"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message
...
On 6 Aug 2003 08:53:13 GMT, (Andrew
Gabriel) wrote:

My house was done that way rather than by having an NHBC guarantee.
It is backed up the surveyors insurance. My solicitor said it was
generally regarded as much better than the NHBC guarantee because
the time limit is much longer, and because any solicitor who's had
any dealings with an NHBC guarantee will tell you just how worthless
that is.

Eh?!! How can the NHBC guarantee be worthless! This new house buying
lark has got me really worried now. I'm beginning to think it's best
if I stay put...

I wanted to consider a brand new property so as to avoid any chain
hassles. But surely we should be able to trust any accredited building
firm, like any of the big-name firms, to erect a property that
reflects quality of work, and is value for money. It should NOT be up
to the owner, as depicted in last night's programme, to have to
consider putting the brand new property to auction (realising a 50 per
cent drop in value) in order to get shot of it. The house they showed
had daylight showing through the roof, for Gawd's sake! The bannisters
on the landing were flimsy and probably dangerous. There were major
problems with flooding, and so on. We're not talking here about a
cracked tile in the bathroom or a sticking front door.

No, get a surveyor to inspect the build at crucial stages. Also he must
insist snags are put right pretty well straight away before the next stage.
If the they do not cooperate then put out of the deal. Better than loosing
half of the house value and you will get a better built house overall. The
BCO is supposed to catch all these snags. They don't. They are either too
lazy, incompetent or too much on their plate.

A good BCO would not allow a build to progress unless he inspected that
stage of the build. Most don't care and allow the builders to do what they
like.



---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 04/08/2003