Issues with the buildings regulations officer

nikinak

Issues with building regulations

Basically the building controls officer is telling us to gain our completion certificate for a single storey extension that was completed in November 2009, we need to dig up our kitchen floor expose the foundations of a peer in the centre of the kitchen, If the foundation prove unacceptable we then have to have the peer under pinned. we have some issues with this to say the least!

In the emails dated 8/06/2011 The inspector states that during the inspection 21/10/09 the visiting inspector noticed a newly formed pier was very poor. This was not a actually a newly formed peer it was actually the remaining brick work from the corner of the house.

The Inspector stated verbally in a phone call to me on the 8/06/2011 that he had advised on the visit on 21/10/09 that the peer needed to be rebuilt on dense concrete.

However, my husband was present on this visit (21/10/09) and the inspector made no mention of foundations whatsoever, just that the size of the peer needed to be increased based on calculations from the architect, to increase its load bearing over the existing foundations. Both my husband and the builder are adamant that this was the advice given on this day.

The builder told us that the inspector was happy with the size of the peer on ther visit two days later (23/10/09). He is also states that the inspector did not ask to see the foundations on this visit.

Firstly we cannot understand why if the foundations were an issue, was this not raised in the inspection (21/10/09) prior to the peer being extended? (This was the inspection that my husband was present at) Surely this is the logical order – foundations then build on top of them. There is absolutely no way that we would have let building continue without the foundations being checked if it had been mentioned on this or any visit. Husband and I are both professional intelligent people, We have never planned to stay in the house for long and know it would be an issue when it came to selling. It does not make sense that we would have ignored such pertinent, important advice.

Secondly, If the builder is not being truthful and the inspector had told the builders that the foundations needed to be assessed at the visit on the 23/10/09, (as we are certain it wasn’t discussed on the visit on the 21/10/09) Why when the builders didn’t give the inspector the opportunity to assess the foundation were we not informed? Surely this is a contravention of building regulations with failure by the builders to give the required notice at specified stages of the work to allow for inspection? At this point the building project was no longer meeting the regulations that inspector was imposing, and legal proceedings to change or stop the work could have been enforced. At the very least we as the home owners, and the people who were paying for regulations should have been informed. Thus preventing us being in the position of having to dig up our kitchen floor to expose the foundation and loose the sale on the house.

Any advice anyone

Doozergirl

Is this an email you've sent to Building Control? I can't work out where all this is supposed to be? Is it new house, old house? I'm assuming you've removed an internal wall? Where are your structural engineer's calculations for all of this? This post might be better in the In My Home board.

Building Control aren't pro-active so I wouldn't ever expect them to push you. Not having examined something is not the same as contravening regulations.

Digging up your kitchen floor won't lose you your sale, it will get you your completion certificate. Can you dig from outside rather than in?

It does remind me of something that happened to us where we'd removed an internal wall, but before I understood any of this stuff. I think our architect signed something off for us in the end as the building inspector was insisting that either he signed it off or we dug up the floor, though I'm afraid I don't have proper recollection and now we have structural engineers calculations for everything before we touch anything and work according to his instructions. The building control officers don't question any of that at all, though they want to see it.

G_M

The onus is on you to meet the Regs and get sign off at each stage. If you did not get sign off on the foundations, then the BC Officer will not sign off the whole job unless he gets to look at the foundations again.

sonastin

nikinak wrote: »

Secondly, If the builder is not being truthful and the inspector had told the builders that the foundations needed to be assessed at the visit on the 23/10/09, (as we are certain it wasn’t discussed on the visit on the 21/10/09) Why when the builders didn’t give the inspector the opportunity to assess the foundation were we not informed? Surely this is a contravention of building regulations with failure by the builders to give the required notice at specified stages of the work to allow for inspection? At this point the building project was no longer meeting the regulations that inspector was imposing, and legal proceedings to change or stop the work could have been enforced. At the very least we as the home owners, and the people who were paying for regulations should have been informed.

If the building inspector had raised this with the builders, it is possible that a) work would have had to stop while they wait until the building inspector could inspect again thus delaying their progress and/or b) you might have ended up arguing with the builder over who had to pay for the extra work. The builder has been paid and moved onto the next job and isn't facing any sort of enforcement action or prosecution. IF this is what happened, the builder had every incentive to keep this information to himself and faced very little risk provided he wasn't caught at the time. Given that building control aren't proactive, there was little risk of getting caught. It isn't very ethical but there are plenty of TV shows showing just how unethical some builders can be.

This is pure speculation though - I have no way of knowing how professional or trustworthy your builders were. Equally, without proof that the building inspector gave those sorts of instructions or information to your builders, there isn't anything you can do about it now anyway.

poppysarah

Ask to see the building control mans notes he took at the time. Some councils scan them in and store them with planning info.

nikinak

This is in our house we're living in now. Yes two internal walls were knocked down steels were put in place and a peer. Regs are happy with the steels, its all about the foundations under this peer. The peer is in the middle of the kitchen so its going to be an inside dig. We've got a structural engineer with a building company, who's going to give us a quote, he's seem well certified is member of various bodies and offers an extra insurance at an additonal cost that covers us even if his business go under. The cover is for a period of 20 yrs, I am presuming this is an honest policy that does what it says on the tin. Anyway hopefully this will satisfy our prospective purchasers. I am very nervous about hiring anybody now, how do you really know if if you've got the right chap for the job? We thought our last builder was good, he had a list of phone numbers to call for references was listed as a member of federation of master builders, - although checking yesterday he no longer is. We know nothing about construction, we're a doctor and scientist, so we had to trust the builder, and thought as building regs were checking everything as it went along , that if there was an issue we would at least be informed and could insist it was done as perscribed.
As for the onus being on us - the building regs man only ever really spoke to the builder, he never informed us of anything so how are we suppose to know?

Doozergirl

nikinak wrote: »

This is in our house we're living in now. Yes two internal walls were knocked down steels were put in place and a peer. Regs are happy with the steels, its all about the foundations under this peer. The peer is in the middle of the kitchen so its going to be an inside dig. We've got a structural engineer with a building company, who's going to give us a quote, he's seem well certified is member of various bodies and offers an extra insurance at an additonal cost that covers us even if his business go under. The cover is for a period of 20 yrs, I am presuming this is an honest policy that does what it says on the tin. Anyway hopefully this will satisfy our prospective purchasers. I am very nervous about hiring anybody now, how do you really know if if you've got the right chap for the job? We thought our last builder was good, he had a list of phone numbers to call for references was listed as a member of federation of master builders, - although checking yesterday he no longer is. We know nothing about construction, we're a doctor and scientist, so we had to trust the builder, and thought as building regs were checking everything as it went along , that if there was an issue we would at least be informed and could insist it was done as perscribed.
As for the onus being on us - the building regs man only ever really spoke to the builder, he never informed us of anything so how are we suppose to know?

Hmm. I think this is the builder's fault. How is the building control officer happy with the RSJ? He should be happy because a structural engineer had produced the calculations and been happy with the load on the foundations as well.

Did you not have a structural engineer involved? Someone must have calculated it somewhere along the line... If the builder is organising the building regs for you, then you're paying him for that and therefore need to get that certificate in your hand before you pay them that final sum of money.

You pay to be a member of the FMB; it's not an honour they bestow upon you. For bog standard membership they check you've been trading for a while and some references which frankly could have been from anyone. It doesn't mean a great deal about the quality of your work, more that you've paid them £700 for the privilege of using your badge for a year.

nikinak

So the membership of various bodies, means nothing then? We had an archtiect that did the drawings and the calculations.
How on earth do you ensure that your builder is a decent fellow, who is going to do the do job properly?

poppysarah

nikinak wrote: »

Regs are happy with the steels, its all about the foundations under this peer.

My argument with building regs would be that how come they let a steel go in place if they weren't happy with the foundations.

They come out at every stage to check.

nikinak

Some slighty better news, building inspector has suggested we dig test holes in the garden and the structural engineer with the inspector can come to a descision on the whether the peer is ok on a strip foundation based on quality of the ground then decide if under pinning needs to be done based on this> Inspector was really nice today, he's also said that normally in the area I live if there's movement it happens within 12 months, and extension has been up for 20 months now, with no cracks even in the plaster work in the kitchen around the peer, so there may be some hope yet.
Saying my prayers

Regarding my builder have found out his firm has liquidated and is now operating under a new name with all the same builders, I think Doozegirl and Sonastin have grasped the situation clearly - shame we didn't at the time.

The builder is around still and trying to help, although i'm not letting him anywere near our under pinning, or test holes - no way hosa!

sonastin

nikinak wrote: »

So the membership of various bodies, means nothing then? We had an archtiect that did the drawings and the calculations.
How on earth do you ensure that your builder is a decent fellow, who is going to do the do job properly?

Some professional bodies give out accreditation to anyone who pays the fees. Others require a level of qualification before they bestow membership on you. A bit of internet research can help although none of their websites are going to shout about how anyone can join - you need to put in a bit more effort and interpretation than that!

Off the top of my head, all the ones I can think of with "Institute"/"Institution" (I'm a member of one and can't remember which term to use!) in the name, and especially "Royal Insititute/ion" will have minimum standards that an individual must meet before they become a member (RICS, RIBA, IStructE, ICE, etc). Caveat here is that they were good enough when they joined but usually after that you just have to keep paying the fees so if for example, a drink problem then causes deterioration in the quality, its only if he gets reported that the governing body will look at revoking membership...

On the other hand, "Federations", (FMB, FSB, etc) tend to be "give us your money and we'll let you use our sticker" organisations.

There may be exceptions to these but its a starting point rule of thumb. Best way to find trades is to get recommendations from other people.