Damp proof course hasn't worked - rant warning

[ReamviThantos]

On the presumption you have buildings insurance, make a claim with your insurance company. They will in all likelyhood send out a surveyor to assess the damage and if they are good identify the issue and give you advice if they feel it is not covered under your insurance which it sounds like it would not be. You ask for a letter of repudiation to be sent detailing the reason for repudiation which supplied details of the issues found and therefore you may be in a position to use this information to pursue your case against the damp proofing company under poor workmanship. I'm sure that on reflection you don't need to know why they recommended damp proof coursing, I see this quite frequently as mis diagnosis of the root cause of an issue for monetary gain. Obviously no idea if this is the case at your house as you need to have a professional surveyor (a good one experienced in the practical side as opposed to the pure theory) attend to advise you of the problem as they find it. Hope this helps.

 

[Shewie]

So if its a single layer and they have drilled and injected it were does the stuff they use go other than in the small drill holl. Obviously if theres a cavity it fill it to stop damp rising through the cavity from ground. Iv seen similar on a chimney breast built out of solid stone collums

I think the stuff I had done just permeates into the brick to form a layer of resistance against the rising damp, to be fair 95% of it's worked but one wall is being stubborn.

write them a letter stipulating their duties under the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982, specifically:

• The Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 requires a supplier of a service acting in the course of business in England, Wales and Northern Ireland to carry out that service with reasonable care and skill and, unless agreed to the contrary, within a reasonable time and make no more than a reasonable charge.

you could seek to argue that the course was improperly installed and thus didn't work, the lack of care and skill counts as a breach of contract. If costs are incurred for remedial work (survey and repair etc) then you have every right to bill the original contractor for those works IF there has been a breach of contract.

The DTI Quick guide to the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 can be found here: http://webarchive.nationalarchives....i.gov.uk/consumers/fact-sheets/page38337.html

We're currently doing a similar thing re: a wall mounted TV that was improperly installed.

Thanks for the link mate, I'll have a good read through that tomorrow

Does the damp area extend to more than a metre above the ground?

No, it's up around 40-50cm at the highest point

On the presumption you have buildings insurance, make a claim with your insurance company. They will in all likelyhood send out a surveyor to assess the damage and if they are good identify the issue and give you advice if they feel it is not covered under your insurance which it sounds like it would not be. You ask for a letter of repudiation to be sent detailing the reason for repudiation which supplied details of the issues found and therefore you may be in a position to use this information to pursue your case against the damp proofing company under poor workmanship. I'm sure that on reflection you don't need to know why they recommended damp proof coursing, I see this quite frequently as mis diagnosis of the root cause of an issue for monetary gain. Obviously no idea if this is the case at your house as you need to have a professional surveyor (a good one experienced in the practical side as opposed to the pure theory) attend to advise you of the problem as they find it. Hope this helps.

More good info thanks, I'll make some phone calls in the morning

 

[roger-uk]

On the presumption you have buildings insurance, make a claim with your insurance company. They will in all likelyhood send out a surveyor to assess the damage and if they are good identify the issue and give you advice if they feel it is not covered under your insurance which it sounds like it would not be. You ask for a letter of repudiation to be sent detailing the reason for repudiation which supplied details of the issues found and therefore you may be in a position to use this information to pursue your case against the damp proofing company under poor workmanship. I'm sure that on reflection you don't need to know why they recommended damp proof coursing, I see this quite frequently as mis diagnosis of the root cause of an issue for monetary gain. Obviously no idea if this is the case at your house as you need to have a professional surveyor (a good one experienced in the practical side as opposed to the pure theory) attend to advise you of the problem as they find it. Hope this helps.

Damp is not an insured peril and they will likely decline without instructing anyone.

 

[Shewie]

Set up a spy camera to make sure that you are not sleep walking! A friend of mine has started 'visiting' the living room at night, at first they blamed the dog...

A pal from work used to favour the linen basket in his folks bedroom when he still lived at home

this damp patch isn't yellow is it Rich?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Funny you should say that

 

[ReamviThantos]

Damp is not an insured peril and they will likely decline without instructing anyone.

Oh dear Rodger please keep up. Escape of water is damp is it not, are you saying they won't send out an inspector if you tell them you have a damp issue you don't know the source of!?

 

[santaman2000]

Damp is not an insured peril and they will likely decline without instructing anyone.

But damp causes mold which in turn causes health risks which could leave you open to a lawsuit. Mold over here is reason enough for an insurance company to move you out of a home into temporary accomadations while they have the offending portion of a home demolished and rebuilt to avoid liability.

 

[ReamviThantos]

Damp is a symptom of an issue as yet undetermined. Mould needs to be observed in the context of the situation assessed and correct diagnosis is paramount to remedy the situation at the earliest onset. We haven't (yet) got to the stage of the US with regards to the toxic mould situation but no doubt it will be coming. Regardless you do not want to be breathing in significant amount of mould spores for the obvious health risks associated, deal with the mould, get an expert involved. As per my previous post would in my opinion and your circumstances provide your best option.

 

[Silverclaws]

I used to do damp coursing in a two man business that had to fold through failure to make enough money, the reason, well we used too much DPC fluid to make a profit in an industry very well catered for, for we used spirit based DPC fluid not Aqueous based that most others used because it was cheap. We also did not do the standard thirty seconds of fluid pumped in at 30 psi, we pumped the fluid in until we could see the damp of the fluid bleeding through the surface of the brick and joining between the two injection wand holes as a result our thirty year guarantee was worth something and in five years we never had a call on our guarantee, because our silicone damp courses worked, but we didn't make any money.

You see from what I have said above in damp coursing there are too many cowboys and the whole process is open to abuse, as to aqueous DPC fluid, you are pumping water in with whatever dilution of DPC fluid, and the dilution can be abused, as it is mixed on site so though it may look like a silicone fluid damp course has been injected, it could be a very lean dilution or even just water, as the punter is clueless and guarantees with many outfits are not really worth the paper they are written on as there are so many ways to dodge one's obligation.

But for an outfit to charge for a survey on a complaint of a failed damp course, just what is that saying, well to me having worked in the industry, it says they are doing their best to disuade a guarantee claim, they are attempting to dodge their obligation

So the only way forward for the typical homeowner is to seek advice, as to who to approach, well most DPC operators are members of trade bodies, approach them for advice, and with that the building/ trading standards department of the local council, then following that a solicitor.

But one thing I understand about working in the building trade for over ten years in various technical roles is that industry is rife with dishonest practices and I am glad to be out of it, as the deceit that is operated by many is astounding and from it I have learned, never buy a new build house, because I have seen how they are put together, it does not inspire confidence in something that is so expensive and of work on older properties, well an unclued customer is a gold mine to many

 

[Teepee]

My take on this;

The DPC you had injected should have cured the problem by now and the wall should be dry. Its simply faulty and should be rectified by them. If its guaranteed, they havent got a leg to stand on.

My experience of my customers not getting shafted by unsatisfactory work are the ones who employ a surveyor and then take things from there - once they know you aren't going to bend over for them it most often results in them changing stance and sorting the problem out.

The way I see the survey charge is this. You don't want a survey, you want faulty work rectifying and this shouldn't be chargeable. 99% sure its against your statutory rights unless you waived it with a signature on the original paperwork.

Supply of goods and services act 1982 This sets out in black and white each parties obligations to each other. Worth a read.

Whatever happens, this isn't the way a reputable company conducts matters and is no way to keep customers.

In your sitch mate, I would arm myself with and much info as possible from the act above, contacting trade bodies and maybe the CAB as you have done and put pen to paper. Surveyor and then solicitor next if that fails.

Spoken to fellow tradesman about this today , all in agreement that its a simple failed DPC and they are trying to avoid upholding their responsibilities.

 

[tartanferret]

This threads gunna come in handy if my house buy goes through,

(got to damp proof my future man cave, If if goes through like)

Cheers Rich !

 

[ReamviThantos]

Spoken to fellow tradesman about this today , all in agreement that its a simple failed DPC and they are trying to avoid upholding their responsibilities.[/QUOTE]

With all due respect unless either of you have been out to the property concerned you cannot advise that it is a simple failed DPC. There are numerous potential causations for this issue which can only be determined by inspection. My current role is in insurance assessment of commercial and domestic properties which have sustained peril related damage (this also as it turns out obviously also incudes non peril related damage). Any advice as to it's being definatly one thing or another over the internet by remote survey is pure conjecture.

 

[Teepee]

Spoken to fellow tradesman about this today , all in agreement that its a simple failed DPC and they are trying to avoid upholding their responsibilities.

With all due respect unless either of you have been out to the property concerned you cannot advise that it is a simple failed DPC. There are numerous potential causations for this issue which can only be determined by inspection. My current role is in insurance assessment of commercial and domestic properties which have sustained peril related damage (this also as it turns out obviously also incudes non peril related damage). Any advice as to it's being definatly one thing or another over the internet by remote survey is pure conjecture.[/QUOTE]

Yes, I've seen it .

 

[ReamviThantos]

Fair doos