Dangerous Wimpeys

[dowden]

Our flat was built in 2007, we moved in 2009 and since then we have been fighting Taylor Wimpey to listen to our concerns with no success.
We can hear the people above using the loo, having sex, and when they are showering it sounds like we are in a caravan when it's raining on the roof. Preparing food, washing up, walking, talking, kitchen cupboard doors and drawers opening and closing and one of the worst things is Sunday night she does the ironing in the kitchen.

We have had to change our sleep times so we can get to sleep.The people above are great, they are not being noisy on purpose and the things we hear are just daily living noises.

Taylor Wimpey did a sound test 2 years ago.
They said it passed but would not give us the results unless we paid £150.
The only thing left to do was get a builder friend to remove the bed and en-suite ceiling and install some soundproofing, it didn't work as when the plasterboard was removed we found big holes and gaps in the concrete that separates our flats (my roof and there floor).

Still they would do nothing and refused to visit to discuss the problems so I contacted one of the big bosses and said there are health and safety and fire issues due to the holes and fire could easily spread to the flat above. Amazingly he told the divisional manager, who had previously refused to visit, to make an urgent appointment to come to my home. He is coming on the 4th June with either a production or technical manager.

There is absolutely no insulation in any void or cavity. Nor are there any fire walls above the plasterboard. Any advice for when they visit would be great. If I have done it right there are photos of the problem.

[Philofacts]

I am assuming you are the second owner. 
This being the case, most house builders are less likely to give a service (even poor as it normally is to first owners) to the second owner as they are not the builder's customer.

Your problems are concerning sound insulation although as you state, the cavities are not insulated.
Party wall cavities are not normally insulated for sound.

Clearly the level of sound transfer is unacceptable and would fail to meet the requirements of the sound test required by the Building Regulations.
No doubt Robust Details were 'used' by Taylor Wimpey, meaning that a sound test before first occupation would not then be required under the building regulations. 
Unfortunately for you, it is clear beyond any doubt in my mind, that the Robust Details have not been followed at all!

The structural concrete floor should not have any gaps through which sound and more importantly, fire and smoke, could spread between one flat to another. 
Separating walls are required within the roof space, but not necessary between the plasterboard ceiling and the concrete floor, as the concrete floor and plasterboard will give the required fire resistance (providing that the floor has no holes or gaps!)

As Taylor Wimpey carried out a sound test two years ago, when you owned the flat, you are entitled to a copy of the results.
Under the Data Protection Act 1998 an individual has a right to have access to information that is held by companies and organisations.
What you need to do is a Subject Access Request requesting all information, including the sound test results appertaining to your property.
Taylor Wimpey has no option but to comply and cannot charge you more that £10 for the information. Our website has a template letter.

The fact that Taylor Wimpey's Divisional manager, had previously refused to visit your home shows how uninterested Taylor Wimpey are in dealing with problems buyers find in the homes they build.

[dowden]

Thank you for the information.
The meeting did not go well at all, there was supposed to be 2 people visiting but 3 turned up, they came to discuss the noise transference and the structural defects yet all I got when discussing noise was it was built to regulations they did not want to hear anymore.
Mr John Murphy also made a statement which threw me, he basically said "what quality do you expect for the price" he did not use those words but that was the meaning.

They said they had brought the sound report but did not show me it nor did they leave me a copy as promised.
As for the structural photos he unbelievably referred to the concrete as being uneven and there should be a slight gap,I replied it is a massive hole big enough to put your hand through and extends the length of the room.  In another of the photos he described it as chipping - again it is a big big hole.
Mr Murphy asked me to involve the NHBC to which I told him I had done numerous times and they refused to help.
He said he cannot contact them on my behalf only to change his mind later and say he would contact them. By this time I was becoming irate at his repeated use of the word regulation and his refusal to listen and take my concerns seriously.

Mr Murphy then told me another lie saying he had never refused to visit me at home, I informed him i had written proof and I will forward it to him which I have done.
I know it hasn't helped me but I felt like I was talking to a brick wall so I verbally threw them out before I lost my rag completely!

[Philofacts]

Ah the old trick of arriving on-masse.  This is common as when three people from a house builder are saying something and all agreeing with each other, it makes it difficult to contradict as you are out numbered 3:1.

It is no use trying to say that "regulations" have been met.  There is a genuine problem at your home and they need to prove the regulations have been met.  
The sound test even if your flat  "passed" can be fiddled on site!

For any employer of a house builder to say words along the lines of:
"what quality do you expect for the price" is amazing.  
So in other words the less you pay for a Taylor Wimpey new home, the poorer the quality will be.
I expect he would be sacked for this if it got back to the main board!
Perhaps next time you should secretly record your conversations with Taylor Wimpey.

There should not be any holes through a separating concrete structural floor.
It is not splintering. Holes for drainage should have been made good and any other gaps such as you describe may be structurally serious.

You should make formal complaint to Taylor Wimpey CEO Peter Redfern e mail peter.redfern@taylorwimpey.com    and also write to the NHBC and formally ask them to send an inspector.

[dowden]

Thank you
I have copied Peter Redfern in on every communication I have sent but he has never replied.
I am amazed that Mr Murphy described the holes as chips in the concrete. I showed him photos of the concrete where it is joined together properly and asked him why it is not all like that. I asked him about Robust Details and he said it was built before it came in.
I may have read it wrong but I am sure if it is not built to Robust Details then it should have insulation in the cavities and voids, he said that is wrong.

Would you know what my next step could be as I need to fight this till the end.
I told him I don't know how long I have left as I am seriously ill and I do not want to leave my wife living like this when I am gone.
Any help is very much appreciated.

[Philofacts]

Normally I wouldn't be surprised by Taylor Wimpey failure to reply, especially their CEO.
Most house builder's CEOs just pass the letters and e mails from buyers with issues down the line.
However, given your ill health, a reply to your communications is the very least Peter Redfern can do!
In fact Taylor Wimpey, knowing how ill you are have acted nothing short of disgusting towards resolving defects with your home.

Now it would appear you have been lied to as Robust Details have been around since May 2004. Quite why you were mis-informed by something that is so easy to check is again absolutely disgraceful.

The following is a quote from the Robust Details website:
"The Robust Details Scheme is an alternative to pre-completion sound testing (PCT) of separating walls and floors in new build joined houses, bungalows and flats, to demonstrate compliance with the relevant minimum Building Regulation performance standards in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland."
"The business started in May 2004, in response to the house-building industry's need for an alternative to pre-completion sound testing to satisfy Part E of the Building Regulations."

Whilst it could be argued that the details themselves are evolving over time to take account of new construction techniques, the Scheme existed a good 3 years before your home was built.

As I said in my previous reply, the only option you appear to have is to write to the NHBC using the warranty stating that you believe your home does not comply with both Building Regulations (has not been built to robust details) and the NHBC standards and is in fact a fire risk. This can take time so it may be a good idea to mention your situation to maybe speed the process up.

You should also make a formal Subject Access Request to acquire a copy of all information appertaining to your home especially the alleged sound test report. 
This would be useful if you need to take legal proceedings. 
I would hope given your state of health this will not be necessary and Taylor Wimpey will now do what they should do and fix your flat!

You should complain to the Consumer Code for Home Builders Adjudication Scheme as the level of service provided by Taylor Wimpey falls well short of that required under the Code. This process takes around 8 weeks and costs £120, which you can get back as part of your claim.

Finally I am sure BBC Watchdog, having featured Taylor Wimpey only last year, would be interested in learning of your issues with this company.

On a personal level, I very much hope this matter reaches a successful conclusion for you, sooner rather than later and I wish you well.

[dowden]

Thank you for your information and concern, you truly are one of the good guys.
I am amazed but not shocked at another lie they told me regarding robust details.
I will try and mail you the photos and thank you for adding them to the site.
I have checked my phone which I did set to record so I have the lies they have told me recorded, some of it is grainy as we moved about but the lies are there.
Should I tell them I have the lies recorded.

I  have looked at the Consumer Code and No6 says it must be submitted within 2 years of the warranty, am I too late?

[Philofacts]

Regarding the Consumer Code for Home Builders, you are quite correct, a claim for compensation must be made within the first two years of warranty.  (I should have checked your build date!)

I have had a look at your photographs and they would appear to indicate the edges of some of the pre cast floor planks have been cut on site and "trimmed" using a hammer so they fit. 
Whilst it does look somewhat untidy, it is not structural as it is not across the span but parallel to it.
Quite often, the smaller filler beam is sent full width and is cut to fit to suit the building.

However, the gap between the panels should always be fully filled with concrete which they do not appear to have been in your case. 
This not only binds the floor together but more importantly stops the spread of fire and smoke as well as sound transfer from the flat above.

When did you first make Taylor Wimpey aware of the problem?
They may try to claim it is now outside the 2-year builder warranty period.
You should write to the NHBC in any case.

I would suggest that you inform Taylor Wimpey that you have recorded the conversations with them and will be sending the audio files to BBC Watchdog if they do not sort this out within the next 28 days.

[dowden]

Thanks again.
Mr Murphy tried to tell me how they built the floor above saying it is built with screeds etc, but surely any amount of soundproofing built into the floor above is negated by the caverns in the concrete below,you can fit your arm in the width of the holes and they stretch all across the room.
Indeed if you look at the biggest hole you can actually see light on the right hand side of the photo,our electric was switched off while the work was being done.
Thanks for all your help and the twitter feeds.

[Philofacts]

This Murphy chap shouldn't really still have his job in my opinion.
True, the screed above will cover the gap, but it will be more likely to crack  because of the gap under.
And as Murphy should know, the thicker the material the greater the sound insulation.
200mm PC concrete will give beytter sound insulation than a 65mm sand : cement floor screed!

[dowden]

Totally agree about Murphy.
He replied to my letter of proof that he refused to visit me by saying the letter says he did not personally refuse, he reckons the letter says they would refuse to visit a home that has been built to regulations. Well according to him it had been built to regs but he still visited - a massive contradiction I think.
Amazingly we have just had a call from the NHBC who want to make an appointment to visit me to discuss the problems, a bit of backtracking on their behalf as they also refused before, but it is welcome.

Any help and info you can give me on how to deal with them would be great.

[Philofacts]

You will find the NHBC inspector much more open and honest in my experience.
The facts are quite clear, the large unfilled gaps in you PCC floors/ceiling are causing excessive noise transfer. 
The sound test "pass" is questionable. if indeed it ever had one!
Robust Details were not used as TW told you, (incorrectly) they didn't exist when your home was built.

You may need to explain why this has only just been reported though!

Good luck, I am pleased that this is moving towards a conclusion for you.

[dowden]

Thanks Phil
I hope they are more receptive, I will keep you updated after they visit.

[dowden]

I received two 2 letters from Taylor Wimpey today; one from Fergus McConnell a divisional chairman(North) and one from Mr Murphy.
The first one acknowledges the meeting with Murphy did not go well and agreement could not be reached, what agreement? There was nothing on offer but they are going to escalate the claim to Gary Russon a divisional managing director who will look at my file when he returns from annual leave.

The second letter from Murphy is an apology, yes an apology admitting he told me the flats were not built to Robust Details as they did not exist then when infact he admitted they were built to Robust Details.

All this after I let them know I recorded the meeting so they had nowhere to hide.
So he lied about denying to meet me at home and lied about how the flat was built.
Three managers came to my home and between them they did not have a clue.
Now they need to admit to another lie on the tape, they described the holes and gaps as chipping and said that all the concrete slabs put in have a chamfer,well this is no chamfer it is more like a canyon.

[Philofacts]

The PCC floor planks are made with a camber across the span as an arch is stronger than a flat slab.
The chamfer I think you are refering to is the slightly bevelled edge at the top of the cast PCC planks.
From your photos the gaps are as a result of the PCC slab being split to fit with 'lips' broken off.
The photograph shows the ends/edges have been filled.  The slabs are not solid but usually "hollow core" as they are lighter.

One thing you may like to consider:-  at least your building is not built using timber frame construction!
This was popular with this company in its recent past.