Cracks under Steel Beam

[noseall]

The bricks are 100mm wide, maybe the bottom flange was 110/120mm so he had no other choice.
Is it the norm for beams to protrude ?

Poorly designed spec's yes. Looks more like to me that either the wall was meant to be thicker, or the beam is something the builder had lying around. I can't see any point or benefit in a 100mm thick wall having a spreader beam wider than the wall itself.

 

[stevie888]

He's used an odd length of 203x133UB by the looks of it which I'd guess he has picked up cheap. Nothing wrong with the notion of a properly designed steel to be used as a padstone but this one's not an appropriate size and that will make the drylining that bit trickier.

Another red flag for me I'm afraid.

As a matter of interest what did your SE specify?

 

[Koolpc]

Lots of red flags appearing with this job...

 

[billm]

Lots of red flags appearing with this job...

Yes it appears so. Mainly steel oriented. The brickwork is very good. Looks like he has tried to cut corners on the steel side of things.
Your comments are all helping me build a solid case for when BC come to inspect and I will know what to question, what's acceptable and what isn't. Thanks guys

 

[noseall]

Yes it appears so. Mainly steel oriented. The brickwork is very good. Looks like he has tried to cut corners on the steel side of things.
Your comments are all helping me build a solid case for when BC come to inspect and I will know what to question, what's acceptable and what isn't. Thanks guys

As people have said - don't put too much faith or expectation in BC.

 

[noseall]

As Woody said, don't put too much faith in BC. They deliberately limit their liability these days, even more so now that each officer is personally responsible. No harm in asking if the calc's have been through their checking process, though you should have been notified. Did you do the BC application yourself?

 

[billm]

If the Builder hasn't filed Structural Calcs - therefore not had them approved by BC - will BC refuse to sign off the steel work until they have seen the calcs, have agreed them and checked the work complies with the calcs ?

 

[noseall]

If the Builder hasn't filed Structural Calcs - therefore not had them approved by BC - will BC refuse to sign off the steel work until they have seen the calcs, have agreed them and checked the work complies with the calcs ?

Correct. But that's your headache. BC may be of the opinion that the job is sound and just needs SE scrutiny and approval.

Did you apply to BC yourself?

 

[billm]

Yes I believe my son paid for BC and speaks to them directly although the builder has up to now asked BC directly to sign off the various stages of the build as it proceeded, eg trench, footings etc
But I & my son will be there when BC come to inspect the steels to point out these issues.

IF BC see that repaired wall under the beam, and even after showing him the previous failure of the wall, they & the builder are of the opinion it is OK - when the over riding opinion on here is that it is not OK - how best would we proceed to get it made right ?

 

[noseall]

Yes I believe my son paid for BC and speaks to them directly

He will have been notified regards the SE calc's checking process.

although the builder has up to now asked BC directly to sign off the various stages of the build as it proceeded

BC work for the applicant. Who rings them or witnesses the inspection matters not in that respect. Sign off comes at 'completion'.

IF BC see that repaired wall under the beam, and even after showing him the previous failure of the wall, they & the builder are of the opinion it is OK - when the over riding opinion on here is that it is not OK - how best would we proceed to get it made right ?

Independant SE.