DAD FORCED DEVELOPER TO REBUILD WALLS OF NEW HOUSE
AMAN was left so frustrated by the poor finish on his new-build home, he forced Persimmon to tear down the walls and rebuild them from scratch.
Andrew Higgs bought his fivebedroom family home in June 2019 but was so disappointed in the standard of workmanship he launched into a battle with the house-builder.
He endured months of negotiations before the national firm moved him and his young family into temporary accommodation while it replaced every single external brick.
Andrew said problems started appearing from the day he moved in to his Charles Church house in Old St Mellons, Cardiff, with his wife and two children, aged two and five.
From the off, Andrew made his dissatisfaction known to Charles Church, which is an upmarket house builder owned by Persimmon, but claims he was repeatedly fobbed off.
“There was a long list of snags from day one and each week we would notice additional issues of poor workmanship,” Andrew explained.
While some of the issues were reworked “multiple times”, Andrew said it took more than a year of discussions before Charles Church agreed to knock the walls down and rebuild them brick by brick.
“Our main concern was the external brickwork which we felt was of a very poor standard aesthetically,” Andrew said.
It included inconsistent mortar joints, chipped and damaged bricks and wonky mortar beds.
The full list of issues he claims ran into the hundreds, including visible plasterboard joints, cracks appearing in the walls and ceilings, damaged roof joists and drainage issues to the front garden.
It was only after contacting one of the directors directly that Andrew was able to get any response, claimed the 41-year-old dad of two.
Charles Church commissioned an independent survey by CD Grey and Andrew walked the director for Charles Church East Wales around his home pointing out the outstanding issues.
While the house-builder confirmed many of the issues, Andrew says it “downplayed” them. The CD Grey report said that while there was no indication of any structural movement there were notable aesthetic issues.
“They did accept all the issues and looked to get them addressed but the brickwork I felt was so poor I insisted it all be replaced in line with building codes of practice,” Andrew said.
“Eventually they agreed to replace all four external walls or potentially compensate.”
Even so, despite the verbal agreement, it took several months before builders arrived on site to begin the reconstruction. Even then, Charles Church insisted on a further survey, this time from the NHBC (the National House Building Council).
Andrew’s concerns were confirmed again and the report, carried out in May last year, advised repairing the defects.
“There are areas where the builder hasn’t complied with all of our technical requirements,” it said, although it fell short of instructing a complete rebuild.
Andrew was insistent: “I kept on and would not back down on the agreement that was previously made, replace the walls and rebuild as per the codes of practice.
“A number of internal rework snags they had already done were of a poor quality and we were extremely reluctant to allow partial patch repairs to the external walls, especially when they already agreed previously.”
Eventually, Charles Church backed down and agreed to replace all four external walls in October 2020. In a letter sent to Andrew, it said despite his “unreasonable” request, it would rebuild all four walls and elevations. The action had been agreed as a “gesture of goodwill” it added.
Exhausted from all the negotiations, Andrew instructed a solicitor to manage proceedings. While Persimmon agreed to find the family alternative accommodation and commissioned Fox Moving and Storage to manage the temporary move, Andrew says it was far from smooth.
“During the pandemic I had to move my young family out of our home,” he said. It was just weeks before Christmas and Andrew was desperate to get his family back home for the festive period.
“We were issued a six-week completion date, which was then pushed out to eight weeks, then we were notified that all works were complete on December 1 but in fact it was nowhere near complete and Fox refused to move items back until December 5,” Andrew said.
When they did get home, Andrew claims the construction work had led to damage, including to his carpets, CCTV cameras, the alarm system and a large family fridge freezer.
Persimmon reimbursed the family for the alleged damage but Andrew says his CCTV cameras captured workers for Fox Moving and Storage being careless with his property and taking personal military belongings out of boxes.
Fox Moving and Storage said it had spoken to one of its young porters, who was told his behaviour was “careless” and “not in keeping” with its standards of customer care.
It denied any breach of confidentiality or privacy and said: “There were no damages attributed to Fox and no insurance claim was made, confirming this position. In our view this confirms a careful and professional service was performed in the moving of hundreds of items of household furniture and effects in two separate phases.”
Andrew is adamant some issues remain “outstanding” to this day.
“Having returned we’ve noticed most cracking issues have reappeared and are now suspicious there may be movement occurring with the timber frames,” he said.
In a letter to Andrew after the works had been completed, Persimmon’s legal team wrote: “I can confirm all minor snagging issues you have raised have been noted by the site team already and are in hand. The cracking you report appears to be entirely normal settlement and are to be attended to shortly.
“With regard dates for the expected completion of works, it is not unreasonable for those to be extended, on notice to you due to matters beyond our control. Communication with you remained open, you were always informed of the anticipated dates and the progress of works which were carried out on your insistence. You remained in alternative accommodation at our cost for the duration.”
A spokesman for Charles Church East Wales said: “We have been in constant dialogue with Andrew to try to address his concerns. We have at all times endeavoured to ensure Andrew was happy with his home. We therefore agreed with him that we would go beyond the specific actions identified by the independent assessment of the property to resolve the situation. We will continue to liaise with Andrew through his solicitor.”