Trade proceeded without agreed detail...

[christianbeccy]

So, long story VERY short, but if a tradesperson proceeds to install without an agreed detail, who is responsible for it if it isn't suitable?

I know you guys love context, so I'll give you an idea of it, though trying to stay focused on this simple core question. This is a £50k Zinc Roof on a residential self-build. Expert installer brought in, but certain details were not provided by me or my Architect. Should they have proceeded to design 'on the fly' or should they have pushed it back to me (nominated principle contractor) and who is now responsible for installed details that are not suitable?

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

It depends how expert they are, how they were appointed, what the architect was contracted to supply detail wise etc.

That said if they are a specialist installer and there are no peculiar details it would be reasonable to expect them to be able to proceed without any clients details, typically a zinc roof manufacturer (which one is it btw?) will have dozens of typical details detailing how their products should be installed and one would expect the installer to be familiar with those and be installing to those details in the absence of any others, if there are peculiar details or different wall types shown at junctions for example not picked up on the manufacturers details (which is not all that uncommon) or by the architect and the installer is unsure of anything then it would be reasonable to expect them to ask for clarification before proceeding.

 

[christianbeccy]

It depends how expert they are, how they were appointed, what the architect was contracted to supply detail wise etc.

That said if they are a specialist installer and there are no peculiar details it would be reasonable to expect them to be able to proceed without any clients details, typically a zinc roof manufacturer (which one is it btw?) will have dozens of typical details detailing how their products should be installed and one would expect the installer to be familiar with those and be installing to those details in the absence of any others, if there are peculiar details or different wall types shown at junctions for example not picked up on the manufacturers details (which is not all that uncommon) or by the architect and the installer is unsure of anything then it would be reasonable to expect them to ask for clarification before proceeding.

Thanks for your reply.

The Architect is no longer involved in the project, it was handed over with General arrangement level drawings. There is a potential for part of the blame to go there as the design gave rise to the 'peculiar detail', namely to do with rooflights. The Zinc installer superseded much of what the Architect drew with their own details and mostly it seems OK/justified.

The roof is VM Zinc and a specific detail doesn't exist for this exact circumstance. The installer has tried to adapt/overcome, but has not taken account of other factors that relate to their detail and a very definite problem has emerged.

Had the installer have called it out prior to their installation, further simple works could have been done to make the detail suitable, but sadly these improvements are impossible now that the Zinc is installed. There is a complex argument going on, but it really comes down to whether or not the installer should have halted work and pushed it back to me, or take full responsibility for the detail that they produced without my full agreement.

In essence, the factory fitted hinges for the rooflights were removed from the timber upstands during the Zinc installation and now the Zinc impedes them being refitted as intended by the rooflight manufacturer. It was clear and obvious that the hinges were needed.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

So was there a main contractor managing the roofers? Or were they employed directly by you, turned up, fitted the roof and left? That is precisely the particular type of detail that should have been drawn for exactly this reason but that comes down to what the architect was contracted/paid to do and how good they were. Was the rooflight specified by the architect? Who took the hinges off the rooflight? So many factors there's really not a yes or no answer without understanding the whole context and the order of which things occurred.

 

[noseall]

So, long story VERY short, but if a tradesperson proceeds to install without an agreed detail, who is responsible for it if it isn't suitable?

I know you guys love context, so I'll give you an idea of it, though trying to stay focused on this simple core question. This is a £50k Zinc Roof on a residential self-build. Expert installer brought in, but certain details were not provided by me or my Architect. Should they have proceeded to design 'on the fly' or should they have pushed it back to me (nominated principle contractor) and who is now responsible for installed details that are not suitable?

I'm finding it difficult to understand, bearing in mind the cost involved, that there wasn't a lot of conversation i.e. much back and forth regards the finer details. It just doesn't make any sense to me - from all the parties involved.

 

[wessex101]

The roof is VM Zinc and a specific detail doesn't exist for this exact circumstance. The installer has tried to adapt/overcome, but has not taken account of other factors that relate to their detail and a very definite problem has emerged.

Contract claims is a highly specialised area but I would take the view that if the specialist roofing subcontractor deviated from the approved drawings or manufacturers standard details or developed their own detail in the absence of a standard approved detail/drawing then they take on the design responsibility for that detail and by extension responsibility for it's failure.
The legal test always seems to be "what a reasonable tradesman would do" but as they were specialist zinc roofing contractors that test of reasonableness would be set pretty high in this case. Accordingly, assuming the rooflights were in place and accessible at the time of the roofing work, I think they should have identified the potential problem from their specialist knowledge and experience and requested clarification or detailed instruction from the main contractor/client/contract administrator. Not just ploughed on and cobbled together a bodge to get around the problem. They've dropped themselves right in it.

 

[catlad]

It just doesn't make any sense to me - from all the parties involved.

I find it hard to believe that hinges where taken off without consulting anyone!

 

[noseall]

I find it hard to believe that hinges where taken off without consulting anyone!

I find it hard to believe that the whole roof was furnished with expensive specialist product and there was no conversation whilst it was ongoing. Did all the people involved go on holiday or summat?

Bonkers.

 

[Notch7]

A standing seam roof is quite straightforward, experienced contractors should have well established details for roof light upstands etc.

There is a complex argument going on, but it really comes down to whether or not the installer should have halted work and pushed it back to me, or take full responsibility for the detail that they produced without my full agreement

I think the answer to this is quite straightforward.

The contractors were engaged to fit a zinc roof, they are the experts and they should be able to build a roof that fully complies with their standard detailing.

If your design forces them to deviate from their standard detailing, which may compromise the roof integrity, then it is their responsibility to refer back to you.

Or to look at another way: they provided you with a quotation to do the job, based on your architects drawings. If the design had issues that would compromise their construction detailing, they should have raised that whilst quoting.

If they arrived on site and what had been built was different to the drawing the quoted against, they should have gone away and requoted.



The reality is the contractors made design decisions on the fly, probably because they just wanted to get on, they c0cked up and now remedial work will be costly so they are avoiding taking responsibility.

I’m not sure where you go from here, essentially they need to come back and sort it out.

 

[christianbeccy]

I find it hard to believe that hinges where taken off without consulting anyone!

As I said originally, there is a fairly long story behind this. I haven't withheld details for any other reason than because I'm trying to answer one question to simplify the matter. The whole story probably needs a solicitor to get underneath, but I want to know simply whether they should have pushed this back to me when a problem was spotted.

The installer asked me if they could take the hinges off to run the 0.8mm thick Zinc up the upstand. I called the rooflight manufacturer, who said ideally no, but as it was only 0.8mm it would be fine. So, I OK'd that to be done.

Now that I have gone to refit the hinges and have dug a little deeper, there are actually 5 layers of Zinc in the build-up of the upstand and this far exceeds the tolerance for the windows. There is a soldered joint right in the position of one of the hinges too, so the hinge really can't be fixed over the top of that.

 

[christianbeccy]

I find it hard to believe that the whole roof was furnished with expensive specialist product and there was no conversation whilst it was ongoing. Did all the people involved go on holiday or summat?

Bonkers.

Lots of conversations were going on, but keep in mind I'm essentially the main contractor, I was getting on elsewhere. I thought I had a good balance of keeping them supplied with tea/coffee, showing an interest and being on hand to answer questions, but at the end of the day, they are the specialist, something I was constantly reminded of (in those words).

Also, the overall roof looks good, the defective detail is not immediately obvious to the untrained eye, but the effect is disastrous.

 

[christianbeccy]

A standing seam roof is quite straightforward, experienced contractors should have well established details for roof light upstands etc.


I think the answer to this is quite straightforward.

The contractors were engaged to fit a zinc roof, they are the experts and they should be able to build a roof that fully complies with their standard detailing.

If your design forces them to deviate from their standard detailing, which may compromise the roof integrity, then it is their responsibility to refer back to you.

Or to look at another way: they provided you with a quotation to do the job, based on your architects drawings. If the design had issues that would compromise their construction detailing, they should have raised that whilst quoting.

If they arrived on site and what had been built was different to the drawing the quoted against, they should have gone away and requoted.



The reality is the contractors made design decisions on the fly, probably because they just wanted to get on, they c0cked up and now remedial work will be costly so they are avoiding taking responsibility.

I’m not sure where you go from here, essentially they need to come back and sort it out.

See, that's what I think. With everything else aside, they should have pushed the problem firmly back to me. When the roof was a bare deck, I could have added a spacer under the upstand, would have taken me an hour tops, then this problem would not exist. I employed them to do this job because it's WAY beyond me, but keep in mind they are the first major external trade I've needed for a build that is 170m from the road, with difficult access, all services are up here and a structural shell is built. I did not employ a specialist to rethink and second guess them all the time.

Now that the Vapour Control Layer, Celotex and Zinc are fully installed, that's a monumental task. Meanwhile, £11k worth of windows sit on a pallet.

 

[mrrusty]

So, I OK'd that to be done.

I guess, not in writing and with any detail. At face value my impression is, you assumed it would be 0.8mm, the installer assumed your OK meant it was OK. Personally, I would get them to quote for remedial work - there will be a solution - there always is, and suck it up, because I suspect with this amount of 6 of one and half a dozen of the other, litigation is a fools errand with no certainty of success and guaranteed delay.

 

[martygturner]

So you have a choice redo the zinc or commission new hinges for the roof lights..Bit surprised that the roof light people cannot offer a solution, seen a few rebuilt hinges with extensions, cranks and packers to get round tolerances, its is a fabricator with a TIG welder at the end of the day.

 

[wessex101]

The installer asked me if they could take the hinges off to run the 0.8mm thick Zinc up the upstand. I called the rooflight manufacturer, who said ideally no, but as it was only 0.8mm it would be fine. So, I OK'd that to be done.

Oh, that changes things. I appreciate that you did not fully understand the implications of removing the hinges but to be fair probably neither did the roofing contractor. I dare say they just did their usual standard kerb/upstand detail thinking any potential problems had been resolved between yourself and the rooflight manufacturer.
Legally I think you may be on the hook so hopefully a compromise can be found.

Probably a stupid question but can the rooflight frame/hinges be raised on a small secondary upstand with some kind of cover flashing to bridge the gap?