Subsidence claim refused - any help please?

Furts

mumlady1 wrote: »

Thanks to everyone who replied. To answer all your questions
Furts - I fully understood my obligations before starting the project. The plans were drawn up by an architect & the structural designs by a structural engineer. One of the problems we have is that we allowed the builder to work as our agent so in most cases we didn't get to speak to these people directly. Hindsight is a wonderful gift!!

Hintza - no, I didn't ask for the cheapest option. I did, in fact, pay extra to have the raft foundation built as this was deemed (by the structural engineer) to be the most appropriate foundation for the build.

I know it's no substitute for proper legal advice but I'm just looking for helpful suggestions from anyone on here who may have been in a similar position or who may have knowledge in this field.

Please understand that there are some very highly qualified people posting on the forum, and you are receiving approprate advice. Further, having read the posts on the Insurance Section, you are receiving better advice on the DIY Section than you did there. Without wishing to offend anyone, you do not need sympathies and platitudes that you received there. Instead, you require genuine advive on technical matters.

Unfortunately, going down the subsidence route and attempting an insurance claim was ill thought through.

With regards your response to Hintza, I am sure this is a typo on your part. To reiterate, you did not pay extra to have a raft, but you did pay the minimum sum for the work.

The crux of your case, as I am sure your solicitor has explained, but you have failed to explain to the Forum is...

Who was overseeing, inspecting and signing off the construction?

This point was made in my post. Unfortunately, without a satisfactory answer from you I suggest nobody on this Forum is in a position to offer further constructive help.

mumlady1

Thank you again for your replies.
Furts - To answer the question regards the raft foundation, I did actually pay an additional cost to have this constructed as it was advised to be the best type of foundation for us to have. I certainly didn't ask to just have the 'cheapest option'

Regards overseeing, inspecting & signing off - as I have no building knowledge or experience myself (obviously) this was left to the builder, the original structural engineer & the building control officer at the council.

Rightly or wrongly (and as I've said before, hindsight is a wonderful thing) I would not have taken on the responsibility of signing off any of this work myself anyway as I have no building knowledge.

With regards to going down the insurance route - once rough costs started arriving for the remedial works, we had no option but to try the insurance route. The advise to go through our insurance was given by our new structural engineer and our solicitor.

huckster

mumlady1 wrote: »

Thank you again for your replies.
Furts - To answer the question regards the raft foundation, I did actually pay an additional cost to have this constructed as it was advised to be the best type of foundation for us to have. I certainly didn't ask to just have the 'cheapest option'

Regards overseeing, inspecting & signing off - as I have no building knowledge or experience myself (obviously) this was left to the builder, the original structural engineer & the building control officer at the council.

Rightly or wrongly (and as I've said before, hindsight is a wonderful thing) I would not have taken on the responsibility of signing off any of this work myself anyway as I have no building knowledge.

With regards to going down the insurance route - once rough costs started arriving for the remedial works, we had no option but to try the insurance route. The advise to go through our insurance was given by our new structural engineer and our solicitor.

This is a bit confusing. Second paragraph suggests builder/structural engineer signed off the raft foundation as being built correctly. Then in the third paragraph it suggests that you signed off ( you supervised the work) the work as being ok, based on what was originally said to you. It does not sound as if any professional signed off the actual raft foundation work. Is this correct ?

Surprised that a new structural engineer and Solicitor would advise to contact Home Insurers regarding works that seem to be faulty. They must realise this is not an Insured peril event that would be covered, given the recent building of the extension. Unless they thought that there was a weather event that caused the sudden subsidence and it was not due to defective building.

I am not sure of the legal position if builders do work to a plan and this is signed off by the home owner ? I would guess that you would have to prove who was at fault and take it forward legally.

Furts will no doubt add their comment in due course.

teneighty

Surely if you have got a second structural engineer investigating the defect they have identified the cause?


Either it is a failure in the design and the raft is not adequate to support the weight of the extension or the ground bearing is inadequate to support the raft OR it is a workmanship issue and the builder has not constructed the raft in accordance with the approved calculations/drawings.


Until you establish that you are not going to make any progress in determining liability and remedial work required. Either way I cannot see it being covered by any standard domestic building insurance.

mumlady1

Thanks Huckster for the reply. I can see where you are confused -apologies, my brain is a little pickled with the stress of this situation.
To clarify - I DID NOT sign off anything.
All drawings (by original engineer & architect) were submitted to building control, checked by them and passed by them as satisfactory & building warrant was then issued to allow the work to start.

Both the solicitor and the new engineer suggested putting in a claim to insurers, I presume in the hope of getting a quicker and easier settlement.

I have not signed off anything.

The most urgent concern is getting remedial works underway which is what the new engineer is trying to do. I'm looking for ways to carry this forward with either
A. The builder (who isn't responding to any correspondence from me or my solicitor)
B. The original engineer
C. Building control (who signed everything off as satisfactory & have issued a completion certificate)
D. My insurance company. They have admitted there is subsidence but have said its due to faulty workmanship or design. If A, B or C have all done their jobs correctly then surely my insurer should pay out for subsidence? Or is that too simple?

Furts

mumlady1 wrote: »

Thanks Huckster for the reply. I can see where you are confused -apologies, my brain is a little pickled with the stress of this situation.
To clarify - I DID NOT sign off anything.
All drawings (by original engineer & architect) were submitted to building control, checked by them and passed by them as satisfactory & building warrant was then issued to allow the work to start.

Both the solicitor and the new engineer suggested putting in a claim to insurers, I presume in the hope of getting a quicker and easier settlement.

I have not signed off anything.

The most urgent concern is getting remedial works underway which is what the new engineer is trying to do. I'm looking for ways to carry this forward with either
A. The builder (who isn't responding to any correspondence from me or my solicitor)
B. The original engineer
C. Building control (who signed everything off as satisfactory & have issued a completion certificate)
D. My insurance company. They have admitted there is subsidence but have said its due to faulty workmanship or design. If A, B or C have all done their jobs correctly then surely my insurer should pay out for subsidence? Or is that too simple?

I apologise if this sounds pedantic but:
1) You did not pay extra to have a raft designed and constructed. You paid what was appropriate. Both you and your original engineer have accepted this by having a raft designed and built.

2) Without knowing full details I cannot make a decisive comment but I suggest it was a mistake getting a replacement engineer involved.

3) The decision by both your solicitor and your new engineer to go down the insurance route is, I suggest, a sign of either gross incompetence or a lack of knowledge. Neither is excusable.

4) Despite many promptings you fail to make it clear who has inspected, overseen, and signed off the raft. It is absurd that you request advice on this Forum yet appear unable to supply the most basic information.

5) Rafts are a specialism in foundation construction. They cannot be investigated without trial holes and removing elements on your floor slab. Even then the results will not be conclusive, hence a legal case could fail to judge in your favour. Basically, there will be doubt and you will not have proven your case.

6) There is no likelihood of a successful claim against your insurers under the category of subsidence.

7) You are highly unlikely to suceed in any action against Building Control - do not try, but instead get them on your side. For what it is worth, I have tried in the past with one case reaching the personal responsibility of a Government Minister. I am unable to go into details, but the suffice to say the case did not then suceed. Please take this as a warning.

8) All the above points should be overly familiar with you because you will have heard them time and time again from both your solicitor and your new engineer. That said, I have doubts about your postings, and wonder what advice you are being given by both these parties...?

9) Always remember it is the interests of both your solicitor and your new engineer to spin you out for as long as they can get away with it. They are profiting from your misfortune.

10) Feel free to hit the thanks icon should you ever feel anyone on the Forum has offered a grain of advice. We are deemed laymen in the eyes of both your solicitor and your new engineer, but the reality is there are Forum members who can run rings around such professionals. A little token of appreciation does not go amiss.

huckster

mumlady1 wrote: »

Thanks Huckster for the reply. I can see where you are confused -apologies, my brain is a little pickled with the stress of this situation.
To clarify - I DID NOT sign off anything.
All drawings (by original engineer & architect) were submitted to building control, checked by them and passed by them as satisfactory & building warrant was then issued to allow the work to start.

Both the solicitor and the new engineer suggested putting in a claim to insurers, I presume in the hope of getting a quicker and easier settlement.

I have not signed off anything.

The most urgent concern is getting remedial works underway which is what the new engineer is trying to do. I'm looking for ways to carry this forward with either
A. The builder (who isn't responding to any correspondence from me or my solicitor)
B. The original engineer
C. Building control (who signed everything off as satisfactory & have issued a completion certificate)
D. My insurance company. They have admitted there is subsidence but have said its due to faulty workmanship or design. If A, B or C have all done their jobs correctly then surely my insurer should pay out for subsidence? Or is that too simple?

So the builder was just allowed to get on with it and there were no checks made at different stages of the work ? The builder has now gone missing, which makes me think that they know of the problems. Has the builder done other work elsewhere that has caused homeowners problems ? Something to look into, as you may not be the only person trying to get hold of the builder. Having said that I am not sure how you would find out this.

a) I think you need to trace the builder. Are they still at their registered address ? Perhaps go with someone to see if they are and if not put a note through the door asking for them to make contact.

b ) Original engineer - Advise them of the situation and that you may seek to claim against their professional indemnity Insurance, if the works they planned are proved to be inadequate.

c ) Building control - I think they only advised on their requirement at the outset and were not involved until the completion certificate. They would not be aware whether the raft foundation was ok or not.

d ) Home Buildings Insurance - This was never going to cover the subsidence, because of the general exclusion under all policies which states that they won't cover defective works. As others and I have stated, if this was an extension built say 10 years ago without problems and then due to weather/ground issues there was subsidence they should allow a claim. However this was an extension completed at the end of 2013.

As Furts has suggested this is going to become a technical legal situation, where it is going to have be worked out a) what the cause of the subsidence is and b) whether fault can be attached to someone because there specification was wrong and/or the building work was not done properly. I would suggest to you that a decent builder would not try to avoid contact and would be willing to atleast discuss the situation. If the builder has some form of Insurance to cover them for liabilty, then if the builder is liable you may be able to claim against it.

mumlady1

Apologies to anyone I have inadvertently offended (Furts) but I have no idea where to find a thanks button! However, i would like to thank everyone for taking the time to reply. Huckster, your posts have been kindly worded (much appreciated considering how distressing this is for me) and helpful so special thanks to you.

huckster

mumlady1 wrote: »

Apologies to anyone I have inadvertently offended (Furts) but I have no idea where to find a thanks button! However, i would like to thank everyone for taking the time to reply. Huckster, your posts have been kindly worded (much appreciated considering how distressing this is for me) and helpful so special thanks to you.

The thank button is below where a reply has been added and has a green tick. The regulars on here quite like to see this, otherwise they have no idea whether people have found their reply helpful. I only use it when I feel a reply has added advice which is helpful or asks appropriate questions.

The builder you used would presumably have experience of building raft foundations ? Are they members of any trade body such as federation of master builders or similar ? If they are, you may be able to contact the trade body to see if the builder is 1) still a member, 2) whether the builder has to comply with certain rules to be a member, 3) whether there is a complaints process, 4) whether they can contact the builder or have other contact details.

As Furts has suggested the new Structural Engineer and Solicitor don't appear to be giving much help with this or they have not explained it in a way that is understandable. Sometimes the professionals can speak in another language. If this is the case, you may have to do some of the investigation work yourself and find the best way to deal with the situation. Just make a note of all the advice you have been given on this thread and then start to make enquiries.