NHBC legal obligations?

[PJLoyd]

I purchased a new house some years ago and used the dispute resolution service to try and conclude the matter. The Developer simply ignored the reports issued and I ended up going to court.
I won in the end after putting up over £20,000 in legal and Engineers costs.

Unfortunately I am now in the position of after having purchased a house 7 years old that I have established has not been built in accordance with the design. The NHBC have stated that it is not covered as no damage has occurred. The fact that you can rock the floors apparently does not matter.

The NHBC were the building control on the development.

As I understand it if the NHBC were the building control then they have a legal obligation to ensure that the property is constructed in accordance with the design and subsequently the building regulations.

Does anyone have any views on this?

[SteveF]

Hi PJLoyd

If you check Section 4 of the Buildmark Warranty you will see what cover is provided.

Additional Cover in years 3 to 10 if NHBC's subsidiary did the building control;
NHBC Will Pay For
"Repairs needed where there is a present or imminent danger to the physical health and safety of the occupants of the home, because the home does not comply with the requirements of the Building Regulations that applied to the work at the time of construction or conversion in relation to the following;"

I think the relevant point for your consideration is "where there is a present or imminent danger to the physical health and safety"

The point that i think you are trying to make in regards to the NHBC responsibilities or "legal obligation" is a mute one. In my opinion a court will come down on the side of what the insurance or warranty provides for rather than looking to consider if the NHBC have done their job correctly.

If anyone has any legal view on this i would be pleased to hear it.

SteveF

[Structural Assistance]

I have several legal extracts of various relevance to this.
mmmm? How can they be posted?

But to the case in hand:
NHBC are blinkered.
The designer should have overseen his design holistically.

NHBC see & report what suits them.

I have a case where roof tie down straps are provided. But not secured.
Roof has moved.
Significant Structural problems.

NHBC currently have ommitted even the basic work of this defect.

[Structural Assistance]

The legal nature of the NHBC's Buildmark warranty | The Law Gazette

David Lewis - Barrister Profile


New house warranties are 'jerry-built' - Telegraph

We won the battle of the Wharf | News

[Shaun Heath]

Hi

Submitting a claim to NHBC can be very time consuming and you not only need to prove fault but you also need to make sure you have followed the correct procedures.

The first point of your letter states that you used the 'Dispute Resolution Service'. For a claim to be valid under this you needed to have contacted the builder about this problem within the first 2 years. It requires a defect to be present but no damage needs to have occurred. The builder is obliged to fix this.

You then state that the NHBC will not cover the claim as no damage occurred. This would indicate that NHBC are considering it under the Section 3 of the policy. This requires there to be a defect and damage. The damage also needs to be to the extent stated in the policy. For instance you can have cracks in the building that are due to movement in the ground but it will not be covered if it is not considered 'Major Damage.' NHBC are obliged to fix or cover the costs of fixing the defect and resultant damage.

In respect of Building Control, NHBC would not normally accept a claim under Section 4 of the policy which covers the Building Control aspect, but cover it under Section 3 or offer ex-gratis assistance, otherwise it can affect their building control licence. NHBC do not have any legal obligations to ensure that the property is constructed in accordance with the design but there is cover under the policy for certain aspects of the Building Regulations.

What you need to do is first show under what part of the NHBC policy you are claiming as the evidence of proof is different and NHBC's obligations are different and the process of complaint are different. You then need to provide the evidence to show that the criteria is met to make the claim.

Therefore make sure you follow the correct procedure and understand what you are claiming for is covered under that procedure. Otherwise you will spend a lot of time, money and cause yourself anguish in chasing something you have no chance of winning even if there is a problem and others tell you are right.

Shaun

[Snaggedout]

For a claim to be successful under the NHBC policy (and similar policies such as Premier Guarantee) you do not have to prove there is a defect or negligent construction. If the home is outside the first two years of the warranty it is NHBC's job to investigate and determine whether the home was built in accordance with their standards and building regulations and if their is any damage. If you disagree with their decision you can appeal to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

Building control bodies, both local authorities and private Approved Inspectors, check the work built satisfies the building regulations. It may not be built in accordance with the design but it will still have to meet the regulations.

[NewHomeExpert]

It would be unusual if a breach of NHBC standards did not result in a defect or if a defect was not a result of NHBC standards not being followed.

The important thing is to make sure you report everything in writing to the house builder in the first instance. Keep copies as you may need them if you make a claim to the NHBC.

Like all insurers, the NHBC would want to avoid having to pay a claim if they can. After all it will be the house builder that caused the problem -not the warranty provider.

[Snaggedout]

No problem with the advice to put things on writing. It's just common sense and avoids arguments at a later date.

You just have to have particular view on life if you think that all insurers set out to dodge claims. It's not my experience. Yes I've had claims turned down but I've learnt that cheap cover is usually cheap for a reason - it doesn't cover much.

As for the new home warranty providers, if there are swathes of unhappy claimants why aren't they hammering at the the door of the Financial Ombudsman Service? It causes insurers much hassle to have to justify why they turned a claim and costs them a case fee as well. He gets sheds loads of complaints about general insurers and banks. How many complaints went to the FOS last year about new home warranties? And how many were valid? Answers will fit on a postage stamp.

[NewHomeExpert]

Insurers like to minimise the claim they payout. It is in their interest. If this was not the case then Claims Adjusters would be out of business!

Regarding unhappy customers, they want their homes put right, not a long drawn out financial compensation battle. I agree I have never heard of anyone complaining to the Financial ombudsman yet, but hey let's just suggest it now:

TO EVERYONE WHO HAS A PROBLEM WITH THE NHBC NOT SETTLING A CLAIM FOR NEW HOME DEFECTS - FILE A COMPLAINT TO THE FINANCIAL OMBUDSMAN.

[Snaggedout]

Anyone who has had a claim turned down by an insurer is already told they can appeal to the FOS, it's in their decision letter.