this is an acceptable standard of work would, in my estimation, have to be very suspect as to what they did during the underpinning. I would think that you need to get the insurers involved. Surely would not be very happy if they knew the poor quality of the work that they are being expected to pay for.

olias

I agree with all that has been said. That is a shoddy, shoddy, bodged job, done by people who either don't have a clue, or don't care. Had they even taken the radiator off to plasterboard the wall behind it?

I am a competent DIYer, nothing more, and I recently plasterboarded a couple of walls in my bathroom and did a far far better job that appears to have been done there, and I had never plasterboarded before!

Did you choose the builders, or the insurers? You need to speak to your insurers, and get a competent builder out to remedy this mess before they do any more damage!

Olias

rosekitten

no expert here but our buiders removed all the
skirting boards first,if carefuly removed they can
be reused.Our wallboards were fitted floor to
ceiling.

never_enough

Send photos to the insurers along with a letter of complaint, you shouldn't need to put up with that.

misgrace

That is awful workmanship :eek: You poor poor thing <<<<hugs>>>>

Right then first things first......

Firstly, Who is asking for the extra money for the skirting boards, is it the insurer or bill the bodger?

Secondly, I cant see it being the insurance company, but if its not, then you dont have to pay anything for the skirts, as the builders have truely messed up.
The work they did is unacceptable, its the worst jobs I have ever seen.

How did you get these builders?, reason I ask is, because when I worked for a building company that dealt with insurance work, the actual insurers would have some sort of input to nudge you in the direction of who to choose out of your quotes.
They would know thier standard of work, and how good or bad they were, and would normally advise the client, 'Acme building services are very good, we have dealt with them on numerous occassions' or words to that effect.
Also you are entitled to complain to the insurers that you are not happy with thier work, plus they put plasterboard up when it wasnt down on the Spec, hence the bodge up, and the extra work involved.

The insurers wont pay the company out till you, the client, are satisfied with the work, or they put it right, thats if the money has'nt come directly to you of course.
Either way, you are within your rights to refuse this job as being satisfactory.
Another thing, if the insurers havent used them before, or nudged you into choosing them, then they wont use them again for any work, so these builders will have shot themselves in the foot.

Take pics like the OP says, complain like mad, and dont accept anything less than what you should be getting.

let us know how things progress.