Where do we stand legally with problems on eco friendly house?

[cassmrc]

We bought a house in December 2008, its an eco - friendly house, with air ventilation system and solar panels.

Since 2008, the company who supplied the ventilation system have been back a number of times for various problems and the plumber has been back because the solar panel system is losing pressure and needs to be refilled.

End of last year 2010, discovered some leakage from the Solar Panel system where the pipes are joined. The builder has been back to look at it and has said the plumber will be in to fix it, that was in November we still have not seen the plumber and it could be a couple of weeks because the plumber is now up to his eyes with other work.

My question to anyone out there, is what would you do at this stage, would you go to a Solicitor and get a letter sent legally?
We are completely peed off with this.
To be fair the Builder comes and looks at it anytime we report a problem but my concern is that some day he is just going to stop coming and we will be left with the bill for the repair.
Where do we stand legally?

 

[Vanilla]

You need to go back to the solicitor who acted for you in the purchase and find out if you have a structural/ building defects guarantee from the builder, the wording of it and what your contract for purchase says in relation to this.

Anything anyone advises you on this forum will just be speculation until you get advice on this issue.

 

[onq]

We bought a house in December 2008, its an eco - friendly house, with air ventilation system and solar panels.

Since 2008, the company who supplied the ventilation system have been back a number of times for various problems and the plumber has been back because the solar panel system is losing pressure and needs to be refilled.

End of last year 2010, discovered some leakage from the Solar Panel system where the pipes are joined. The builder has been back to look at it and has said the plumber will be in to fix it, that was in November we still have not seen the plumber and it could be a couple of weeks because the plumber is now up to his eyes with other work.

My question to anyone out there, is what would you do at this stage, would you go to a Solicitor and get a letter sent legally?
We are completely peed off with this.
To be fair the Builder comes and looks at it anytime we report a problem but my concern is that some day he is just going to stop coming and we will be left with the bill for the repair.
Where do we stand legally?

Could you clarify what you mean when you say you "bought" the house - was this a self build you procured, or did you buy from a builder?

I'll outline two scenarios below:


=====================

If this is Self Build:

If you followed good practice you involved a building professional [I use this broad term to allow for people who use engineers and technicians as oposed to archtiects] in the construction of the premises.

Such a person would be used to provide tender documents, advise on tender returns, administrate the building contract, appoint nominated sub-contractors, assess the quality of their installations, provide working drawings, conduct limited inspections, certify interim payments and penultimate payments and issue certificates of practical completion and final snag lists.

If such a person exists he/she should have advised you on your rights under the contract, particularly during the defects liability period which for a house like this should have been for a minimum of one year / twelve months.

If you were well-advised and entered into nominated sub-contracts you may have a direct contractual relationship with the companies who supplied/installed the ventilation system and the solar panel system. If not you will have to go to they through the builder, as they were "domestic" to the main contractor and you will probably have no direct contractual reationship.

In that case you may be in a postion to rely on whastever guarantees arrived with the Opinions fo Compliance.
Since I'm listing whay may be included below this I won't include it here.


=====================

If this is a Purchase:

If you or your solicitor followed good practice, then you/she/he should have sought the appropriate documents and assurances from the vendor in relation to the presmises which may include but might not be not limited to:

• Building Energy Rating Certificate [legally required regardless whether property is in sale or rent]
• Health and Safety File extract relating to this property.
• Architects Opinion of Compliance with Planning Permission
• Architects Opinion of Compliance with Building Regulations, including
• Certificate from Structural Engineer [specialist groundworks, substructures, drainage and possibly the timber frame]
• Certificate from Timber Frame Suppliers structureal engineer re the timber frame [if not separately supplied]
• Certificate from Main Contractor in relation to the overall built work.
• Certificate from Electrical Sub-Contractor
• Certificate(s) from Mechanical and Plumbing Sub-Contractor
• Certificates, Warranties and/or Guarantees from Specialist Sub-Contractors or suppliers.
• Certificates, Warranties, Guarantees. commissioning certificates and manuals for all elements or installed items [flat roof sections, specialist glazing systems, boilers, etc.]

These together with your contract to purchase and possibly a separate building contract may form the basis of any claim under the several branches of the law you may be advised to invoke.

Defects liabiliy period expires after 12months usually - major patent defects or snags should be sorted within this period.

It seems clear that the ventilation system was spotted, and may have been on the snag list depending on when it was discoverd.
It has not been adequately remedied yet but the contractor and plumbing contractor have axknowledged its their problem by the extent of repeat visits required to sort it out.
Similarly for the solar panel system.

================================

If you really want thsi to be sorted, then in my opinion, you may need to stop relying on the Contractor and Plumber and take independent professional advice on both the ventilation system and the solar panel installation.
I would engage a competent mechanicla and electrical consulting engineers to inspect both installations and issue a rport.
If the firms involved are simply not able to perform due to a lack of competence or training the report should point out the reasons for the continuing or patent defects and any other latent defects not yet apparent.
You may find that this will cost you less than a solicitor for more focussed results, but a solicitors letter will advise the builder that all your professional costs will be borne by him and that you are not satisfied with his failed attempts to remedy matters and that you hold him and the plumber and the ventilations system installer liable for any and all repairs and replacements.

ONQ

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action be taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters at hand.

 

[Vanilla]

If you really want thsi to be sorted, then in my opinion, you may need to stop relying on the Contractor and Plumber and take independent professional advice on both the ventilation system and the solar panel installation.
I would engage a competent mechanicla and electrical consulting engineers to inspect both installations and issue a rport.
If the firms involved are simply not able to perform due to a lack of competence or training the report should point out the reasons for the continuing or patent defects and any other latent defects not yet apparent.
You may find that this will cost you less than a solicitor for more focussed results, but a solicitors letter will advise the builder that all your professional costs will be borne by him and that you are not satisfied with his failed attempts to remedy matters and that you hold him and the plumber and the ventilations system installer liable for any and all repairs and replacements.

You should NOT do this before you take legal advice as you may well be wasting your money. Either you have a comeback against the builder/subcontractors or you don't. Until you know this you should not engage anyone to do a report as this is likely to be very costly- far more costly than the initial legal advice.

 

[onq]

Vanilla I have a lot of respect for you, but I don't know where you're coming from on this one.

My experience is that the architect's [or engineer's] report is often the basis for taking legal advice, less so the other way around.

This is because the statute of limitations is 6 years so let's move this on from here and assume some legal remedy is available.

There is a shedload of correspondence and horse-trading that may occur before a solicitor may be needed.

This is from personal experience and it is not speculation.

Others may have different experiences, this is mine.



ONQ.

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action be taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters at hand.

 

[Vanilla]

Onq- many houses are bought on a caveat emptor basis- therefore the buyer may have no legal remedy against the seller/builder. They need to find out if this is the case BEFORE they get engineering reports.

 

[onq]

Vanilla,

My understandig of the law in relation to the built work is that who ever is building it;

- must be competent under the Health and Safety legislation to carry out his task
- must build in accordance with the Building Regulations
- must build in compliance with the Planning Permission
- must offer a BER cert in sale or rent
- is liable under breach of contract, even if its only the impliece fitness for purposes and compliance issues.
- is liable for 6 years under the statute of limitations
- can be taken to court by the local authority for non-compliance, as can the owner.

So as fare as I can see, assessing the problem by someone competent to do so is the first port of call, followd by the legal options.
Assessing the problem is never wasted money - it means you know what it is, and can frame the legal case based on this or repair it properly.
For example, the problem may lie with the support of the solar panel, or the kind of fitting used, the quality of the work, or the lack of a flexible hose in the connection sequence.
Only once you have assessed the problem can the solicitor begin to frame the specific allegations of the case, although I'm sure many solicitors don't let that stop them firing off letters.
But I suspect this is on of the reasons why more and more judges are referring building defect cases to arbitration - so that a competent assessment and costing of the remedy finally gets done.

========================================

As I've posted before, I do not hold myself out to be an expert in these matters, but all of the above provisions seem to apply here.

If the purchaser did not inspect, I agree his position might be weaker, but my understanding is that major defects and incidence of significant non-compliance must still be put right.
The purchaser did not contract to buy a defective house but a compliant house and the building control act and attendance regulations give the legal requirements in this regard.
A minor leak on a pipe might not fall within this ambit, but a generic problem with the ventilations system might.

In the present case, both faults centre on mechanical and electrical installations - the solar panel plumbing and the ventilation system.
I would not be going anywhere near court without a full log of the incidents and an assessment by a competent mechanical and electrical consultant.

This should encompass the sizing and set up of the entire solar hearing system, including the pump size, capacity and efficiency in operation.
In addition, any assessment of the ventilation system should address how it restricts both fire and the passage of sold smoke and fumes through the building.


========================================

Vanilla, I won't rebut your comments again.
This really has to be teased out with the legal team.
I accept what you say has validity - its just not my way.
I've inserted a few of my disclaimers on the posts I've made.
It points to the fact that there is a need to assess this "on the ground" and that the information here cannot be relied on in court.

ONQ.

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action be taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters at hand.

 

[Vanilla]

I accept what you say has validity - its just not my way.

It's not about 'your way'. It's about the contract these purchasers made. Either they do or don't have a remedy- they need to find that out first. The OP doesnt state they made a contract with the builder, they may have bought from a third party. There are all sorts of possibilities here. Only OPs solicitor can advise on the particular contract entered into.