Building regs

pledgeX

Hypothetical question. You're removing a load bearing wall so you submit plans to building regulations to ensure they're happy with the size of the beam you're putting in and the supports etc.

Your plans use a beam that is half the size/strength that it needs to be, but building regs somehow miss this and approve the plans. Your builder comes along and follows the plans to the letter (also not noticing the weak beam).

After carrying out the work, building inspectors come out and finally notice the error. Can they force you to tear out the work and replace it, even if will cost you thousands of pounds to correct through no fault of your own?

I know that you'd be stupid not to rip it out for the sake of personal safety, but as I said, it's a hypothetical question.

southcoastrgi

Don't sound very hypothetical to me, it sounds like someone putting cost before people's lives & the fact their house might fall down around their ears

MisterBaxter

If you are submitting full plans then Building Control almost certainly will want to have seen the structural calculations for the beam you are planning on installing so someone will have had to have done this work upfront. If the structural engineer got the calculation wrong then you would go back to them for the cost.

If you simply install a smaller beam than is needed under a building notice then the Building Control Officer or Approved Inspector will just refuse to issue a completion certificate. In and of itself the lack of a completion certificate isn't an issue until you come to sell. I suppose they could commence some sort of enforcement against you.

Building Control/Approved Inspectors aren't design consultants and so far as I can see any errors would still need to be corrected by the applicant at their own cost. You may be able to get your fees back if the error was solely down to Buidling Control.

System

Building control don't design or calculate the beam size, all they do is check for compliance with the regs.
Whoever specified the undersize beam is at fault.

They are entitled to insist that unsafe work is made safe, and they are not liable for the costs of rectifying works

Furts

the_r_sole wrote: »

Building control don't design or calculate the beam size, all they do is check for compliance with the regs.
Whoever specified the undersize beam is at fault.

They are entitled to insist that unsafe work is made safe, and they are not liable for the costs of rectifying works

I agree and add to this. If we are looking at a blame game then who submitted the drawings with the undersize beam on it? This person has a responsibility here. Following this, a competent builder would know if a beam is only half the size it is meant to be and would flag this up. He would be seeking proof that matters were satisfactory.

So the hypothetical answer appears to be a cowboy client, or cowboy agent, has submitted drawings and then allowed a cowboy builder to work from them. This cowboy builder has not flagged anything up and now the Building Inspector is expected to be the fall guy.

macman

It is the responsibility of the property owner, no one else. Yes, BC can enforce the regs. Whether the owner has a subsequent claim on the builder or engineer is another matter, and no concern of BC.

chappers

what did the hypothetical structural calcs say. Sometimes an architect will suggest a beam size on a drawing, to be confirmed by the SE, who specifies something else and the drawings don't get rewritten.
When BC approve plans they check for things like insulation materials etc and may pick up on basic structures like floor joist sizes etc but are not in the habit of checking structural calcs.
Onsite experience tells them when something is wrong as it should have told the hypothetical builder.
What did the SEs calcs say if they are wrong you could have some recourse to them.
You may find that the SE disagrees with BC in which case the BCO will usually cede to the SE.
Drawings should never be read on their own, but in conjunction with the SEs calcs