Engineer Fee 11k - supervison/periodic visits??

Blackbanana

Registered User
Messages
17
We paid engineer 11k for design, tendering (to his builder panel) supervision, certificates of compliance. However, though there were 10 visits to the property, and though he describes himself as the administrator of the builder's contract in several emails, and decisions were not to be made without his input, he denies he was supervising the project, and it was just periodic visits - house renovation with kitchen extension and attic conversation.

We are now left with 80k bills for mistakes on planning which have devalued our house - said we didn't need planning when we did - should have come under BCAR but didn't, remedial work costs 80k for structural issues.

We are likely to have difficulty selling our house in the future as we didn't come under BCAR, because of engineer's mistake, who is also a planning consultant, so we don't have all the BCAR certification we need, just a new global cert for the house from new engineer. Builder has gone to ground and left the country. What is the engineer's liability here - is it worth pursuing?
 
Maybe. have you contacted him and more importantly, is he a member of some professional body that requires members to have insurance?
 
The engineer owes you a duty of reasonable care.

Specifically, the engineer must bring such competence and skill to bear on your work as it is reasonable to expect of an engineer of his/the firm's skills, experience and avowed competencies.

You have a right of action in the tort of negligence and or breach of contract.

This matter needs the attention of a solicitor to deal with your interests as your losses are significant.
 
Thanks Ravima and DirectDevl for replies. We did not know there was a difference between periodic site visits and supervision. The fee was 11k. We also did not know the difference between Opinion of Compliance and Cert of Compliance. The engineer in question never informed us of these differences. The new engineer, a Chartered Engineer, who would be well known and thought of in engineering circles said that the fee we paid, 11k is far more than would have been considered for periodic site visits, and that the fact that the original engineer designed and tendered for the project as well as stating in many correspondences that he was the supervisor of the project, the administrator of the building contract and that all design changes and cots had to go trough him, the building contract also refers to the engineer as the supervising engineer, and this meant that though the original contract said periodic site visits, the implied contract was supervision. The engineers professional body thinks he wasn't less than diligent in his supervision as he was making periodic site visits, and that he has no case to answer re supervision, but did have case to answer on other issues, e.g. CPD, competency etc. though there was 80k of remedial work required, including insertion of two lots of steel supports to make the structure safe, among many other issues. We also never obtained the correct certification for him. Re. our planning cert, he wasn't able to give us that as he was not a Chartered Engineer. We still do not have full certification for the house. The new Engineer says that the original engineer should have supervised the renovation at key points, foundation, blockwork, roof and attic conversion/supports.
 
Back
Top