Fraudulent sign off, who's liable

phills1 · 2 Oct 2016

Anybody ever had this or think this is even legal.

In 1994 we bought a new build house. We are just about to add an extension. However, there are two large public sewer pipes suddenly flag that run within varying distance of between 100mm and 500mm of the house and garage and is stopping us building the manholes are not within our boundary but on public park land. We are not connected to them; the water company has confirmed even in 1994 the house would have been in breach of building regulations and would have never have been signed off legally. The house builder has since been bought out twice. The public pipes were in place long before the houses were built in 1994

Would I be right in believing we have rights to claim damages for this, against the present parent company, and they are responsible for moving it to bringing into regulations. As far as I can tell documentation has been forged, regulations ignored and bribes paid as due to the size of these pipes the min clearance either side that is needed at least 3m. The house foundation footings go down deeper than the paperwork the council hold.

The house is detached and the end of the road plot so there is nothing beyond us.

GeoffJ · 2 Oct 2016

For it to fraudulent it needs to have been intentional, and there will normally be a benefit derived from the person completing the illegal activity.

Until you can provide proof on intent (or evidece a benefit that is gained) you have to recognise that it could also be incompetence.

John D v2.0 · 2 Oct 2016

Is it really building regulations? The council were not interested in drains for our, but Thames water were. Even so, as long as we dug down below the invert of the drains for the foundations, they were happy.
Anyway, don't worry about claiming, as it hasn't caused a problem. Just worry about how to do your alterations.

phills1 · 2 Oct 2016

It's stopped everything, ground level has already been dropped ready for piling and now we are static - we've been told this house should have never been signed off, movment costs I have no intention of us paying for whatsoever

^woody^ · 2 Oct 2016

What is the actual problem other than the water company saying you can't extend?

And are you sure that the water company is not giving you incorrect opinion? Did you ask them why they are not pursuing it under their powers if they are after all, implying that there is a risk to the public sewer, and unauthorised work had been done. Bear in mind that if it is as the water company say, a criminal offence would have taken place and they have a duty to act. Why aren't they taking action I wonder?

BTW, however you look at it, their is no fraud.

phills1 · 2 Oct 2016

The house doesn't meet building regulations either in 1994 when it was built, let alone now. Paperwork for the spec of the house held by the council doesn't match with the existing house as it stands now. We can't extend anywhere without diverting the pipes. Anglian are not helpful.

^woody^ · 2 Oct 2016

phills1 said:
Anglian are not helpful.

I suspect that that is your problem, and you should get advice on how to overcome that.

Almost every build is different to the plans that the council hold. That is quite normal.

John D v2.0 · 2 Oct 2016

Oh dear didn't realise you're already half way through the foundations! Piling so close isn't going to go down well, if it really has to be piled then it's going to be tough. Perhaps a structural engineer will be able to help. We had to pay a fee before Thames water would consider, but once we did so they approved it from the SE's drawings the same day. So I ended up with a very expensive piece of paper.
My recommendation would be consult an SE with the information about the drains, and get him to find something Anglican will accept.

Doggit · 2 Oct 2016

What makes you think that documentation has been forged, and what proof do you have. Have you spoken to the Building control department for their opinion, as I suspect you're implying that it was a BCO that was bribed to sign the job off. The footings may well have gone deeper than the submitted plans, simply because the BCO looked at the job, and said keep digging.

Even though the company has been bought out a couple of times, it may well be that legal liability has disappeared in the takeovers, as they may only have been purchasing the assets, and the name, but not the liabilities.

As Geoffj said earlier, you can't prove that a bribe was given or taken, only that the BCO was possibly incompetent at signing off the job, and it may well have been that the builders dug close to the pipes without realising they were there.

Do you have legal insurance cover on your household insurance to cover the cost of pursuing this. Is there by any chance an indemnity in the house deeds that might have been taken out to protect against any such problems - that he incompetent solicitors have missed.

Have you approached the building company for their opinion, or sought an intital consultation with a solicitor yet.

phatboy · 3 Oct 2016

You seem very angered by this, and I don't think you will progress far with it until you stand back and look at the situation and all the possible solutions.

Action against anyone for the breach is extremely unlikely to go anywhere and could cost a huge amount of money for nothing.

I understand your frustrations but your best bet is to look at how to progress with your build and not taking legal actions.

motorbiking · 3 Oct 2016

If the company was acquired, so have its liabilities. BCO can't check everything and the sign off will be based on the inspections. Rogue builders can get away with anything pretty much, if they try hard enough. I think statute of limitation would prevent any claim progressing. Didn't the water company write to you when you got planning permission?

phills1 · 3 Oct 2016

Permitted devolpment for this build, no planning permission required. Short of demolishing the house impossible to change the plans we would have to reverse the entire house around on on the ground level. Or demolish the enitre site to and have the exteneded garage on the otherside of the plot.

John D v2.0 · 3 Oct 2016

If you want to get litigious, you can also try your solicitor who did your conveyancing. They should really have done searches for water assets around your house. When we bought, they sent us all the plans for the street, although that only covered water and drainage, nothing about electric and gas.
However as with others I think claiming ultimately won't give you what you want.

^woody^ · 3 Oct 2016

Perhaps your designer should have checked all this before you started and as part of his work?

motorbiking · 3 Oct 2016

The OP bought his house in 1994 - He is out of time for any claim against his solicitor.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/contents

Quite a lot of water under the bridge in terms of statute regarding public sewers since then.

diynot

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.

Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.

Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local

Fraudulent sign off, who's liable

Doggit

Similar threads