Innovative building work or balancing act?

20.11.2018

News

In our August Building Bulletin, "It’s a roof Jim but not as we know it?" we highlighted some really poor work encountered on site.

We finished the article with "...this really is one of the worst examples of building work we have come across, unless of course you know about something worse".

It appears to have set an unwanted challenge as we received this startling example of innovative work shortly afterwards...

At first glance it looks reasonable, especially as the roof timbers are positioned correctly. But looking closer, the walls are built straight off the patio slabs. It also featured a new form of construction not seen before – mortar free masonry!!

This photo shows the left hand corner pier in the previous photo with the blockwork bonded together with Febfoam.

While this material is seen as the answer to all things needing sealing, we are pretty sure it hasn’t been tested to BS EN 998-2 Specification for mortar for masonry - Part 2: Masonry mortar.

The lintels were also timber and the structure was about to receive a render coat.

Despite the protests of the "contractor" who was quite adamant that the patio concrete could "easily take the weight of the building" there were no alternatives other than to demolish the structure.

The offending work has now been removed, the local authority are looking to prosecute the "contractor" and the householder is having to take the contractor to magistrates' court in an attempt to recover monies paid out for the defective work undertaken.

This was a harsh lesson for the householder who thought they had received a really good price for their dream extension. The adage "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is" is too often overlooked and serves as a warning to anyone seeking prices for building work.

We really are hoping we won’t find anything worse than this.

Please Note: Every care was taken to ensure the information was correct at the time of publication. Any written guidance provided does not replace the user’s professional judgement. It is the responsibility of the dutyholder or person carrying out the work to ensure compliance with relevant building regulations or applicable technical standards.

Comments

Shoddy work

Submitted 5 years 4 months ago

Do we have to go all through this again. How long is it going to take before all builders need qualifications like plumbers and sparks. The work we find on site is still dreadful. We recently uncovered a concrete lintel, 3m long x 300mm x 150mm holding up the upstairs wall. This lintel has a bearing of 35mm onto brickwork. And that’s it. We’ve had to prop it, build a footing and a pier, just to make it safe. House owner had no idea of the poor quality work they had paid for. Enough is enough. Registration, vat reg on everyone and insurance as well

Poor workmanship

Submitted 5 years 4 months ago

Recently viewed some work that I was told required finishing!!??
Lintel above a bathroom window approx 30 mm bearing either side ( no padstones )
Other issue with internal steel etc ..etc ... no regs - I’ve quoted to put right the work & gain building reg certification ! But I’m too expensive?? Some will never learn £30k extension of sorts !!

Ground beam with no reinforcement.

Submitted 5 years 4 months ago

I was overseeing work on a property that required a steel box frame on an ex ground beam. I told the contractor that I wanted to inspect the reinforcement before the beam was cast.
The builder poured the beam on a Saturday without the check, saying that he had a window so took the opportunity to move the job on. I asked for pictures and design mix supplied by the concrete supplier. Nothing was forthcoming so instructed the builder to break out the beam. What a surprise it was (not) to see no steel in the rubble.
The contractor was sacked.