Is the builder covered by the Sale of Goods & Services?

[Maitri]

Out of interest does anyone on the forum know that if a new build purchaser is not covered by the Sale of Goods & Services if the builder is? When the builder buys windows / plumbing / heating / boilers / white goods is the builder covered by the Sale of Goods & Services? So if those goods fail due to an inherent fault with goods or installation within 6 years why can't the builder pursue a case for the purchaser? If I was to buy a home (not a new build) and the vendor had just had new windows fitted or a roof or heating etc I would, or rather my solicitor would ask for the guarantees, so has the builder got any guarantees for the goods /services provided to him in his properties? My thinking is that if the builder is covered for faulty goods / installation by the Sale of Goods & Services for up to years then on what basis can they say they only have liability to the purchaser for 2 years?

Having posted this Q earlier I found this in amongst the Report prepared by the OFT with regards consumer issues and new builds can anyone explain what it means as it seems to refer to my Q. (http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/rep...y/oft1020g.pdf ) It states the the Builder is covered by the Sale of Goods & Services through his contract with those he contracts to build his homes but how can the purchaser of a property get the builder to return to the contractor regarding breaches? And why would the purchaser of a new build only have 2 years to get the builder to deal with problems that it would appear the builder would be covered for for up to 6 years if the fault was inherent from the start? (Actually having read through the above document linked it would seem a new home purchaser has absolutely NO RIGHTS, for every sentence that says they do there seems to be another sentence that says they don't, how can this be allowed? )

The other Q I have regards standard warranties, should windows / plumbing etc on a new build come with the kind of guarantees one would expect if one had employed a plumber or bought double glazing or indeed bought an old property in which the vendor had just modernised? In other words should there be additional guarantees on top of the NHBC Warranty on these aspects of a new build? If a private vendor of an old property had had a roof replaced there would be a guarantee on it wouldn't there, so should there be guarantees on these aspects of a new build? Or are we saying a builder can put in any old rubbish, nurse it through 2 years and then just walk away.

[SteveF]

Hi K.

I think that the only advice i can offer here is to say that the Builder/Contractor may well have recourse under the sale of goods act but that does not necessarily transfer to the buyer of a new home as the contract between new home buyer and builder generally limits liability to the New Home Warranty (NHBC or Similar) where liability is limited to 2 years.

I hope this has been helpful.

SteveF

[Maitri]

Thanks Steve. I think what I am now trying to establish are the limits of that liability with regards compliance with Building Regulations / Technical Requirements. In other words does the 2 year rule apply if it can be shown that something never conformed to regulations/ standards in the first place. Or would the 2 year rule being used when something never met standards or was fit for purpose offer an opportunity to challenge under unfair contract terms? It's an interesting idea.

The law states that a standard term is unfair ‘if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligation arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer’. Further that Contracts should be drawn up in a way that respects consumers’ legitimate interests and that terms should be expressed fully, clearly and legibly and that terms that might disadvantage the consumer should be given appropriate prominence.

Therefore with regard to the NHBC’s 2 year rule applying ONLY to breaches of the NHBC Technical Requirements R1 – R5 that have been notified there appears to be a possibility surely for a challenge under Regulation 7 (2) that states: “If a term’s ambiguity could cause detriment to consumers it may be challenged as unfair even if one of its possible meanings is fair”.
What do you think?

[SteveF]

Hi K.

If you want my honest opinion then here goes....

I have met with numerous Legal Professionals who are very well reputed and conversant with the legal system with regards to property and construction.....none of which have ever been able to provide me with a straight answer in regards to the question you pose. None of which would take on a case without a substantial advance payment from the client...and definitely none that would take the case on a no win no fee basis. I think that should give you cause for thought!

The best way of dealing with any problem where the NHBC is involved is to keep applying the pressure and don't take no for an answer.

SteveF