Who is liable? Load bearing demolished accidentally

[Millypip91]

Hi there,

I am having a DIY disaster. We bought a 1930's semi in September. It's a 3 bed with a partially converted loft - loft was boarded and plastered, has electric and windows but was not officially converted with stairs etc. We had all our surveys done before buying and all was well.

We moved in and decided to make a bigger kitchen diner and get the wall between kitchen and dining room knocked through. We did our research and after a few quotes went for a reputable local building company who has their own structural engineers. We were assured by them that the wall was a stud wall and not load bearing so no building regs were required. Long story short they knocked down the wall and a crack appeared almost immediately in the newly decorated bedroom. We also noticed some worsening of hairline cracks in our recently re plastered bedroom ceiling. The builder thought it was just stress fractures and suggested that the ceiling was badly plastered before (by other tradesmen) so recommended plaster boarding and re-doing them. I had a bad gut feeling about this so instead I got a structural engineer to come out and assess the cracks. Unfortunately he informed us that the loft which was partially converted didn't meet building regs and all the previous owner had done was take the supporting beams out without putting extra supports in making the house structurally unsafe. Sadly this was not picked up in any of the surveys we had done. He also said that because of the lack of support in the loft the wall that was knocked down in the kitchen effectively was load bearing even though it appeared not to be. The builders didn't actually go in the loft so they didn't know about this but arguably they still knocked the wall down and told us it was fine so surely some of the blame lies with them. The previous owner did not declare any structural changes to the property so we already may have a case against her but I am wondering if I can pursue anything with the builders? Since it happened they did immediately come and put some beans back in the loft and temporary poles where the wall was up to secure everything but they are still trying to charge us a lot of extras for fixing the damage and I kind of expected that they would give us quite a hefty discount considering that they did knock it down. My other half doesn't seem to want to pursue anything against the builders and is trying to kind of keep them on side whilst they are still doing work and accessing our property but I am getting a bit peed off that they're not really being held accountable. Would love any advice x

The builders thought the wall could be taken down when in fact because other structural elements had been remove it was no longer safe to do so

In some ways it's probably good to find the problem now as the house would have been in trouble - this just highlighted the problem more quickly

Was it a full structural survey or just a homebuyers one?

I agree with this. The builders will hold some responsibilty for knocking a wall down. They should have liased with the structural engineer but most good builders can look at a house and understand when and where a wall can be pulled down. My DH would have triple checked this even with the help of both parties.

Read your survey closely. They normally have a caveat that will something to the effect of it being incumbent on you and your conveyancing solicitor to ensure all building regs certificates are reviewed for the work.

You'll find everyone will try and pin it on each other. Realistically you could take everyone involved to court to reclaim costs but a court is unlikely to find against any of them and you'll be suck for hassle and fees.

The builders aren’t liable. The wall they took down wasn’t load bearing. They didn’t know about the issues in the loft.

If you had a full structural survey then your surveyor takes some of the blame.

A builder's job is to build. Over time they will get a sense of what works and what doesn't based just on experience, but they are not structural engineers or architects or building regs inspectors or any other skilled profession, and anyone who chooses not to employ the proper expertise and just relies on a builder's opinion needs to take responsibility for their own choices, not try and pretend it was the builder's job to make up for their failure.

Structural engineers will have studied engineering to degree level at least and "building structures and of the amount of load/force, pull etc that the house can take at various points" is not something they just have "a grasp" of, but is a serious skill requiring knowledge of the right equation, physical laws and probably specialised computer programmes. Builders are skilled craftsmen who will know HOW to put a steel beam up, and they might be able to eyeball the size of beam they'd usually use in a certain situation, but they are a totally inappropriate person to ask to actually design and calculate what the load is and how it should be transferred. Plenty of builders are guys who have a GCSE in maths max - they are good at what they do and it's totally unreasonable to blame them for not doing detailed engineering calculations that they weren't even given the information they'd need to do.

Just to clarify, when we had the structural engineer that I paid to come out after the cracks appeared he advised that it wasn't enough to just correct the loft and put the beams in, he said we still needed an RSJ where the wall was regardless because the builders knocked down a wall that was supporting. The builders did not check this correctly. I am not trying to hold them responsible for the loft but I am trying to hold them responsible for their part which is knocking a supporting wall down without properly checking it. If we knew now what we knew then we obviously would have investigated it more ourselves but we are not builders and no one flagged anything to us when we bought the house or when we got quotes to knock it down. The building company advised that they had their own structural engineers but we didn't actually see them we just assumed they would use them if they needed to but they told us it was fine and building regs weren't needed. This wasn't any old company either they are well known and have loads of 5 star reviews and appeared very professional. This may have been naive on our part but we had no idea there were any issues with the loft. We didn't get a structural survey but we did pay for a more in depth home buyers report and the only thing that was flagged on that was some damp issues so we did pay for damp specialists to come out but all they said about the loft was that it appeared structurally sound.

Thank you for all the other comments I found it really helpful to get everyone's views as me and my partner have been really divided over this. It's not an easy one and I'm honestly not trying to rinse anyone or tarnish anyone's reputation but it could have been so much worse had the ceiling fallen in or something so I do feel like the previous owner who didn't declare the structural changes she made on the paperwork and the solicitor for not picking it up and the builder who knocked the wall down all share some responsibility. I guess it's just a case of if it's worth the time, money and stress to pursue it or to just pay and get it done. I am going to do a bit more investigating about how the builders made the assessment that the wall wasn't load bearing and go from there.

The liability absolutely doesn’t lie with the builders. You need to be pursuing your surveyors from the purchase and the vendor.

This must be so stressful for you, I do sympathise and hope you are able to recover the integrity of your house.

I think it'll come down to whether or not the builders actually had a formal written ie insured report from structural engineer. Ie if they just got someone to take a 'look' or paid for a formal report. If they've paid for a formal report then that's where the blame lies, and you'll be able to see it. However, which is what I expect, they probably don't have one. In which case, it's mainly on them, but questionably you if you didn't ask in writing for a formal report or didn't tell them about the unsupported loft.
Basically, I think you should stay calm and polite with builders and get them to finish the house. Ask to see formal report ( they won't have it, and will be very worried ) then when they can't produce it say, look, the main thing is that we get this all sorted safely so please go ahead. I think you should be prepared to pay some extra, as it should always have cost extra. I think it wouldn't be worth going down a legal route. I'd attempt to go half's on extra expense, but if they wouldn't agree I'd negotiate up until I was paying for the lot.
If I managed to get any off extra expense I'd tell myself I'd got a discount on what should have always been expensive works.
If you don't feel you can swallow the extra cost, I'd go back to conveyancer and ask to see signed off building regs for loft conversion and take it from there...
But mainly, I would not fall out with builders. I would get them to complete the work.

The liability absolutely doesn’t lie with the builders.
I think that the liability for knocking down the wall without getting a structural engineer to check first absolutely does lie with the builder. It's not always obvious how a house is held together without looking in the loft. Surely any professional builder should check in the loft first, see the botch job, and warn the home owner (an amateur who would have no idea) they need a SE. Many roofs have had dodgy DIY jobs, and not all stud walls etc are as non-loadbearing as they first appear.
In fact, I agree with dairydebris's approach.
Obviously, purchasing the house with a roof issue is a separate matter.

It absolutely does for the wall that was knocked down

I think the liability is with the builders IF they didn't get a structural survey down before knocking the wall down. Which they should have. If they did get a survey then it is the surveyors fault.

The first thing you should do is get those support beams in before the whole upper section comes crashing down .

Your builder is responsible for his mistaken assumptions and the failed work he has done, however right now you need his cooperation to get it fixed. No other builder would come close to this house. You may even need to move out until it is repaired.
Don't bother going after the builder. This could take dozens of years, energy, worries and you might lose. Just get it repaired and then forget about it.

Nope. You can't expect the services of a structural engineer if you don't ask for or pay for the services of a structural engineer.

So surely if a structural engineer is necessary to ensure the building works are safe to carry out, then builders should be asking their clients to obtain such a report and show it to them before they start any building works? Or they should automatically employ a structural engineer themselves, because they deem it necessary, and factor that into the cost when they provide the clients with a quote for the work.

If I take my car to the garage I expect the repair team to consult the necessary professionals and supply the correct parts, then bill me. I don't expect to have to specify it all beforehand. Because I know nothing about cars other than how to drive one. If I asked them to remove two wheels and install pink lights all round, because I thought it was more aesthetically pleasing, I'd expect them to tell me it would render the car unsafe/undrivable and illegal to be on the road. Not just carry out the work because I said to.

How is it any different with homes? The builders must hold some responsibility here for deciding it was safe to remove the wall the OP wanted removing. At the end of the day the builders didn't check properly that this was the case, they just established it was a stud wall and decided to remove it based only on this fact. They took a shortcut with checks that they'd get away with most of the time, but this time it's had disastrous consequences and they should compensate OP for that. It's bad their first response upon being told of cracks appearing wasn't to double check the structure, but to automatically assume the cracks must be shoddy work from a plasterer and offer to repair that work (which they'd then charge for). If OP hadn't called in a structural engineer themselves but had instead trusted the builders opinion and paid for further plastering works, their house could have collapsed on them at some point

The OP couldn't have told the builders about the shoddy loft conversion when the OP themselves didn't know the loft conversion was shoddy, until the house started falling apart when the stud wall was removed.

Whether it's worth suing anyone, either the builders or any surveyor/engineer they used, or the surveyor you used prior to purchase or the previous owners, OP, is another matter. It seems in life that when others stitch you up they generally get away with it by disappearing or becoming bankrupt. So maybe not worth it to fight for compensation.

Interesting thread . Especially as I'm reading it in our bedroom in loft conversion. Created by previous owners in the 1970s .
We are in a house divided into 2 flats . Lower flat had their lounge and kitchen made into one large room by removing the dividing wall.
No one looked at our loft .
Anyway I think Candlesand crystals nails it .

Did you have a full structural report done when you bought the house or just a homebuyers report? Assuming the former, this is where the real error is.
You need to rectify the attic as much as the kitchen and as soon as possible. I’m not sure some boards are enough - the SE needs to do load drawings for new RSJ
which the builder then follows.
If it’s semi you’re potentially affecting your neighbour too.

It sounds like your solicitors are at fault. How on earth did they not request up to date building regs for the loft conversion when you purchased!

This is an interesting point actually. If the loft wasn’t on the particulars or mentioned by the buyer, the solicitor may not have known about it.
Otherwise though I agree.

I can see how annoying it might be. However, if the builder HAD identified the issue at the beginning, what would you have done differently? You would still have had to do something to rectify the issue. It’s not the builder’s fault that previous work is not compliant.

Also I’m not sure how the builder and structural engineer removing the wall would ever know the loft wasn’t compliment. They wouldn’t be opening up and investigating the supports. The assumption would be that the supports were done right.
The second guy only discovered the issue because he was looking for the problem.

This is the responsibility of your original surveyor, not the builders. Hopefully you got a proper, full survey on buying and can go back to them? If this had been picked up on the survey, the builders would have known too. Their structural engineer was not there to cary out a full survey.

As far as they knew, this was not a load bearing wall.

Installing an RSJ is not a massive deal or coat normally, I would suck it up and move on...while raising concerns with the original surveyor.

Did the structural engineer state that the builders were liable? On reading my first instinct is that the builders are not at fault, even if they had spotted the issue beforehand, paying the costs associated with the extra work needed would be yours. It's unreasonable for the builders to pay for additional work because of a fundamental problem with your property, however should they have spotted this before? Probably, so the question is, are there any additional costs, which you would not have incurred if this was spotted before.
I don't think the survey you have had is detailed enough to hold that surveyor liable, if I recall correctly they don't lift things like flooring/ boarding and I guess it was hidden behind the boarding. Maybe you got the wrong survey.

1)"Sadly this was not picked up in any of the surveys we had done. " No, not sadly. That's the first problem. Attack that.

2)"The builders didn't actually go in the loft so they didn't know about this ". Problem number 2. Attack that.

Unfortunately a home buyers report is not a structural survey. I don't think there's much point to them at all. So you never had a survey at all.

I agree it's something the solicitor should have checked/ the seller should have declared.

It's a really difficult one...

Ultimately, as a lay person, you have twice now hired experts who should execute their role with the necessary skills and precision,

I would be contacting your solicitor and the building surveyor as this should’ve been picked up at purchase. You’ve therefore overpaid for your property, because had they have flagged this you absolutely would’ve either walked away, or negotiated the remedial work was completed / factored into the purchase price.

The second issue is, as many have said - the builder has their own structural engineers who you trusted to advise on whether the wall was load baring. Unfortunately they’ve been caught out being a bit slap dash with their inspection and it’s backfired. There’s no point having structural engineers if they don’t check fully that a wall isn’t load baring. The builder should have insurance for this. The RSJ would’ve been required had you have known it was load baring so I don’t think you can persue that cost. The redecoration and making good of the cracks I think they should resolve.

The loft, I’d be using your solicitor to go after the surveyor and their insurance, and also checking whether the previous owners lied on the purchase documents.

What a mess for you.

Also, your home insurance may help with legal fee’s. And your mortgage company are likely going to want to know about this so do check your paperwork.