What do ordinary clients do?

[cjard]

I'm somewhat discouraged; my house build is alas turning out a far greater headache than I thought it would. Having modelled the entire building I'm in a position where I can give 2D plans and 3D models of pretty much anything out to whomever wants them

The timber frame guys came to site, did measurements, went away and drew plans (using only cursory reference to my plans it seems) then presented me with a set of drawings that wouldn't fit inside the existing structure. I remeasured everything, asked them to amend their dimensions to those I'd supplied and we're flying.
Their SE drew a foundation layout which I had to give to another SE to have a foundation design drawn and then that design was wrong. Some point loads landed on foundationless dirt, some pads were specified for point loads that didn't exist and so on. I printed plans up on tracing paper, laid them over each other and sorted out all the errors.
With somewhat failing confidence I started checking every post, beam and joist on everything I was handed. As a result, I've had joists sticking out of the roof tiles, steel beams running through the middle of windows and doorways blocked by posts. My plans had a 40m2 loft and they'd drawn 80m2. Once they took out the massive (I mean 7 metre, 110kg/m) steels that were to support this and swapped in more normal 4m 25kg/m ones, and halved the floor area on their drawing, they gave me a load drawing that showed the load exerted by the building had gone up by 3 tons. I still haven't been able to get an answer to my query as to how, when half of the building materials and floor area is removed, dead and imposed loads rose. My latest set of queries is regarding joists - most of their joist choices are in line with the manufacturer span tables but some of them are massively over spec

So my query is; does this happen on every job? For the builders out there, do you regularly get handed a set of plans that contain major errors? For the architects/ATs out there, do you regularly argue with your SEs about mistakes they've made? Who, on a typical build job, has the big picture in his head and checks everyone else's work?

And if the crunch comes to work that is done wrong and needs re-doing, or additional works because of someone's oversight, who foots the bill? In a normal build where the client just gets all the services in, and takes no interest in the proceedings, do Mr & Mrs Turnkey-Jones unwittingly pay for every mistake? Is there a project manager saying to the SE "whoa, whoa, you drew this foundation based on the building design, it's laid exactly to your plan, and now the building doesn't even land on it - more concrete required; you're paying for it" - should I be checking everyone's work or should I just let them to it, and request they pay for their mistakes?

I get the feeling that these things are easier corrected on paper, even if professionals get upset that some jerk client is asking a thousand questions and pulling them up on their work. I think if I was making everyone pay for every cockup the job would just grind to a halt.. I never wanted to be this much trouble as a client (I want to have a life too; play with my son, watch some tv, not have to spend hours cross checking every CAD drawing i get emailed) but I'm not sure how else to approach it

 

[AronSearle]

Welcome to the UK building industry.

/sorry, not very constructive.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Your approach is the appropriate one if you’re not willing to employ a PM/Architect/Technician etc to run it on site and make responsible for coordinating and commenting on all the subbies drawings and making sure they all tie up etc. If you don’t employ someone to do it, it won’t magically happen so you will have to do it yourself. If you don’t want to spend hours checking everyone else’s drawings then employ someone to do it for you.

For an extension it’s not really an issue as generally there will be little in the way of subbies drawings to check so the builder (as long as he’s not a half-wit) can be left to get on with it but a whole house build is altogether different.

With respect to if things go wrong, well if you have a sharp PM/Architect/Techy employed to co-ordinate the different contractors and make sure their drawings all tie-up then the on-site mistakes will be minimized if not eradicated, if a subby then builds something different to his previously ‘approved’ drawing then he foots the bill, it’s clear cut then.

Subbies drawings ALWAYS say ‘draft subject to Architects approval’ or similar. And all of the drawings need to be co-ordinated by someone. Some builders will say they will happily PM the project and many can, however if things go wrong some trot out the old ‘well I’m not an architect’ scenario so ‘how can I be expected to check the drawings’ so this route may not be flawless either.

It is sad and tiresome that sometimes subbies do such shoddy work before they even get to site (you wonder just how the hell they can even come up with such blatantly wrong drawings sometimes) but that’s just how it rolls sometimes, normally most subbies are OK I find and their drawings need the odd comment here or there but sounds like you’ve been pretty unlucky. Typically, draftsmen (they’re not trained technicians) sitting in an office in a beam and block or truss company for example have never been to site or had any training outside of that company so they work in a bit of a bubble.

But in essence Aronsearle has hit the nail on the head.

 

[cjard]

Cheers FMT/AS. I guess nominating myself as the one who designed the building and want to see the project driven through (oh, how glorious) also attracts the requirement to see everything correct and foot the bill when it isn't..

"Before they get to site" -
Draftsman in manchester, SE in Birmingham; I don't know if I'll ever see my contracted framer's subbies on site!