Do I have any recourse?

Mrs_Manero

We are in the process of building a two storey extension.

All the plans were drawn by an architect and have passed planning and building regs. The builing is up all as drawings.We now find that there is a problem with the floor joists ie span too large between them in one room, and and length of joist betwwn steels to large in another room. My question is should this not have been picked up at the point of building regulations approval? And if so do we have any claim to recover the extra cost of correctional works?

McAzrael

Building control will check that the proposed building complies with the current building regulations. If they have said your plan complies, and it doesn't, then get complaining. Double check what they said complied - did they approve a floor supported on joists, or a floor supported on joists at 400mm centres, for example.

If your plan does comply, but cannot be built, then you might want to have a word with your architect.

Mrs_Manero

The building has been built!
The floor is supported on joist at 600 centres...thats the problem. It was approved. In another room the span of the floor joist resting on steel is 3.6 m should be a maximum of 3.1m. was also approved. The Building inspector and Architect have come up with a solution involving lost of extra timber, but of course this is costing us more money for labour and materials.....who do I complain about?

HugoSP

The BCO have Crown immunity.

You should ask your architect to foot the extra bill. He should be technically competent enough to have got it right.

Failing that you can complain to his professional body for negligence.

I have no architectural qualifications, yet the building regs are easy to understand. Even I would have got it right.

McAzrael

Were the 600mm centres and the 3.6m span specified on the building control drawings and is the problem that you have subsequently found that 600mm centres and 3.6m span do not comply with building regs? If so, then complain to building control - they have let you down. They will only be liable for the cost of doing the job twice, and not the cost of the extra timber which you would have needed anyway had they assessed the drawing correctly. Of course, there is nothing to stop you from demanding the full cost of the rectification.

If the problem is that the building isn't working in some other way - say the span is too large for the joists which you have used and a different timber woud have been fine - but is in compliance with building regs, or the drawings did not show the construction method used - say they specified timber joists but not the centres - then the architect (or whoever decided on the failing construction technique) needs top take responsibility. Building control do not, and should not, check buildability.

McAzrael

HugoSP wrote: »

The BCO have Crown immunity.

You should ask your architect to foot the extra bill. He should be technically competent enough to have got it right.

Failing that you can complain to his professional body for negligence.

I have no architectural qualifications, yet the building regs are easy to understand. Even I would have got it right.

I'm pretty sure that BCO are liable at law in negligence claims. See page 17, part 7, and the Department for Local Governments advice to buildign control bodies on record archiving in case of negligence claims. http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/br/bcpi/building-control-performance-standards_june06.pdf