Roofer did shoddy work and has now filed court claim against me

[f16]

Kinger

What the architect is saying that when you changed it from "flat" ceiling to "vaulted" it should have been re- speced.

with regards to insulation (Which would be changed from Rockwool to Celotex).

The plaster board would be up graded from "standard" to "foil backed vapour barrier"

The Veluxs should also have a vapour barrier kit fitted.

A 50mm "Air break" between top of insulation and underside of "Tilers sheet"

 

So he is saying that the "verge vents" on the drawings should be there along with the soffit vents but other things should have been done as well.

[f16]

Cheers caro

Mike_hawk assisted with good input regarding Kingers letter to the roofer

Thanks again

F16

[caro]

No problem f16.

[Kinger122]

Just so you know that this has not been ignored. Is there some specific advice you or Kinger are looking for?

 

 

 

Thank you for you response. Mike_Hawk provided useful advice for which I am very grateful.

[Kinger122]

Kinger

What the architect is saying that when you changed it from "flat" ceiling to "vaulted" it should have been re- speced.

with regards to insulation (Which would be changed from Rockwool to Celotex).

The plaster board would be up graded from "standard" to "foil backed vapour barrier"

The Veluxs should also have a vapour barrier kit fitted.

A 50mm "Air break" between top of insulation and underside of "Tilers sheet"

 

So he is saying that the "verge vents" on the drawings should be there along with the soffit vents but other things should have been done as well.

 

 

That's great news then. I called the building inspector again and it went to voicemail. I left a message too. I can only assume that the roofer has told the inspector he must deal with him only; which if he did is bang out of order.

 

 

I received a response from the insurance company. I am not sure whether I should name the roofer. Here it is

 

 

" Good Afternoon,

Reference the above subject and your recent enquiry to GPI Ltd, which has been referred to ourselves as the administrators.

I will need more information on your contractor before I am able to release the relevant specimen policy, can you confirm the company name please?

Should you have any queries please do not hesitate to contact me.

Kind Regards,"

[caro]

Thank you for you response. Mike_Hawk provided useful advice for which I am very grateful.

 

Great stuff. Mike is very knowledgeable and as so often happens caggers other than site team are able to help. Good luck.

[f16]

Hummmmm..... I don't know.

Would they contact him via the NFRC ?

 

I think they will just check that he is a member of the NFRC.

[Kinger122]

Hummmmm..... I don't know.

Would they contact him via the NFRC ?

 

I think they will just check that he is a member of the NFRC.

 

 

 

So shall I just provide the name of the company? It won't make things worse for me will it? I thought they may just check a database.

 

 

However I don't believe this company offers the guarantees as normal practice. This was only offered because of court, so it may be he has applied separately which might not come up on their system.

 

 

Do you reckon I should just risk it and sent the company name?

[f16]

A thought....

You said many moons ago that "you got 3 quotes" for the roof.

Were they all members of the NFRC ?

Use one of their names...... That will "throw them off the scent".

[f16]

Kinger

It can't make it worse !

You're just making sure you are "covered" and not issued with some "Worthless" bit of paper.

 

I would use his co. name.

[Kinger122]

Kinger

It can't make it worse !

You're just making sure you are "covered" and not issued with some "Worthless" bit of paper.

 

I would use his co. name.

 

 

 

Thanks. I'll use the company name and sent it now. Hopefully they will get back soon.

[f16]

Kinger

Just to "recap" on your post #330. "That's great news then".

 

Yes. Because the roof does not conform to Building Regs. regarding "ventilation".

 

Do not let the Building Inspector "talk you into" an "unvented" roof... Because we know for a fact there are no vapour barriers.

 

You require the ventilation as per the drawings.

[f16]

Kinger

Found something for you.

Search NFRC code of practice. 2 page doc.

Print it off. .... Interesting read.

Points 11 - 24. ... In particular point 21

 

Did the roof leak over Easter ?

[Kinger122]

Kinger

Found something for you.

Search NFRC code of practice. 2 page doc.

Print it off. .... Interesting read.

Points 11 - 24. ... In particular point 21

 

Did the roof leak over Easter ?

 

 

 

I'll check that out thanks. No the roof did not leak as we didn't get any rain. Just a little drizzle today. The building inspector has also got back to me. He sent the following:

 

" Thank you for your email and telephone message. We will make arrangements to call out to inspect the roof and I suggest that I call with one of our principal surveyors, Mr xxxx. He is currently on leave this week but is due to return on Monday, at which point we should be able to confirm with you a day and time for the inspection."

Shall I sent the NFRC another email? I already did once and they didn't even send an acknowledgement. Its just an idea but I'm not too optimistic. It seems like they back their members even when they are in the wrong.

 

Is there anything else that can be done in the meantime or shall we just wait for the inspection. I hope you enjoyed your bank holiday F16.

[f16]

Kinger

I would "Lay off" the NFRC at the moment because I agree with you they a "backing" their member. Which is not the way to operate IMO.

 

I would advise the "roofer" of the building control Email. So that you can prove to the Judge (If it comes to this) that you have kept the roofer informed.

 

I would reply to the Building Control. Thanking them for the response and that as this extension is the subject of a court case that roofing co. XYZ

are not made aware of this inspection/meeting.

 

See what "Mike_hawk" thinks on this .

 

Then we've got a "shed load" to get through before the meeting

F16

 

PS. I hope it rains..... LOL

[f16]

You have clearly got Building Control on the "Back foot".

Hence the Principal Surveyor attending.

 

Your roofer is going to have a "To do" list, that is going to make Al Capone's charge sheet look small.

[f16]

Question for the "Legal Crew".

 

Would the Judges decision re. the pitch at 13.5 instead of 15 degrees, supersede Building Control or Manufacturers fitting instructions ?????

 

This can't be right. Can it ???

 

Otherwise the Judge could say "fit the tiles inside out, upside down" Building Control will have to accept it.

 

Answers on something larger than a postage stamp (which is what the Judge wants) appreciated.

F16

[f16]

Kinger,

What was the "pitch" on the "architect" drawings before XYZ roof co. said they could "make it 15 degrees" by using 5" firings ?

 

Did the architect say that the original calculations would achieve 15 degrees ???

 

I can't access the dims. on the drawings

Sorry

F16

[maddiemay]

This must be so stressful, but looks like it's going in the right direction now, Kinger must be so grateful to you f16, you have been great!

 

I also wondered how a judge could say a pitch of 13.5 would be okay, bet he/ she wouldn't accept anything less than was on the plans if it were theirs.

 

Hope the legal peeps are still following, gonna need them soon!

[Kinger122]

Kinger,

What was the "pitch" on the "architect" drawings before XYZ roof co. said they could "make it 15 degrees" by using 5" firings ?

 

Did the architect say that the original calculations would achieve 15 degrees ???

 

I can't access the dims. on the drawings

Sorry

F16

 

 

 

The architect only stated that the low pitch tiles should be used and that everything should be installed according to manufacturer specifications.

[Kinger122]

This must be so stressful, but looks like it's going in the right direction now, Kinger must be so grateful to you f16, you have been great!

 

I also wondered how a judge could say a pitch of 13.5 would be okay, bet he/ she wouldn't accept anything less than was on the plans if it were theirs.

 

Hope the legal peeps are still following, gonna need them soon!

 

 

 

Hi Maddie. Yes very stressful. I cant wait for the end. I appreciate everyone's help

[Mike_hawk]

Hi Kinger

 

I am following, just not sure that I can add anything useful beyond reminding you to tread gently and don't do anything to upset the applecart. Try to bear in mind the other side will know you are using building control as leverage to rectify the build, how that will fair with the court if the builder applies for any remedy to speed up the process is anyone's guess. He knows he must get the build signed off, he also knows that the delays and inspections are likely to reduce his ability to effect a cheap fix. I suppose you have to ask yourself how pacient you would be and what you would do if the positions were reversed.

 

One way or another the builder convinced the judge on the day the pitch was a de minimis element within the contract and seemingly the judge agreed that it would be unjust to withhold payment....... I believe the doctrine of Quantum meruit [as much as is deserved] has been referred to earlier on in your thread and would assume the judge was focused on that aspect of the case. Without getting embroiled in further litigation and bearing additional costs with applications, hearings, experts fees etc its a position that [given the value involved] you may be best placed to keep all correspondence with the other side as neutral as possible and be prepared to show the court how 'helpful' you have been in protecting the other side from exposure to [financial] damage.

[f16]

Mike_hawk thanks...... Another question if I may.

 

If Building Controls Principals Surveyor refuses to accept the 13.5 degrees and wants the correct 15 degrees, so it "complies with Regs.

 

What happens then ?????

[Mike_hawk]

I'd assume the builder will either have to comply with bc requirements or face the possibility of being unable to comply with the order.

[f16]

Kinger.

 

NFRC code of practice.(Point 11).. Execution of contract and materials used.

 

Each trade member shall execute each contract in accordance with current building regs.

Relevant British or European Standards or (This is the important part)

Other technical approved accreditations operative at the time and

codes of practice relevant to the work being carried out.

 

In a "Nutshell". Fit materials to manufacturers spec. and instructions.

 

So if it is in the "Code of practice" then it will be in the insurance "Clauses"