Federation of Master Builders (FMB) - Dispute Process an absolute Joke!

chris1012

Doozergirl wrote: »

You asked people to investigate for a problem but then quote at the same time to fix it?

That’s delusional. You’re asking people to take on all the risk of a problem that belongs to you.

I’ve got it with a PWS right now who expects a method statement from us and drawings from our SE when we don’t know what’s under the ground. I could give them something categorical but then that compromises my integrity. We’ve written again asking to dig and investigate, then commit.

It’s the same thing. How can someone quote to fix what they don’t know and how can you have clear specification?

That was passing the buck. Again, I’d refuse to quote because it smells like a cowboy client who will then throw a tantrum when the work costs more than the poor idiot who did quote could have anticipated.

I have a site manager. He is brilliant at what he does, but he cannot run his own business because he can’t quote correctly and massively underestimates. When he does take a job on he falls out with the client but they’re getting great work for the wrong price. Everyone ends up bitter and no doubt the client feels they’re being ripped off but we had to physically lend him money to finish the last job he did for someone. He project managed a job and took responsibilty for the lot for less than his employed day rate. It doesn’t make him a bad builder.

When we had quotes we always asked for a worse case scenario which would be to do the whole floor again and redo the drains.

The issue was an uncapped drain under the paryt wall, which the neighbours builders didn't cap when they had their extension built.

AndyMc.....

OP have you ever been happy with any work you’ve had done?

chris1012

AndyMc..... wrote: »

OP have you ever been happy with any work you’ve had done?

Kitchen fitters were great and so was our landscapers

Furts

chris1012 wrote: »

Kitchen fitters were great and so was our landscapers

The court will determine if you are trustworthy, genuine and honest. Honesty is a concept of telling the truth. Only last November you were complaining on this forum about the extract formed for your kitchen re-fit. But now you say the kitchen fitters were "great". Not a good way to follow in Court.

Add this to the ongoing contributions to answer your thread and, as ever, folks are not a lot wiser on what really happened. Not a good way to follow in Court.

Add this to the uncapped drain which should have been part of your pre contract investigations, or a contingency, or subject to a drain survey, or picked up by your site inspection regime - all of course your responsibility, but you appear still unwilling to man up to this.

Add this to your own admission that you never prepared a Specification, nor engaged an Architect, nor applied for Buildings Regulations, nor had a payments schedule. You might next be telling the Forum you did not have a contract, nor a programme, nor a Clerk of Works and not even a Chartered Building Surveyor on board ....?

All round a huge mistake has been made, and this was the builder ever agreeing to get involved with you. Expecting them to price against seven others (ridiculous), then engage with you (because you could not be bothered to undertake your responsibilities), then prepare detailed Specifications (your job) and detailed payment regimes (your job), is taking the peewee.

Fortunately justice may prevail. If matters get to Court and the builder is as good as the FMB and Trustmark hints at then they will run circles around you. You will then be exposed, the Judge will reprimand you, (since you appear unwilling to listen to anybody else), and hopefully you will think carefully in future before taking on the role of client from hell.

chris1012

Furts wrote: »

The court will determine if you are trustworthy, genuine and honest. Honesty is a concept of telling the truth. Only last November you were complaining on this forum about the extract formed for your kitchen re-fit. But now you say the kitchen fitters were "great". Not a good way to follow in Court.

Add this to the ongoing contributions to answer your thread and, as ever, folks are not a lot wiser on what really happened. Not a good way to follow in Court.

Add this to the uncapped drain which should have been part of your pre contract investigations, or a contingency, or subject to a drain survey, or picked up by your site inspection regime - all of course your responsibility, but you appear still unwilling to man up to this.

Add this to your own admission that you never prepared a Specification, nor engaged an Architect, nor applied for Buildings Regulations, nor had a payments schedule. You might next be telling the Forum you did not have a contract, nor a programme, nor a Clerk of Works and not even a Chartered Building Surveyor on board ....?

All round a huge mistake has been made, and this was the builder ever agreeing to get involved with you. Expecting them to price against seven others (ridiculous), then engage with you (because you could not be bothered to undertake your responsibilities), then prepare detailed Specifications (your job) and detailed payment regimes (your job), is taking the peewee.

Fortunately justice may prevail. If matters get to Court and the builder is as good as the FMB and Trustmark hints at then they will run circles around you. You will then be exposed, the Judge will reprimand you, (since you appear unwilling to listen to anybody else), and hopefully you will think carefully in future before taking on the role of client from hell.

I had an issue with the worktop fitters that damaged the surface using an angle grinder but the kitchen fitters themselves were fantastic.
We had an issue with a boxing they made for our extractor but that was not a major issue and we resolved matters with that in the end but not once does that reflect on the overall job they did!

With regards to the drain - We had camera surveys completed (twice) and multiple plumbers in to help investigate.
I also had pictures of progress of works during the first renovation, which was all made available to the builders provided quotes at the time, including this builder.

As mentioned before, we did not need an architect no building firm has ever said we needed one and I just looked at the councils website and for what we carried out no building regs are required as well, so not sure why this is being brought up or relevant!

It is amazing how you have interpreted it completely different than others have but then again this is a forum and you have your right to your own opinion

ComicGeek

chris1012 wrote: »

New Floor & Floor Insulation
Supply and install suspended concrete flooring system comprising of 155mm deep beams, to include 1500Kg/m3 solid infill blocks set between beams. Supply and install 1200 gauge polythene DPM lapped with perimeter DPC and 80mm Celotex insulation lain to suit whilst incorporating a 500 gauge polyethene vapour control barrier as required. The new 70mm floor screed consisting of 1:4 cement/sand screed laid to comply with best practice conforming with BS8204: Part 1, Appendix B.

Building Regs?

This was not required as we weren't doing an any construction work/remodelling unless we have been misinformed?
Out of all the quotes we got, none of them mentioned about building regs or architect plans.

You installed a new structural floor, you need to have Building Regs approval. It wasn't mentioned by the builders as it's your responsibility not theirs - might sound harsh, but that's the reality.

Who specified 80mm Celotex for the floor and what was actually installed? Did someone do a U-value calculation to determine compliance under Part L1B of the Building Regulations? I'm sure there could be similar questions for each line of their proposed specification, which is the problem when the builder is dictating the specification.

Furts

chris1012 wrote: »

As mentioned before, we did not need an architect no building firm has ever said we needed one and I just looked at the councils website and for what we carried out no building regs are required as well, so not sure why this is being brought up or relevant!

ComicGeek is spot on - you need to be asking serious questions about your role in all this. But also consider this ... you might be proud of drawing up the Specification for the block and beam floor but you had no design, and no Structural Engineer - at least so far there has been no mention of these. Then look at the flaws and illegality of what was written. What was under the floor - services? damp material? radon? methane?

It is common for block and beam to be laid on Hyload dpc (no mention of this), for the infill to be Aircrete (you have dense concrete) , for dpc to be sealed (laps are not satisfactory), and your 80mm Celotex is woeful. Coupled to this is under floor ventilation and air bricks (not mentioned). All this is a blatant failure of good practice sanctioned by you!

But then you had no inspection of this design, nor inspection of the work in progress, which means you have no evidence that anything was done correctly.

Then consider the drain - where was your Structural Engineeer? Re - routing and blocking drainage is an area coming into The Buildings Regulations. Where were you under the PWA?

Then consider your kitchen re-fit ... new wiring under Part P of the Buildings Regulations, ventilation, and extract rates, new drainage, perhaps a new boiler, new floor membranes, possible structural wall alterations, perhaps new windows fitted (yes because you are disputing this and I do not recall what your attitude was to your legal duties here under the Buildings Regulations) ... all Buildings Regulations matters so you get the idea.

You are a fussy client by your admission. This is disingenuous because in reality you are somebody evading professional guidance (and fees), evading agreed building procedures laid down over generations, and entering willingly the shady area of cowboy builders. This is dangerous territory and you got your fingers burnt. Some people including me, would say there is a rough justice here.

Yet you profess innocence!

chris1012

Furts wrote: »

ComicGeek is spot on - you need to be asking serious questions about your role in all this. But also consider this ... you might be proud of drawing up the Specification for the block and beam floor but you had no design, and no Structural Engineer - at least so far there has been no mention of these. Then look at the flaws and illegality of what was written. What was under the floor - services? damp material? radon? methane?

It is common for block and beam to be laid on Hyload dpc (no mention of this), for the infill to be Aircrete (you have dense concrete) , for dpc to be sealed (laps are not satisfactory), and your 80mm Celotex is woeful. Coupled to this is under floor ventilation and air bricks (not mentioned). All this is a blatant failure of good practice sanctioned by you!

But then you had no inspection of this design, nor inspection of the work in progress, which means you have no evidence that anything was done correctly.

Then consider the drain - where was your Structural Engineeer? Re - routing and blocking drainage is an area coming into The Buildings Regulations. Where were you under the PWA?

Then consider your kitchen re-fit ... new wiring under Part P of the Buildings Regulations, ventilation, and extract rates, new drainage, perhaps a new boiler, new floor membranes, possible structural wall alterations, perhaps new windows fitted (yes because you are disputing this and I do not recall what your attitude was to your legal duties here under the Buildings Regulations) ... all Buildings Regulations matters so you get the idea.

You are a fussy client by your admission. This is disingenuous because in reality you are somebody evading professional guidance (and fees), evading agreed building procedures laid down over generations, and entering willingly the shady area of cowboy builders. This is dangerous territory and you got your fingers burnt. Some people including me, would say there is a rough justice here.

Yet you profess innocence!

Fair point if that is the genuine guidelines.
When we spoke to builders about the job, we mentioned previously we had building regs and not one of them mentioned we would require them again.
It is my fault for not looking into it further but I just find it bizarre that no company ever mentioned we needed it again for the works we just had it, even if it is my own responsibility.

Last time round the issue with our building regs was that the builder knew the BI very well and therefore signed off things without really look in depth, which we explained to the builders that came to look at/quote for the job...

I could have protected myself better by researching and looking into things in far more detail but I like most of the people I have spoken to simply just appointed a company to carry out the works and assumed they would walk us through where required.
My neighbours on my street have all done the same think, I do not think it is unrealistic to say that most do not have a clue and put a lot of their trust in the appointed building firm to guide/assist when it comes to things like Building regs, electrics gas etc

Just so you are aware, there was mention in the contract regarding air bricks, Part P and Gas certs etc...

Furts

We are back to the topics of honesty, of being genuine and not misleading folks. You say no builders mentioned the Regulations and you knew nothing about this. Yet you had a previous renovation/building job and you were well aware of your obligations then. So why not this time ...?

Then you wrote the Specification in conjunction with the builder and now admit it referred to Part P, and gas testing ... so you were aware of Buildings Regulations matters this time round.

The fact that you wrote this is is meaningless because you sought no Regulations. I accept you may have followed the self certification route but as in so many areas of your issues, folks do not know what happened.

The more you write the more I worry about your chances in Court. I am even wondering if your next confession will be you paid cash ...?

Be very careful, and remember the builder could contact your Local Authority and push to get you prosecuted for evading the Regulations. Of course, unlikely because the folks have better things to do. But your situation is rife in London and it only takes one Official to say "enough, let us have a case to send a warning out regarding all the illegal work which consumers are colluding with."

The FMB are not fools - you are not happy with the recent outcome but the FMB will have you weighed up.

Perhaps you can now see why my earlier post warned you about going to Court. You could end up being exposed over all this.

Over and out since you dislike what I say, and offer no thanks. But give me a little credit. My view may be different to that of others and it is clearly different to what you want to hear. But that does not make it wrong. Even your comment about my take on block and beam floors is laughable. Is my knowledge "genuine" you have suggested. My intuition is I can run circles round you when it comes to knowledge of building!

I am sure you are a lovely human being, but I am others in the construction industry would prefer to pick who we work with. Some folks are best avoided!

chris1012

Furts wrote: »

We are back to the topics of honesty, of being genuine and not misleading folks. You say no builders mentioned the Regulations and you knew nothing about this. Yet you had a previous renovation/building job and you were well aware of your obligations then. So why not this time ...?

Then you wrote the Specification in conjunction with the builder and now admit it referred to Part P, and gas testing ... so you were aware of Buildings Regulations matters this time round.

The fact that you wrote this is is meaningless because you sought no Regulations. I accept you may have followed the self certification route but as in so many areas of your issues, folks do not know what happened.

The more you write the more I worry about your chances in Court. I am even wondering if your next confession will be you paid cash ...?

Be very careful, and remember the builder could contact your Local Authority and push to get you prosecuted for evading the Regulations. Of course, unlikely because the folks have better things to do. But your situation is rife in London and it only takes one Official to say "enough, let us have a case to send a warning out regarding all the illegal work which consumers are colluding with."

The FMB are not fools - you are not happy with the recent outcome but the FMB will have you weighed up.

Perhaps you can now see why my earlier post warned you about going to Court. You could end up being exposed over all this.

Over and out since you dislike what I say, and offer no thanks. But give me a little credit. My view may be different to that of others and it is clearly different to what you want to hear. But that does not make it wrong. Even your comment about my take on block and beam floors is laughable. Is my knowledge "genuine" you have suggested. My intuition is I can run circles round you when it comes to knowledge of building!

I am sure you are a lovely human being, but I am others in the construction industry would prefer to pick who we work with. Some folks are best avoided!

I feel you are being very unfair how you are judging me and the situation that has unfolded!
Last time round the building company advised us through the whole process and we had the whole house renovated.
This time round we was just redoing the floor and assumed without really thinking about it (yes, maybe incorrectly) that we didn't need it.

Just because Electric/Gas Certs were required, that does not automatically mean someone would think they need building regs!

I do not feel your posts are being helpful at all so not sure why you need to keep trying to make something out of nothing.

The reality is that I took on a building company in good faith and should not of had any major issues with the 'building work'.
Yes, this is about the issues that have unfolded rather than areas I should or should not have carried out.
I have checked with other tilers/builders with regards to our floor and they are in agreement we have had a poor service.

With regards to your comment about the FMB, it is literally as I said it.
They literally discussed none of my complaint. They were simply a forwarding service between myself and the company.
Upon looking online, it looks like they have had some recent changes in their process and others have had the same outcome so its in alignment with my experience.

I thank you for your time, take on board some of your comments but I rather have post more to the point of the topic please.