Creaky Ceilings and Missing Insulation

[NeilW]

I'm the 'proud' owner of a Taylor Wimpey home in the wilds of the North East that was built in 2019, heavily delayed and ended up with over 200 faults with it - as highlighted by a HomeSnag survey, which I booked in thanks to the advice on these boards and webpages.

The faults ranged from minor, to entirely taking down the master bedroom ceiling and installing a metal suspension because the walls supporting the roof are not level. One is two inches higher than the other.

The disruption of the last year not withstanding this has been whittled down to the final two big ones - a creaky ceiling between the master bedroom and the lounge (yes that old chestnut again) and poorly installed insulation in the walls and ceilings (as demonstrated by a Thermal and Boroscope survey).

Taylor Wimpey have rejected both of them, and are now playing the runaround with me. I've raised the issues with the NHBC back in October last year and they have been unable to respond. The standard line is now:

We normally aim to respond to contacts within 10 working days but have now extended our response times to 20 working days.
 
We would politely ask that you don't call or email us to chase a response unless it has been more than 4 weeks since you contacted us.

The extended turnaround time is beyond a joke, and I have got nowhere with them in six months. It took the NHBC over two months to write to the builder.

I have tried to raise the issue with the group company at Taylor Wimpey and they forward it back to the North East contingent. After consulting lawyers I am now at the state where I'm about to issue a Letter Before Action.

Since the NHBC don't appear to be able to get their act together, I'm going to need to hire independent inspectors. Does anybody have any experience of this, and how it should be done?

NeilW

[NeilW]

What's the view of the Cura solution to the 'micro cracking' issue in ceilings?

lift up the existing carpet and underlay, set aside and cut access panels in the chipboard flooring to enable the installation of ‘1 inch x 1 inch’ triangular shaped timber extrusions alongside the bottom of each of the joists at the plasterboard/timber junction within the floor void.

This extrusion is glued with D4 wood glue and pinned in place.

The panels are then re fitted with again, D4 glued and screwed ‘kiln dried’ timber noggins to ensure that these panels in turn do not cause any creaks.

This ‘extended landing’ for the plasterboard is now 2 inches of additional timber ‘extrusion’ plus the original base of the joist bound together with D4 glue and pins.

The results are miraculous and compared to the work involved with the other solutions listed above is quick, relatively clean and can be completed in 1 day so that the homeowner is not inconvenienced for too long.

https://www.cura-home-care.co.uk/portfolio-item/micro-cracking/

[New Home Expert]

First of all the Cura "solution" looks like it is installed from the top by taking up the flooring. This itself could mean the floor creaks more due to the added joints, unless they glue noggins to the joists at the new cuts.

I am pleased you are not giving up due to the inaction by Taylor Wimpey and the NHBC.
Quite frankly, from what you have stated they are both not doing the very things they claim on their websites.

The housebuilding industry is rotten to the core and the government needs to act and set up the statutory New Homes Ombudsman it announced as long ago as 1 October 2018.  It has been mentioned in the last tow Queen's speeches too.

[NeilW]

Update on the progress so far. The NHBC attended on the 29th July to 'mediate' and as expected the ceilings were suffering from micro cracking, the insulation is indeed missing and badly installed and the back door repair was bodged - not only was the doorset bowed but it wasn't put in square, meaning the door doesn't pull tight against the seals.

Despite these faults being raised last September, the NHBC have given Taylor Wimpey until the middle of November to sort them out.

I'm not hopeful. I was assured the Borescope holes left by the NHBC would be filled in that afternoon. A week later I'm still waiting.

I'm not at all happy with the timescales. At what point do I give Taylor Wimpey 14 days to provide firm dates for repair, or start getting my own people in?

[New Home Expert]

You should write to Taylor Wimpey and ask for a firm date.
Whether it is next week or 31 October is of no matter.
But you need certainty now, having received a positive outcome from the NHBC after being messed about by Taylor Wimpey for the last 11 months.
You could add in your letter that if the works are not 100% completed to the required standard by the date given or November 2021, you will appoint contractors and hold Taylor Wimpey liable for the full costs plus a 20% management fee for your time!

That should get them into action. Send your letter to the CEO Pete Redfern!

[NeilW]

The solution to the back door is to order precisely the same door and do exactly the same repair as last time - while expecting a different result. Yet I had a conversation with the Taylor Wimpey rep during the NHBC visit and he suggested that the doorway had been built a fraction too wide and that's why the door frame had bowed. They are not even talking to each other.

So after receiving the same "this will be chased up with the contractor the task has been deployed to and we will ask them to provide an update as soon as possible." as the "I will let our Coordinator know to chase up the contractor for this to be resolved as soon as possible." I got on June 9th, I've given written to them in the manner suggested requesting firm dates for completion of all outstanding issues.

Given they are putting doors in and fences up all around me, it's pretty clear where the priority lies and it isn't fulfilling the repair obligations to me.

On the plus side after three or four chases I've managed to get the borescope holes filled in. It only took ten days. I decided to clear the mortar splats they left on the drive myself...

[NeilW]

Another update.

Taylor Woodrow booked a contractor to come to the house to look at the creaky ceiling/floor. Obviously they didn't bother to ask me whether the date was OK first - they just booked them. I only found out when the Customer Service Agent mentioned it in a reply to one of the other issues. Only after I pointed it out did I get a call from the contractor asking if it was OK if they came on the date they had already been booked to come!

When the contractor rang on the day it was clear they they thought they were talking to the Taylor Wimpey representative. I had to explain that I was the end customer. It turns out this contractor is new to Taylor Wimpey and apparently hasn't worked for them before. Not only that, but the individual, although a very pleasant person and clearly a reasonably experience joiner, stated they weren't that familiar with new build constructions and tended to work mostly on houses with traditional floor construction.

As we went around as well as the cracking noise from the ceiling he spotted a clear V shape in the ceiling boarding, and that the deflection and bounce from the first floor was rather more than he would expect. Also the issues extend into the kitchen ceiling and the bedrooms above.

The contractor wasn't familiar with the issues from the Joint Statement, and said that he would recommend further investigation to start with. I'm awaiting a response from Taylor Wimpey.

I would have thought Taylor Wimpey should have sent around a specialist microcracking contractor to sort out the floor. It's such a common issue surely there must be firms that specialise in sorting it out by now.

My thoughts are that this may be a much bigger issue than just bad boarding on the ceiling and may extend to a faulty installation of the joists.

Would this now warrant a specific structural survey by a suitably qualified engineer/surveyor? Would that help?

[New Home Expert]

First observation is the contractor isn't familiar with new build construction. The floor you have is a traditional joist with chipboard over and plasterboard under and has been used for decades!  OK TJI type joists have only been around for 20 years but.......

I agree, you may well have a damaged joist(s) which is making deflection must worse.

Moreover, I am surprised that no one from Taylor Wimpey was there during the visit especially as they claim to "know a thing about building new homes"

It is now borescope survey by the structural engineer and joist manufacturer.
The inspection findings could have implications for other houses on your development too.

[Kate123]

There is a new update that has been issued on this:

https://gpda.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/GPDA-Guidance-cracking-noises-from-residential-timber-floor-structures.pdf

We are still struggling to find a specialist structural engineer to help us with this issue. Everyone we speak to claims not to know about the problem and our latent defects insurer has said that they consider it not structural so won't help. At least NHBC are making your developer do something about it. Good luck!

[NeilW]

I'm looking at multiple approaches to the issue - with the NHBC being the least likely option to lead to anything since they aren't actually very much use. They like to use the language of insurance (claims) and are definitely operating as the loss adjuster for the builder in the resolution procedure. 

Build contracts are subject to the Consumer Rights Act 2015 for anything concluded after October 2016, which means that the provisions of that act can be used. And they have a fair amount of heft.

s49 states that the service must be performed with reasonable care and skill. Almost certainly reasonable care and skill for anybody who calls themselves a plasterer on a new build would involve knowing about the Joint statement. Therefore if there are any dabs in contact with the ceiling boarding on your walls reasonable care and skill has not been taken and the fault definitely was there at the time the contract was formed (dabs don't appear by themselves over time).

You can then demand that whoever did this fix the fault (s55), and if they refuse you have a right to a price reduction (s56) or can use the common law damages option to give the builder 14 days notice to correct, and then hire somebody to sort it out then recover the cost from the builder.

Rather than messing around with insurance policies from warranty providers, it's likely more productive to do it old school using good old Consumer Rights law.

In my case I'm having to get the floor surveyed first to see if there is a wider issue (In the language of insurance I'm hiring a building surveyor to act as my loss assessor - and produce a specific structural defect expert report). Hopefully there isn't and it just requires the walls and ceiling reboarding to eliminate the noise.

I'm really glad I paid that bit extra to get Legal cover on my home insurance. The advice line has been very instructive. Although I've yet to see if they are correct or not.

All above AIUI, IANAL, etc.

[Kate123]

Thanks NeilW, I do feel a bit relieved it is not just us having this problem although that isn't good for you!!

My warranty holder has also been acting in a similar manner for my builder. They said although they aren't structural engineers and haven't visited the property, on the information they have, they've decided it isn't a structural issue - which is in a way good news - but doesn't help us very much.

It has taken us a while to find anyone but we have found a structural engineer that may be able help and is coming out next week for a first visit. We are just worried about the cost and disruption of a specific structural report but we really need to get to the bottom of the issue.

I am glad your legal Homecover has been so helpful, we have this too but hadn't thought of using it as it such a specialist area and I didn't think the Consumer Rights Act covered New Builds but I am not a lawyer, so the advice they have given is really interesting. 

Hopefully the surveyor we have coming will be be able to help, but if you are in the East of England recommendations would be appreciated!

[NeilW]

Yes the building industry likes to give the impression that the Consumer Rights Act doesn't apply to new homes. However I'm informed that it does apply to off plan new homes where you get the option to alter things because the essence of the contract is a contract of building services. How else could they tailor things to your specification if there was no contract?

It may not if you buy a pre-built home where the completed building is transferred as a land transfer, and the experience is more like buying a pre-owned house.

[Kate123]

Thank you for posting the link. We bought the house completed from a local developer so yes the Consumer Rights Regulations don't look like they apply to us.

Unfortunately we fall down an even bigger crack than a lot of homebuyers, where it was a small warranty company and small developer so have even less protection.

I work in a highly regulated industry and like to think I am reasonably savvy, but admit this whole new build buying has been a real shock. From the blatant Estate Agent lies to the Developer not caring now they have our money! Oh well, expensive lesson learnt!!

[New Home Expert]

Top man thanks for the heads up on the update which hopefully now demonstrates that the industry as a whole should know why it occurs and do something to prevent new home buyers suffering this defect in the future.

First port of call are the warranty inspectors as the prevention via inspection and educating those on site  is clearly in their hands.

[NeilW]

I flagged up the CRA to the Consumer Code for Home Builders to see what they say

They disagree

we are aware of the information which the Home Owners Alliance have on their website and advised them a number of years ago that we do not hold the same view. The Consumer Rights Act (Section 2() defines goods as 'tangible moveable items' and we believe it cannot apply to the sale of a home, whether off-plan or complete. Our view is that the basis of their argument appears to be that the home buyer is buying goods and services.  We do not agree that a consumer is contracting for a service when buying off plan, they buy the finished home under a contract, it would be like arguing that every good that we buy off the shelf includes similar duties.

The trouble is that is self-contradictory. It isn't an off the shelf home. It's one that has been modified to the customers requirements, which they did under a contract of service, if a house isn't a good.

It's amazing that something as important as this isn't 100% crystal clear.