On 26/01/2021 09:10, Nikki Smith wrote:
On Tuesday, 26 January 2021 at 07:31:39 UTC, Robin wrote:
On 25/01/2021 18:41, ARW wrote:
On 25/01/2021 17:12, Robin wrote:
On 25/01/2021 16:59, Alan wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:50:23 +0000, Robin wrote:

On 25/01/2021 08:16, Alan wrote:

The Builder will deny all responsibility for heating faults and design
failures, and point you to the Heating Engineers if there is a fault.

The builder may well do so. But that doesn't mean they can get away
with it. As usual, it all depends on the contract. Builders don't
/have/ to provide any heating. But most new builds will have heating;
and I've not heard of buyers being told they need to enter into a
separate contract with the heating engineer. Heating systems are also
covered by the standard insurance polices and they do have things to
say
about heating systems if they are provided. E.g.

https://nhbc-standards.co.uk/8-servi...rvices/8-1-10-
space-heating-systems/

Yes, but the Builder will just say it is not our problem, we'll ring the
plumbers and get them to look at it, then they'll ring the plumbers, and
tell them to sort it. So there is a guarantee, but, the builders have
sub'd the work out, hence the plumbers are liable.


I repeat, it all depends on the contract: if your contract is with the
builder for a house with a heating system then then it's the builder
who is liable if the heating system is faulty.





Or the architect?

This post is about design flaws not failures.

OK so this is a refurb and not a newbuild I am working on.

It is massively over specced but seems to give little consideration to
anything to do with assisting the boiler to modulate.

It also probably has the worst UFH setup I have ever seen - I had a
regular poster pop in and have a look at it so that he knows how not to
do it when he fits his own UFH.

It's going to end up with overheated rooms and cold rooms.

All fitted to the architects specs and drawings.

Good point. If your contract with the builder is "work to these specs
from the architect" then architect's tender bits are on the block for
design faults.
--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

But how many building contracts stipulate that the builder *must* follow the design information? I've never seen it. A client would be mad to agree to that.

A designer works to a "reasonable skill and care" duty - so only liable if he or she drops below that. An architect copying and pasting a bespoke design from a UFH supplier would probably meet that duty of care, assuming the UFH designer was supplied with all necessary info.

Building contracts put a higher duty of care on the builder - a fitness for purpose. Any client who reduces the builder's liability by insisting on "work to these specs" deserves what they get...


Yes - although IIRC traditional JCT contracts used to put liability for
design faults on the designer rather than the builder if they were at
the same level. (And it comes back to me, I think also allowed for a
design and build contract to explicitly put liability for design faults
on the subcontractor - but I could /very/ easily be wrong.)
--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid