We are looking to rip the back out of our house, extend square, and fit
bifold doors across the back.

One option is to use a local builder who we know.

The plan in this case would be for him to manage the overall build, but for
us to purchase materials directly, and engage and pay the labourers
directly. The amount we are spending we should get trade rates for building
supplies.

This way the bulk of the money does not have to pass through the builder,
and also we should not have to pay 20% VAT on the labour costs.

This also gives us the flexibility to e.g. get family and friends round for
a weekend of knocking down walls and filling skips with rubble instead of
paying laboureres to do the fun bits.

However there are a couple of risks involved.

Firstly, if any labourer gets injured on site we might face a claim (whether
or not be were responsible/liable).
Secondly, the builder could go bust, go sick, get run down by a passing
barmaid, anything.
We will check that he has insurance, but you never know quite how good the
insurance company is.

So can we insure at a reasonable rate against such risks?

The trade members here presumably carry some kind of third party liability
insurance.
The trade members may also carry some kind of insurance against other risks.

Has anyone else gone this route?

Obviously, we do from time to time engage plumbers and plasterers and
suchlike but the overall sums of money involved are much smaller and the
potential disruption a lot less.

Given that the master plan involves a lot of steel and most of the back of
the house disappearing for a time we would want a strategy to cope with
unforseen problems.

I assume that there are also ways of covering yourself if you employ a
building firm to do the whole thing and then the builder goes bust/abroad?

Cheers

Dave R

--
No plan survives contact with the enemy.
[Not even bunny]

Helmuth von Moltke the Elder

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

On 29/10/2011 15:45, David WE Roberts wrote:
We are looking to rip the back out of our house, extend square, and fit
bifold doors across the back.

One option is to use a local builder who we know.

The plan in this case would be for him to manage the overall build, but
for us to purchase materials directly, and engage and pay the labourers
directly. The amount we are spending we should get trade rates for
building supplies.

This way the bulk of the money does not have to pass through the
builder, and also we should not have to pay 20% VAT on the labour costs.

This also gives us the flexibility to e.g. get family and friends round
for a weekend of knocking down walls and filling skips with rubble
instead of paying laboureres to do the fun bits.

However there are a couple of risks involved.

Firstly, if any labourer gets injured on site we might face a claim
(whether or not be were responsible/liable).
Secondly, the builder could go bust, go sick, get run down by a passing
barmaid, anything.
We will check that he has insurance, but you never know quite how good
the insurance company is.

So can we insure at a reasonable rate against such risks?

The trade members here presumably carry some kind of third party
liability insurance.


Dunno if it helps, but I carry £2M public liability insurance which
costs me about £15 a month.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

The Medway Handyman wrote:
On 29/10/2011 15:45, David WE Roberts wrote:
We are looking to rip the back out of our house, extend square, and
fit bifold doors across the back.

One option is to use a local builder who we know.

The plan in this case would be for him to manage the overall build,
but for us to purchase materials directly, and engage and pay the
labourers directly. The amount we are spending we should get trade
rates for building supplies.

This way the bulk of the money does not have to pass through the
builder, and also we should not have to pay 20% VAT on the labour
costs. This also gives us the flexibility to e.g. get family and friends
round for a weekend of knocking down walls and filling skips with
rubble instead of paying laboureres to do the fun bits.

However there are a couple of risks involved.

Firstly, if any labourer gets injured on site we might face a claim
(whether or not be were responsible/liable).
Secondly, the builder could go bust, go sick, get run down by a
passing barmaid, anything.
We will check that he has insurance, but you never know quite how
good the insurance company is.

So can we insure at a reasonable rate against such risks?

The trade members here presumably carry some kind of third party
liability insurance.


Dunno if it helps, but I carry £2M public liability insurance which
costs me about £15 a month.

The house insurance may also go up (or the insurance co certainly needs to
be informed of the works) as the house is/maybe less secure during the
works.


--
Adam

On Oct 31, 7:00*pm, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
The Medway Handyman wrote:
On 29/10/2011 15:45, David WE Roberts wrote:
We are looking to rip the back out of our house, extend square, and
fit bifold doors across the back.

One option is to use a local builder who we know.

The plan in this case would be for him to manage the overall build,
but for us to purchase materials directly, and engage and pay the
labourers directly. The amount we are spending we should get trade
rates for building supplies.

This way the bulk of the money does not have to pass through the
builder, and also we should not have to pay 20% VAT on the labour
costs. This also gives us the flexibility to e.g. get family and friends
round for a weekend of knocking down walls and filling skips with
rubble instead of paying laboureres to do the fun bits.

However there are a couple of risks involved.

Firstly, if any labourer gets injured on site we might face a claim
(whether or not be were responsible/liable).
Secondly, the builder could go bust, go sick, get run down by a
passing barmaid, anything.
We will check that he has insurance, but you never know quite how
good the insurance company is.

So can we insure at a reasonable rate against such risks?

The trade members here presumably carry some kind of third party
liability insurance.

Dunno if it helps, but I carry 2M public liability insurance which
costs me about 15 a month.

The house insurance may also go up (or the insurance co certainly needs to
be informed of the works) as the house is/maybe less secure during the
works.

I wouldn't be surprised if that made it uninsurable, and the existing
house insurance inoperative.


NT

NT wrote:
On Oct 31, 7:00 pm, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
The Medway Handyman wrote:
On 29/10/2011 15:45, David WE Roberts wrote:
We are looking to rip the back out of our house, extend square, and
fit bifold doors across the back.

One option is to use a local builder who we know.

The plan in this case would be for him to manage the overall build,
but for us to purchase materials directly, and engage and pay the
labourers directly. The amount we are spending we should get trade
rates for building supplies.

This way the bulk of the money does not have to pass through the
builder, and also we should not have to pay 20% VAT on the labour
costs. This also gives us the flexibility to e.g. get family and
friends round for a weekend of knocking down walls and filling
skips with rubble instead of paying laboureres to do the fun bits.

However there are a couple of risks involved.

Firstly, if any labourer gets injured on site we might face a claim
(whether or not be were responsible/liable).
Secondly, the builder could go bust, go sick, get run down by a
passing barmaid, anything.
We will check that he has insurance, but you never know quite how
good the insurance company is.

So can we insure at a reasonable rate against such risks?

The trade members here presumably carry some kind of third party
liability insurance.

Dunno if it helps, but I carry 2M public liability insurance which
costs me about 15 a month.

The house insurance may also go up (or the insurance co certainly
needs to be informed of the works) as the house is/maybe less secure
during the works.

I wouldn't be surprised if that made it uninsurable, and the existing
house insurance inoperative.

Thats why you speak to your insurance co. One customer I know of just had
the excess increased whilst the works were carried out.

--
Adam

NT wrote:



I wouldn't be surprised if that made it uninsurable, and the existing
house insurance inoperative.



Don't see why, if the works are being carried out under building control
(where relevant).

Of course, one should talk to the insurance company. If they fail to
understand, seek out one specialising in self-builds who do understand the
problem


--
Tim Watts

Many household policies specifically exclude structural building work
- if done by anyone for reward. That is to say if you remove the wall
supporting the roof, they will pay out.

This does bite people occasionally, eg, some fool builder exposes a
run of strip foundations and wonders why the wall of the house
promptly falls into it.

That which is not specified or inspected is not controlled.