PSE, I hope you don't mind but your recent PM has some interesting opinions, that deserve a wider audience -as does my reply.
PSE said:
"Unfortunately the standards are worded in such a way that the NHBC can interpret them how they want to any given situation. The NHBC Standards 400+ pages should be condensed down to about 2 or 3. I'll wait for the report before my next plan of attack but it is frustrating and time consuming but I'm determined and won't just let this drop. I am thankful that people like yourself are A LOT more help than the NHBC."
The NHBC Standards exist to give housebuilders, more particularly their site managers a clear easily understood requirements to which they should build the nation's new homes. Unfortunately, the vast majority of site managers are either not up to the job, are poor managers, or just don't give a ***k!
It would be impossible to condense the standards down, in fact there should be more clarification. The
"should be" suggestion needs to be changed to a
"must be" requirement.
Whilst attending and NHBC course years ago, a retired NHBC inspector joked that among their inspectors, the NHBC stood for "No Hope Of Bloody Claiming"
It would appear to still be the case.