Conservatory Foundations

[DMCK]

Hi There
Recently started getting a conservatory built by a company.I have planning permission and a building Warrant (Scotland).
In Nov their builders (subcontractors) started digging founds and when I asked when they were getting Building Control to inspect the founds before pouring concrete I was told this was not required.
I knew this was required which BC confirmed.
Upshot is that they hadn't dug deep enough iaw both Building Regs and the plans, which say 450mm or to depth of existing house foundations.
They say they can't dig deep enough due to depth of existing house foundations probably a good six feet or so.
Garden is backfilled clay soil.
They have now submitted plans for a raft type foundation which has been approved by BC.
Conservatory Company has been on phone to me saying I'm being unreasonable in not meeting any further costs, which in my opinion are due to their inability to properly survey the job and to carry it out at the Contract Price.
I may have been willing to go some way if the company had been upfront and told me there may have been additional costs rather than them just digging to 450mm or thereabouts and hoping I wouldn't know any different.
Now they are saying they will reinstate my garden for me (which is obviously easier and cheaper for them and still leaves me without a conservatory). Or that they can build it to BC standards but they can't wait around for BC to visit/inspect, a bit of a contradiction I think.
Building Control has said they do wish to inspect again before any concrete is poured.
Any thoughts or advice from anyone, bearing in mind that I think I'll need to watch them like a hawk to make sure they do comply with Building Regs.

Thanks

 

[masona]

I think I'll need to watch them like a hawk to make sure they do comply with Building Regs.

Shouldn't have to, that's what you pay the building inspector for!

When I'm doing the footing I have to give the building inspector 24 hrs notice, if the builders cannot wait then that's their problem to sort out.

Might be best to have a chat with at the BCO.

 

[noseall]

conservatories are b.c. exempt. they are treated like glorified sheds, which is what they are.

if you intend removing the external spec door which separates habitable from conservatory then you will be effectively turning it into an extension. a standard conservatory roof coupled with all that glazing will not satisfy part L regs.

conservatories above 30m2 do require a planning application.

it is unfortunate that you have made up ground. it would have been difficult for the glazing company to have spotted this without an expensive survey. they should be entitled to re-quote when this new info' came to light.

you should not be liable for any previous foundation work as the made up ground should have been spotted upon first dig.

 

[^woody^]

conservatories are b.c. exempt. they are treated like glorified sheds, which is what they are.

In scotland?
But possibly in an Approved Document in England very soon.

The OPs problem is a contractural one. There is a contract in place, and that includes building to any required standards. The BCO will check the [controlled] work, but not the qaulity or standard of work outside his remit. If the foundations are an unexpected expense for the company, then they may try to make savings elsewhere.

With regards to the builders not waiting for the inspection, then remember that the application is from the householder who assumes ultimate responsibility for the work. If work is not done properly or has to be opened up for inspection, then the costs are with the householder. If the builder won't play ball, then any costs will be recoverable via the civil courts.

I would watch them carefully, but not nit-pick. Try and salvage the relationship as best you can and then you will hopefully end up with a decent job

 

[DMCK]

Thanks for the replies.
Noseall, I'm afraid glorified heated sheds over 8m square do come under Building Regs in Scotland.
There was nothing in the Glazing Company's contract saying about needing to requote if the founds had to be a certain depth.
I'm quite sure if there was something in said contract they would use that against me.
Woody and Masona, What bothered me from the start was their insistance that Building Control only inspected on completion of the conservatory being built.
Then it would be me that was forced to try and get them to underpin it etc in order to satisfy Building Control.
I do know of a couple of conservatories that have required under pinning in my estate.
Even now, if they go ahead with the Raft foundation I don't see how hard it would be for them to notify Building control when their ready.
What I'm concerned about, is that on completion and after they've been paid, is that Building Control who have been very helpful up to now come along and refuse a completion certificate.
As Woody pointed out, I think that ultimately, I as the householder would be the one with the ultimate responsibilty for the work, though the Conservatory Company are also liable for providing goods fit for purpose, ie A Conservatory that complies with Regs.
Thanks Again for the Replies, still not sure whether to tell them to come and reinstate my garden and just walk away.

 

[noseall]

Thanks for the replies.
Noseall, I'm afraid glorified heated sheds over 8m square do come under Building Regs in Scotland.
.

there was no disrespect meant on the glorified shed as i will be installing one my self soon.

i do however find it astonishing that the upvc company, armed with both a drawing and the knowledge that the job would be inspected, did not dig down to the depth of the house footings or expect to get away with something much less.

if a conservatory does fall under building reg's in scotland, how do you get away with the heat loss issues and part L regulations?

 

[DMCK]

there was no disrespect meant on the glorified shed as i will be installing one my self soon.

No offence taken

i do however find it astonishing that the upvc company, armed with both a drawing and the knowledge that the job would be inspected, did not dig down to the depth of the house footings or expect to get away with something much less.

So do I
They must have thought that I was incapable of phoning up Building Control!

if a conservatory does fall under building reg's in scotland, how do you get away with the heat loss issues and part L regulations?

I think that Scottish Regs Part J are equivalent to the part L regs.
From what I understand it's to do with the measurement of the insulation values of the glass (low emission, argon filled etc) and brickwork etc.
The external spec door between house and conservatory will be staying.

 

[masona]

Your best bet now would be to get in touch with Citizens Advice Bureaux and it's free advice unless you top up their money box

 

[DMCK]

Masona, thanks for suggestion.

I have been in touch with CAB and Trading Standards.
At this point in time due to the fact I haven't paid anything up front for the job, apart from their architect's fees, and also the fact that the Conservatory Company are saying that they can complete the job, it's a bit of a stalemate.
Trading Standards have recorded the details though, and say that the contracted price is all I am liable for and that it was up to the conservatory company to properly survey the job.
I think they may have had more to go on if I had actually paid up front and was trying to recover money back.
In the meantime the pallet of cement they left in my driveway has set solid.
Another expense for them methinks.
I think it may be time to get proper legal advice or at least try and get in writing off them how they invisage building to Building Control standards without BC involvement