Loft conversion- damage to the property due to heavy rain

Bendy_House

SoJacob said:

I managed to get some pictures and videos today. The last picture is a piece of the ceiling. From the loft what I noticed the loft board still in a good condition and no water seems gone through the loft board to the ceiling, but the damage is where the loft board removed. This could be prevented with better rain proof. 

Please can someone confirm if this is a chip board? Our builder drilled through this ceiling to install spotlights and to do rewiring. This includes installing a heavy ceiling fan. The fan remains on the ceiling where it has a loft board on the top.  

I will be getting some advice from the CAB tomorrow, and I will wait to hear back from the BCO. 

Please advise if there is anything I can do in the meantime? 

These 'flooring' sheets are chipboard. If you look at the T&G edges, you can see the flakes and chips of wood that have been glued and compressed together to make the sheets. I presume these are for use on the FLOOR of the upstairs?

If you now look at the sample in your hand, you'll notice it's quite different - these are soft 'fibres' rather than 'chips'. So, the piece in your hand is 'Fibre Board', and could be 'medium density' (MDF - as used for making cupboards, shelves, etc) or 'low density', which is pretty soft stuff used as flooring underlay and insulation.

You are saying that your CEILINGS were made of this? If so, when was this done? Who fitted this?

(EDIT - see S62's post afterwards).

Ok, try and get the situation down to basics:

1) you didn't inform your buildings insurance of the work to be undertaken. That most likely means you aren't covered by them, but you should be by the builder. They SHOULD have liability cover, unless they are complete cowboys. Tbh, even IF you had buildings cover, they wouldn't pay out as their assessor would soon tell you to claim off the builder, and would likely suggest you employ your LP to help you. Have you called them up yet? If not, why not - it's like having your own personal solicitor.

2) IF your CEILING (not floor above) is made of that fibre board, then I have no idea why someone would have used this, but would suggest it is just NOT suitable. This brings with it two points; one, it is no surprise that it's as badly damaged as it is, and you cannot really blame the builder for that. Ie, plasterboard would 'likely' have largely survived one deluge - sil had water pouring through every joint in her ceiling from a shower left firing out an open door at full chat, and it dried up over a couple of weeks just fine ( tho' badly stained). Two, that ceiling WAS a fire hazard, and always would have been. Any fire originating on the downstairs floor would very likely become an inferno, and break quickly to the upper floor. You could almost say "Phew, I'm glad I know about this, so can change it."

3) your builder warned of the possibilities of some leaks. Good, so he should. The odd damp patch on a ceiling, or rivulets running down some walls should not be a 'surprise', tho' obviously not ideal. They'd be dealt with by some redecorating. That does NOT mean that a deluge that ends up damaging the new downstairs floor is 'acceptable' - it clearly isn't. The builder messed up with inadequate protection. (This could have been as minor as one corner of one tarp sheet getting loose, and all the accumulated water coursing down there - one wee mistake, but with huge consequences. But, mistake, by the builder, it was. He is liable.

4) he also advised to 'add' 10% for 'additions'. Also fair enough. But you need to be clear in your head what he MEANT by this. Was it to cover rain damage?! Of course not. Was to cover fixing 'unknowns'? Almost certainly 'yes'. Your fibre ceiling IS such an unknown. Does that mean you should be prepared to pay for it? Possibly not 100% b&w, but I'd suggest 'yes'.Or at least a good compromise as I suggested before - you pay for materials, and they do the labour (IF they are happy to agree to this)?

5) damaged downstairs flooring - I'd suggest that the builder is full liable for this. I presume there was nothing you could have done to mitigate? Ie, the water didn't pour down through one spot and you just stood and watched? I suspect much of the water ran down walls? In which there's little you can do to stop this.

6) you renovated your house in a topsy-turvey way! My take on this is that it's entirely your right to do so. If it gets flooded, the builder is liable, end of. If that house had been renovated downstairs BEFORE you bought it, it would have been a fair accompli. Does it make a difference? I'd suggest 'yes' - if I were the builder, I'd make DAMNED sure there wouldn't be any leaks, FAR more so than if the downstairs was empty and gutted. It's a 'shame' you did it that way around, but hey, you did.

7) subtleties and conversations and expectations and agreements with the builder at the start... For instance, did the builder discuss the risks with you, BEYOND "there could be some leaks"? Did they say, "At this time of year, we strongly recommend a full scaffold covering over the roof, but that will cost £Xk more..."? Or, gulp, anything like, "We will obviously take great care, but cannot be held liable for your brand new flooring and kitchen which we really wish you hadn't fitted...!" (I hope not!)

8) leave out the emotive stuff. Stick to the critical facts. Don't pinpoint every bit of flaking paint. But list what the damage has been, and tick the bits that YOU might reasonably be expected to have responsibility for. Eg, the ceilings! BUT, 'potentially' more IF the builder recommended a full cover, and you said 'non'. That doesn't exonerate the builder, but makes their job a lot harder. You may to think in terms of 'would it be fair for me to take, ooh, 10% or so of the repair cost (without prejudice)?"

What to do? I'd suggest talk to your LP. Don't 'over-egg', and don't 'emote'. Be 100% factual. 
Based on what they say, you ask your builder for a friendly sit-down chat to agree a way forward. 
If your LP says "They are 100% liable - give us the nod and we'll take 'im to the cleaners!", then break that to him gently. But I would personally also play fair and acknowledge that your ceiling material was inappropriate, and clearly contributed to the extent of the damage. Say you are willing to cover (possibly even 100%) the cost of this. The new flooring - sorry, LP is clear that's all yours. Redecorating? Ditto - but I'm happy to cover the materials if your guys do the work when they get to the painting stage of the upstairs? Etc etc. Do your damnedest to get to the point of handshakes.

Section62

Bendy_House said:

These 'flooring' sheets are chipboard. If you look at the T&G edges, you can see the flakes and chips of wood that have been glued and compressed together to make the sheets.

If you now look at the sample in your hand, you'll notice it's quite different - these are soft 'fibres' rather than 'chips'. So, the piece in your hand is 'Fibre Board', and could me 'medium density' (MDF - as used for making cupboards, shelves, etc) or 'low density', which is pretty soft stuff used as flooring underlay and insulation.

You are saying that your CEILINGS were made of this? If so, when was this done? Who fitted this?

...

2) IF your CEILING (not floor above) is made of that fibre board, then I have no idea why someone would have used this, but would suggest it is just NOT suitable. This brings with it two points; one, it is no surprise that it's as badly damaged as it is, and you cannot really blame the builder for that. Ie, plasterboard would 'likely' have largely survived one deluge - sil had water pouring through every joint in her ceiling from a shower left firing out an open door at full chat, and it dried up over a couple of weeks just fine ( tho' badly stained). Two, that ceiling WAS a fire hazard, and always would have been. Any fire originating on the downstairs floor would very likely become an inferno, and break quickly to the upper floor. You could almost say "Phew, I'm glad I know about this, so can change it."

See here for a more modern version of wood-based insulation board and why it is used...

https://www.insulationsuperstore.co.uk/product/steico-therm-woodfibre-internal-insulation-board-1350-x-600-x-20mm.html

(Edit: Randomly chosen link, not a recommendation)

Bendy_House

Section62 said:

Bendy_House said:

These 'flooring' sheets are chipboard. If you look at the T&G edges, you can see the flakes and chips of wood that have been glued and compressed together to make the sheets.

If you now look at the sample in your hand, you'll notice it's quite different - these are soft 'fibres' rather than 'chips'. So, the piece in your hand is 'Fibre Board', and could me 'medium density' (MDF - as used for making cupboards, shelves, etc) or 'low density', which is pretty soft stuff used as flooring underlay and insulation.

You are saying that your CEILINGS were made of this? If so, when was this done? Who fitted this?

...

2) IF your CEILING (not floor above) is made of that fibre board, then I have no idea why someone would have used this, but would suggest it is just NOT suitable. This brings with it two points; one, it is no surprise that it's as badly damaged as it is, and you cannot really blame the builder for that. Ie, plasterboard would 'likely' have largely survived one deluge - sil had water pouring through every joint in her ceiling from a shower left firing out an open door at full chat, and it dried up over a couple of weeks just fine ( tho' badly stained). Two, that ceiling WAS a fire hazard, and always would have been. Any fire originating on the downstairs floor would very likely become an inferno, and break quickly to the upper floor. You could almost say "Phew, I'm glad I know about this, so can change it."

See here for a more modern version of wood-based insulation board and why it is used...

https://www.insulationsuperstore.co.uk/product/steico-therm-woodfibre-internal-insulation-board-1350-x-600-x-20mm.html

(Edit: Randomly chosen link, not a recommendation)

Eek! So it's ok to use as a ceiling board? In which case the builder is back to being more liable for it all again?

diystarter7

SoJacob said:

@diystarter7

Thank you for your advice.

If a local authority surveyor is not already involved, pick their brains and get the work checked out you may have to pay for this.

Is it through the council? 

Yes. I've found them very helpful re rules and regs, ask for the duty officer.  Your choice if you want to give them your full details intially. They are often there to ensure that to their est ability your builder is doing the job properly. Not sure if it applies to you but years ago we told them about the new roof and they came out and told the builder to use bigger flashing and when we had a load bearing wall knocked out they told the builder to use extra supports. The roofer and the builder did not want them involved said it was "pointless" but we notified them and paid a few quid I think but this was years ago.

Section62

Bendy_House said:

Section62 said:

Bendy_House said:

These 'flooring' sheets are chipboard. If you look at the T&G edges, you can see the flakes and chips of wood that have been glued and compressed together to make the sheets.

If you now look at the sample in your hand, you'll notice it's quite different - these are soft 'fibres' rather than 'chips'. So, the piece in your hand is 'Fibre Board', and could me 'medium density' (MDF - as used for making cupboards, shelves, etc) or 'low density', which is pretty soft stuff used as flooring underlay and insulation.

You are saying that your CEILINGS were made of this? If so, when was this done? Who fitted this?

...

2) IF your CEILING (not floor above) is made of that fibre board, then I have no idea why someone would have used this, but would suggest it is just NOT suitable. This brings with it two points; one, it is no surprise that it's as badly damaged as it is, and you cannot really blame the builder for that. Ie, plasterboard would 'likely' have largely survived one deluge - sil had water pouring through every joint in her ceiling from a shower left firing out an open door at full chat, and it dried up over a couple of weeks just fine ( tho' badly stained). Two, that ceiling WAS a fire hazard, and always would have been. Any fire originating on the downstairs floor would very likely become an inferno, and break quickly to the upper floor. You could almost say "Phew, I'm glad I know about this, so can change it."

See here for a more modern version of wood-based insulation board and why it is used...

https://www.insulationsuperstore.co.uk/product/steico-therm-woodfibre-internal-insulation-board-1350-x-600-x-20mm.html

(Edit: Randomly chosen link, not a recommendation)

Eek! So it's ok to use as a ceiling board? In which case the builder is back to being more liable for it all again?

It depends what the material is.  Some are more flammable than others.  It also depends how it is used.

Solid sheets of fibreboard with a plaster skim are more resistant to the spread of fire than sheets which have had openings cut in them. E.g. to install recessed lighting. Then if the recessed lighting itself poses a fire risk, you've converted what was a relatively safe ceiling into a potential deathtrap.

I can't say for sure what concerned the BCO the most, but if I was doing a similar project and the ceiling boards were some form of unknown fibre then I'd allow for their removal and replacement with PB as a matter of course.

Section62

SoJacob said:

Quick update to all. I have been to the CAB. Advised me regardless the advice by the BCO RE: fire hazard- the builder made damages to the property and he responsible to fix it. The ceiling would not be damaged such a way if the roof was watertight. CAB advised me to write a deadlock letter to the builder. If the builder leaves the job, then he is responsible to pay us the cost to complete the job and if he doesn't then he can even be ended up in prison (what am I gaining here!!)  But my concern is, even if he says he do haveiability insurance how do I know this? What if I legally forward and he say he is bankrupted?

The CAB advisor was giving you very poor advice.  The builder is not going to jail in any circumstances relating to non-performance of the contract.

I think the problem you'll be having further down the line is that much of the circumstances of your situation will be on a he said/she said basis.  E.g. can you prove the BCO didn't give the builder the impression that the ceilings had to be replaced for fire-safety reasons?

Edit: Typo

diystarter7

@SoJacob
Many thanks for taking time out in stressful times to update us.
There is a lot going on and I'll let others with a lot more experience in this area help/guide you.
Don't forget, you will get over this and soon it may be a distant memory and one best to forget
but use this experience to your advantage next time you or a friend/family have works done.
Good luck

Doozergirl

Section62 said:

SoJacob said:

Quick update to all. I have been to the CAB. Advised me regardless the advice by the BCO RE: fire hazard- the builder made damages to the property and he responsible to fix it. The ceiling would not be damaged such a way if the roof was watertight. CAB advised me to write a deadlock letter to the builder. If the builder leaves the job, then he is responsible to pay us the cost to complete the job and if he doesn't then he can even be ended up in prison (what am I gaining here!!)  But my concern is, even if he says he do haveiability insurance how do I know this? What if I legally forward and he say he is bankrupted?

The CAB advisor was giving you very poor advice.  The builder is not going to jail in any circumstances relating to non-performance of the contract.

I think the problem you'll be having further down the line is that much of the circumstances of your situation will be on a he said/she said basis.  E.g. can you prove the BCO didn't give the builder the impression that the ceilings had to be replaced for fire-safety reasons?

Edit: Typo

Leading on from this, it's also not good advice to stick you straight into a dispute/deadlock while you have no roof.  There's what the law says on paper and there's the actual toll on your lives and the potential escalation of costs if you fall out now with no guarantee of payback.  

The cost of replacing the ceilings, might draw the ultimate costs if this builder walks away.   You run the risk of

• ongoing and further damage with no roof 
• the costs associated with the time it takes to find someone new
• additional costs to provide some kind of insurance policy to someone new taking the project on
• legal costs if your court case is above £10k
  

Legal costs can often wipe out the benefit of winning because you cannot claim much of those costs back.    And even if you do win, if they have no assets, you'll get nothing.   You cannot get blood from a stone.   

It is not easy to find a builder full stop.  It is even less easy to find one when you have a dispute because the builder needs to try and work out what the full story is and whether a relationship with you is likely to collapse with them also.  

My gut says suck this one up until you at least get watertight, so you minimise your financial and elemental exposure.

The cost of just the ceiling damage should be less than £10k and puts you in the small claims route.  

Re: BCO.  I'm not sure they're helping your case.  The ceilings need replacing because they're not as expected - I can confirm that I have only seen one room that was plastered chipboard in a 20 year career.   The fire things is a bit of a red herring.  I would be recommending replacement as your BCO is.  It's a shame that the ceilings had been skimmed - when you say 'my plasterer' did it - you genuinely mean you employed someone to do this yourself?  Not your main contractor?  

Bendy_House

Hi SoJ.

Thanks for the update.

First - you can pretty much disregard most of what I said about the ceiling boards... You will have read updates on this from the likes of S62 and Doozer.

It still remains a toughie, as far as I can see. Should this become a civil action/claim, a clued-up adjudicator will be looking at all the evidence, and part of that might be that your unusual ceiling material was far more vulnerable to water damage than the standard plasterboard. Would that make a difference to any claim? I don't know. But, for example, I would expect the water stain shown in your last photo - and a lot worse than this - to survive such a short-term soaking, whereas your ceiling material would likely not. So, if your house had been a more 'conventional' construction, then things might have been a lot better. BUT, the water ingress is the builder's responsibility, no question in my mind.

Should you call your insurance? No idea.

Should you call up your LP? I'd say yes - as a priority. LP is completely independent to your insurance co. They should be able to give you sound and proper legal advice (unlike what does appear to be an over-egged response from CAB). Your LP might suggest you inform your insurance - I don't know - in which case you should. In essence, you need to be guided by a legal bod, so that's either the LP you've paid for, or a solicitor you've yet to find; I'd suggest the former. (And calling them up for guidance does not mean you are launching a claim. Yet.)

If your LP says anything similar to CAB - ie this is a very clear case of the builder being liable for all the damage, and you'd have them bang to rights - then that is a useful thing to take to the table when you sit down with the builder. You can explain you want to arrive at the best decision for you both, and that might - depending on how accepting they of for the overall responsibility - see you willing to cover the cost of some of the materials. Then you explain what you were told by your LP - hopefully that they see it as a clear 100% responsibility, and that it would be a case they'd be willing to take on if needed. Add, of course, that this is the last thing you want to happen.

You also need to explain what you were told about the ceiling materials by the BCO. This will be embarrassing for the builder, as it'll imply he was telling porkies, so keep it matter-of-fact; "I'm a layman in this, but these were the exact words by the BCO - 'blah blah blah'. If you disagree with that, it's between and the BCO, but my LP is very clear on their take on this..."

"What can we agree on, so we can both move forward, and put this unpleasant-for-all situation behind us?"

DanDare999

Bendy_House said:

Hi SoJ.

Thanks for the update.

First - you can pretty much disregard most of what I said about the ceiling boards... You will have read updates on this from the likes of S62 and Doozer.

It still remains a toughie, as far as I can see. Should this become a civil action/claim, a clued-up adjudicator will be looking at all the evidence, and part of that might be that your unusual ceiling material was far more vulnerable to water damage than the standard plasterboard. Would that make a difference to any claim? I don't know. But, for example, I would expect the water stain shown in your last photo - and a lot worse than this - to survive such a short-term soaking, whereas your ceiling material would likely not. So, if your house had been a more 'conventional' construction, then things might have been a lot better. BUT, the water ingress is the builder's responsibility, no question in my mind.

Should you call your insurance? No idea.

Should you call up your LP? I'd say yes - as a priority. LP is completely independent to your insurance co. They should be able to give you sound and proper legal advice (unlike what does appear to be an over-egged response from CAB). Your LP might suggest you inform your insurance - I don't know - in which case you should. In essence, you need to be guided by a legal bod, so that's either the LP you've paid for, or a solicitor you've yet to find; I'd suggest the former. (And calling them up for guidance does not mean you are launching a claim. Yet.)

If your LP says anything similar to CAB - ie this is a very clear case of the builder being liable for all the damage, and you'd have them bang to rights - then that is a useful thing to take to the table when you sit down with the builder. You can explain you want to arrive at the best decision for you both, and that might - depending on how accepting they of for the overall responsibility - see you willing to cover the cost of some of the materials. Then you explain what you were told by your LP - hopefully that they see it as a clear 100% responsibility, and that it would be a case they'd be willing to take on if needed. Add, of course, that this is the last thing you want to happen.

You also need to explain what you were told about the ceiling materials by the BCO. This will be embarrassing for the builder, as it'll imply he was telling porkies, so keep it matter-of-fact; "I'm a layman in this, but these were the exact words by the BCO - 'blah blah blah'. If you disagree with that, it's between and the BCO, but my LP is very clear on their take on this..."

"What can we agree on, so we can both move forward, and put this unpleasant-for-all situation behind us?"

That's slightly misleading, they'd have a strong case. In court a judge may disagree.