Cowboy Builder number 2 ?

srm1

I am the adjoining owner and after 6 years, it appears that my neighbour, the building owner may be in the process of selecting cowboy builder number 2 to conduct the required demolition & reconstruction works.
The original builder had no idea about trespass, working from plans, building regulations or correct constuction methods.
Builder #1 and I use the term "builder" very loosely had also managed to cause £10k of damage to my property.

I noticed a loft conversion van parked outside today, presumbly to offer an estimate for the demolition & reconstuction works.

After a bit of research about this new company - they are not a registered builder with the Federation of Master Builders, Constructionline or The Guild of Master Craftsmen.
The reviews builder #2 gets is truely dreadful with talk of legal actions against them.

My Question is, given that I have to permit access into and onto my roof, can I insist that only a registerd builder is used?

On a more amusing note, my neighbour has just had to pay for a second party wall award using 2 surveyors - as he failed to comply with the first award and the agreed surveyor declaired himself as incapable to act.

Thanks.....

Furts

As a matter of common sense you can refuse access to your roof if you have genuine grounds to believe the individuals are not competent. It is apparent that you can back up this judgement with reference to your web searching.

If you consider the principles behind the Health and Safety At Work Act, and the CDM Regulations, it is all about competency, supervision and training. Add in that falls from heights is the number one killer in the construction industry and you have good reason to stipulate that only competent people work on your roof.

phill99

What on earth is a 'registered builder'? There are no barriers to entry into the building industry. The FMB or GMC are 'pay-to-join' schemes and no guarantee if competency or professionalism.

srm1

Being a member of FMB etc would be a good starting point to access competency. If the builder lacked competency, they would not retain membership of the FMB.
Otherwise, you could end up with someone found hanging around the entrance of Wickes.
This could also raise the question of the requirement of a DBS check.

Furts

phill99 wrote: »

What on earth is a 'registered builder'? There are no barriers to entry into the building industry. The FMB or GMC are 'pay-to-join' schemes and no guarantee if competency or professionalism.

I second this.

srm1 wrote: »

Being a member of FMB etc would be a good starting point to access competency. If the builder lacked competency, they would not retain membership of the FMB.
Otherwise, you could end up with someone found hanging around the entrance of Wickes.
This could also raise the question of the requirement of a DBS check.

Here there are two different concepts which are causing confusion. Membership of FMB shows professionalism and marketing skills. My recollection is of guarantees and dispute resolution being available. This all tends to be the domain of the larger, more structured builders. For most consumers with small extensions these builders would tend to be more expensive.

Membership of GMC is to be taken with more scepticism.

Neither organisation has any relevance to competency. This is a personal requirement, that is, does the individual have the necessary degree of competence to undertake the work.

You will not find good tradesmen hanging around the entrance to Wickes. Indeed tradesmen tend to avoid Wickes because of the high prices and poor catalogue!

As for DBS Checks, I will add that in all my time in the construction industry I have never been required to consider this. My career has included contracts with countless schools and vulnerable people both young and old. To suggest that this is required could be considered an insult to the countless thousands of competent construction personnel that exist throughout the country.

However should you consider a DBS Check to be required to work on your property I maintain that you are entitled to stipulate this. I suspect that few builders would carry such accreditation but it can be arranged.

phill99

srm1 wrote: »

Being a member of FMB etc would be a good starting point to access competency. If the builder lacked competency, they would not retain membership of the FMB.
Otherwise, you could end up with someone found hanging around the entrance of Wickes.
This could also raise the question of the requirement of a DBS check.

You know notjong about how easy it is to join the FMB.

And what has a DBS check got to do withit? Builders fix roofs, not babysit your children.

srm1

I consider that the fundimental checks conducted by FMB are considerably better than having no checks whatsoever!
FMB Member

• Has a minimum of twelve months trading
• Have provided a professional reference
• Have passed credit checks, public record and director checks
• Verified no un-discharged bankruptcies or relevant and outstanding County Court Judgments
• Has Public and Employer (if applicable) Liability Insurance
• VAT registration (if applicable)
• Confirmation of business address/details
• XYZ & Son Ltd has agreed to abide by the FMB Disputes Resolution and Complaints Procedures
• Has signed up to the FMB Code of Practice
• Can offer the suite of Build Assure warranty products for the domestic and commercial markets (contact the Build Assure office for rates)

The DBS checks cover criminal records, where some building companies conduct this as a matter of course.

Furts

srm1 wrote: »

I consider that the fundimental checks conducted by FMB are considerably better than having no checks whatsoever!
FMB Member

• Has a minimum of twelve months trading
• Have provided a professional reference
• Have passed credit checks, public record and director checks
• Verified no un-discharged bankruptcies or relevant and outstanding County Court Judgments
• Has Public and Employer (if applicable) Liability Insurance
• VAT registration (if applicable)
• Confirmation of business address/details
• XYZ & Son Ltd has agreed to abide by the FMB Disputes Resolution and Complaints Procedures
• Has signed up to the FMB Code of Practice
• Can offer the suite of Build Assure warranty products for the domestic and commercial markets (contact the Build Assure office for rates)

The DBS checks cover criminal records, where some building companies conduct this as a matter of course.

I accept your viewpoint, but I and countless others could tick all these boxes without being members of FMB. So this raises the question why be a member? Then add in that the overwhelming majority of customers want the cheapest conceivable building with no consideration of any Code Of Practice, no consideration of any Disputes Resolution and Complaints Procedure and you will see why your approach will find few fans.

Your approach is fundamentally correct, and I give you genuine credit for this. Unfortunately it will not be easy for you to implement this.

ceredigion

Neighbour !
HELL


Who is builder number 2. Would like to worn them

Doozergirl

srm1 wrote: »

I consider that the fundimental checks conducted by FMB are considerably better than having no checks whatsoever!
FMB Member

• Has a minimum of twelve months trading
• Have provided a professional reference
• Have passed credit checks, public record and director checks
• Verified no un-discharged bankruptcies or relevant and outstanding County Court Judgments
• Has Public and Employer (if applicable) Liability Insurance
• VAT registration (if applicable)
• Confirmation of business address/details
• XYZ & Son Ltd has agreed to abide by the FMB Disputes Resolution and Complaints Procedures
• Has signed up to the FMB Code of Practice
• Can offer the suite of Build Assure warranty products for the domestic and commercial markets (contact the Build Assure office for rates)

The DBS checks cover criminal records, where some building companies conduct this as a matter of course.

I can't understand. Did you start this thread to ask a question or try and spoonfeed the experienced members of the construction industry what you learned on Google?

My firm won an FMB award this year. Whilst I agree that being a member might show some previous due diligence on the part of the FMB, not being a member is not a sign of being a bad builder, nor does it make anyone 'registered'. There is no such thing. I've never wven looked at the GMC website.

The construction industry runs heavily on subcontract. DBS is not remotely normal in the industry and most subcontractors of even FMB builders will not be members themselves. I appreciate you have concerns about next door, but having access to Google does not make you an expert on the firm being spoken to. You can't draw many conclusions.

If you need a party wall agreement, which it sounds like you may, go and get yourself a party wall surveyor to protect your interests.

If you want to influence next door's choice of builder, speak to them, although it sounds like you'll be looking for a while for one with a DBS check. My husband and I both have one for other reasons but I think I'd refuse to show any prospective pricate individual. It's completely over the top.

Even having a criminal record for something doesn't actually make someone bad or dishonest at their job.

booty40uk

FMB and the like are glorified checkatrade sites and show no level of competency. I would like to think that their members are all good builders, but I know of several who use the membership as a way of appearing to be better than they really are. To them, its worth the annual fee.
This unfortunately is also the case with some of the "stricter" organisations such as GasSafe and NICEIC.