Browse Forums Introductions Burbank homes 41Jan 05, 2009 8:17 am Thankyou to allyou lovely people that have supported us-especially Grace16 and you are right I am a girl!!!! a very Pi***d off one... I actually cannot believe this happened to us and I believe I asked all the questions I needed to B4 signing contract-in fact I asked many questions twice over to get every aspect clear in my mind.... BUT anyway... Yes Eco classic I too will be interested to see if Burbank give you infomation about us, seeing they did not seem to want to help us or answer our questions (we went to see them after this happened and all they kept saying to us is "Look at the contract') no empathy no partail responsibility NOTHING )- I know at some stage I have to get over this, but now when I cannot do any landscaping or finish my alfresco or do any work to "beautify/finish my house" I do get angry cause that $60000.0 would have come in handy- we worked very very hard to save the money for this-our dream house and to have it taken away from us is pretty hard to swallow- Re: BURBANK HOMES 42Jan 05, 2009 8:21 am I am getting rather tired of defending my stand here when I am trying to help someone. There's way too much emotion and very little logic. The facts are the facts: -
DaneM asked how she could comply and was told to speak to her service provider. DaneM spoke to her service provider who gave her incorrect information. Concrete poured, damage done. enigma_brennan EcoClassic Hi DaneM I supply Burbank and I know them well, I have offered more than once on Homeone to speak to Burbank on your behalf. Not hearing from you, I took it upon myself to speak to them anyway and their story is different to yours. Ed hmmm ..... doesn't sound like permission to me! 2 things...
2 I got permission via a PM (am I allowed to say that?) enigma_brennan I have been a member of this forum for well over twelve months now and an observer for much longer. During this time I have never seen such a staunch defence of a builder from a third party as what you have shown Ed. I appears that you can't differentiate between defence and facts. enigma_brennan Do you mind if I ask you why are you so interested in Dane's issues with Burbank? Certainly, I for one, believe he has a genuine reason for feeling aggrieved - who wouldn't if you had to pay an extra $60k for someone else's mistake. If he is aiming the blame in the wrong direction is that not his problem? I was trying to help... she has 60,000 reasons to be aggrieved but there's grief and then there is accountability. Who is really accountable? I have little doubt they have had legal advice, so where to from here? Should I try to help? Or is this emotional stuff just too hard - I can't win. I am not sure what you mean - "if he is aiming the blame in the wrong direction is that not his problem?" I think I know where the blame should be and have advised DaneM of that. But I won't discuss that here now. enigma_brennan At the end of the day, as you have rightfully pointed out on many occasions, it was in his contract and therefore he probably has no recourse for legal remedy. However he does have a right to be angry because, rightly or wrongly, he trusted them with the building 'stuff' and they failed him. True... In the end, the reality is what was done was done. The facts don't change no matter how emotional we get, and the emotion is proportional to the pain, I understand that. But anger doesn't solve anything. And taking sides serves no purpose when the facts are plain to see. What can be done? No idea but I won't be discussing the detail here. Ed Re: BURBANK HOMES 43Jan 05, 2009 8:43 am Grace16 Enigma....Firstly, I believe that DaneM is actually a girl! And I too was quite gobsmacked in Ed's attitude towards her story. How many other threads have I read recently where members tell of their issues with builders/tradesmen/individual companies...and do so without persecution from others? COUNTLESS. You draw a long bow - persecution... that's how you see me... you put the facts together and present them in a different light. I would like to see that. Grace16 Ed, correct me if I am wrong, but DaneM discussed having issues ( bad ones ) right throughout her build, from a poor SS to a disinterested Building Manager - her issue with this build went beyond the initial sewer capping fiasco. She appears to be well placed to give feedback on this company. I have not entered into any discussion regarding her other experiences with Burbank and don't intend to - she has also said her house is well built or similar words. On this issue of capping, emotional outbursts devoid of facts are not feedback (that is how this issue started, no facts). Now we have facts and move on from here. Grace16 Also, I find it staggering that a builder would discuss any aspect of a build or a contract with someone other than the person that contract was with, regardless of whether or not you told them you had permission! Not terribly "honourable". I would be horrified if my builder discussed my build with any Tom, **** or Harry....just because they ( rightly or wrongly ) said that they had my permission. I can show evidence of permission. Grace16 And it isn't possible to defame the builder if her story is factual and accurate. For want of a better word, the whole situation "STINKS". Cut the lady some slack! You are wrong for 2 reasons, firstly she signed a contract and it is her responsibility and her legal counsel's responsibility to ensure that she knows what she signed and abides by that. Secondly, saying bad things because you aren't happy is no defence for defammation. On another point, as I understand it anyone who defames can face a civil action, one defence is that "it is true". But there is still a case to answer. (That is me talking as me.) I think I made a mistake... Ed Re: Burbank homes 44Jan 05, 2009 8:53 am DaneM Yes Eco classic I too will be interested to see if Burbank give you infomation about us, seeing they did not seem to want to help us or answer our questions Hi DaneM Do you want me to speak to them or not? Ed Burbank homes 45Jan 05, 2009 9:06 am No one has defamed anyone,The house is well built..... I have explained my sitaution incidently to the woman who initially told us she was building with Burbank and wanted feedback-she got what she asked for, however negative... If burbank don't want bad publicity they should ensure they they do right by their customers.. simple as that.... We all know how powerful "Word Of Mouth" is and well, alot of people knew we were building and alot of people asked how it was going...what do you want me to say???? Burbank have had the oppurtunity to try and put things right and try and help us, but they didn't appear to care all that much..perhaps they thought we are only one little customer, will make no difference to them what we say... We filled out a feedback form at handover and told them we were furious, we asked them contact us and they just have'nt bothered
ECO CLASSIC We are appreciative of what you are TRYING to do and hope that you get further than we do...I am sick of this but am still angry SORRY if that seems stupid,but hey I am human and who out there can easily part with $60,000.00 Re: BURBANK HOMES 46Jan 05, 2009 9:21 am I wasn't going to get involved in this.... and I'm sure I'm probably going to be attacked as well, but I think Ed is copping all this completely unfairly. I have also presented the other side of the coin in a few different threads and copped it. In all honestly, the only person I see being attacked in this thread is ED.
DaneM, I sympathise with you, I really do, and I would be absolutely shattered if it was me. But what is Ed is saying is correct, it was in the contract that Burbank was not taking responsibility for the capping of the sewer. Quite simply, and as harsh as it may be, it is not their problem. There are numerous things that are not included in a contract and we accept them and have to deal with them. This may have been an unusual one, but to me that would give me more reason to be diligent. To the matter of the sewer. I may be harsh, but there are things I'm failing to understand, this is my understanding of what happened. *You left a meeting with Burbank unclear on what your obligations were, but clear that Burbank would not be capping the sewer. *You contacted your service provider and were provided with incorrect information. This is the part I don't understand. Did you get this information from your service provider in writing? Did you speak to a solicitor to look over your contract? Did you speak to an independant person to make sure all your obligations were being met? I'm by no means saying you deserve what happened or it is your fault, but if it was me, I would want all the t crossed and i dotted on something as major as sewerage. "Capping of sewerage" the wording itself is a fair indication of what it is and I'd be very active in ensuring I was meeting my obligations when my builder HAS MADE IT CLEAR that they would not be dealing with it. If I didn't fully understand my obligation, I would be doing as much research and gathering as much information as I could to ensure that I did understand it. Then when I did understand my obligation, I'd want something in writing from the relevant authority, in this case YVW. And something in writing from whoever "capped" the sewer to ensure it was actually done. I'd want a lot more than a phone call with some one from the service provider as my basis of information. If you do have something in writing from your service provider, surely you can then move towards legal action against them? I am by no means a big fan of Burbank. They were one of the first builders I ruled out. But they clearly made the client aware that they were not taking responsibility for something. I honestly fail to see how this is now their problem. We as clients have to be active in our own builds. We talk about contracts and builder's obligations all the time. But we as clients also enter into contracts. As Ed said, if you don't understand it, don't sign it. EVER. From my understanding of contract law, there is nothing to fall back on if one party doesn't understand their obligations unless "unconscionable conduct "can be proven on the part of the other party. And that is not the case here. Jo I leave you to fend for yourself, figure things out yourself. Terrence Malick Re: BURBANK HOMES 47Jan 05, 2009 9:27 am Hi DaneM
Individuals make companies and some don't act in accordance with the way that the Company would like them to. Caring is a real issue here, words are so important, I wish every employee I ever had really cared and showed it. Most people often don't appear to care or have other issues they are dealing with that take over. That's how I see it when my feelings are ignored. As an instance, a schoolteacher many years ago treated everyone so badly - later in life I met a friend of his and told him - it turned out the old teacher's wife was dying of cancer at the time. Trying to be caring and objective is hard when your back is against the wall. I understand how you feel... I have no idea if I can get anywhere with your problem, I will try. But either way you must get over this. There are worse things that happen in life than losing $60,000. You must recover and move on regardless. Ed Burbank homes 48Jan 05, 2009 10:41 am JOLES: The tender stated "Gas,stormwater and sewage to be disconnected at connection points as per authority" i asked the tender presenter to explain this. She didnt, she said "Ring you service provider" Now does that mean she didn't know what it meant-what? If you have had dealings with Yarra Valley water, you will know that dont except anything in writing and they don't provide confirmation in writing that is their policy. I have spoken to numerous lawyers and contractual ones at that and i have also spoken to the "Consumer law action centre" who paint a very different story to you...namely "Duty of Care" Burbank did not provide me with full information and obligation under the contract-there is onus o the builder to provide me clear and precise information on what I am required to do Re: Burbank homes 49Jan 05, 2009 10:49 am DaneM I have spoken to numerous lawyers and contractual ones at that and i have also spoken to the "Consumer law action centre" who paint a very different story to you...namely "Duty of Care" Burbank did not provide me with full information and obligation under the contract-there is onus o the builder to provide me clear and precise information on what I am required to do Danem, When presented with this information what did Burbank do? I understand if you are unable to discuss this Re: Burbank homes 50Jan 05, 2009 12:07 pm DaneM JOLES: The tender stated "Gas,stormwater and sewage to be disconnected at connection points as per authority" i asked the tender presenter to explain this. She didnt, she said "Ring you service provider" Now does that mean she didn't know what it meant-what? If you have had dealings with Yarra Valley water, you will know that dont except anything in writing and they don't provide confirmation in writing that is their policy. I have spoken to numerous lawyers and contractual ones at that and i have also spoken to the "Consumer law action centre" who paint a very different story to you...namely "Duty of Care" Burbank did not provide me with full information and obligation under the contract-there is onus o the builder to provide me clear and precise information on what I am required to do Firtly you don't have to yell JOLES... I can read. Ok so this is the first mention that you have spoken to anyone and gotten legal advice. If that is the case.... as wakeboardandy asked earlier? Why did you pay? Are you pursuing this further? It seems that everyone else has used a demolition company that looked after all these things. (Southies stated this earlier that hers did.) Did you use a reputable demo company? Honestly start a thread, explain everything that happened step by step. Because at the moment it is as clear as mud. You have never mentioned lawyers and legal advice until I mentioned a little bit of contract law in my last post. I understand you are emotional and I'm not saying you are erratic, but your posts are coming across that way and I for one am finding it very difficult to follow exactly where you are with things. I honestly cannot understand why if you had legal advice suggesting you had a case why you would pay the $60, 000. Quite frankly the whole thing isn't adding up, and until you want to offer us all the information I don't think anyone can help you here. Kyton politely suggested earlier that you may get people off side, well anyone that has offered any alternative perspective has basically been abused or yelled at. I am way off side at the moment even though I am sympathetic to your situation. Bec e hasn't even revisited this thread since it's been hi-jacked, Tim the toolman has been scarce since his thread was hi-jacked. Are you here to get advice to work towards a resolution or here to get validation that you are correct and abuse Burbank? I also have plenty of reason to abuse a particular building company (not to the tune of 60k) but I don't fill the threads of people that mention that company with negative comments. It serves no purpose to do that. There has to be a balance and a place for things. Every Burbank thread may not be the appropriate place for your story. Start a thread.... explain the whole situation completely, because if every Burbank thread ends up going in this direction I can see a whole heap of problems ahead for everyone. Jo I leave you to fend for yourself, figure things out yourself. Terrence Malick Re: Burbank homes 52Jan 05, 2009 1:55 pm DaneM i have also spoken to the "Consumer law action centre" who paint a very different story to you...namely "Duty of Care" Burbank did not provide me with full information and obligation under the contract-there is onus o the builder to provide me clear and precise information on what I am required to do Hi DaneM Duty of Care must be proven and in this case you even say that you understood your obligation under the contract to cap the sewer. Then after you asked, Burbank told you to see your service provider, which you did. In your opinion, what more did Burbank need to do to exercise their duty of care to you? Quote: Wikipedia:Duty of Care In tort, there can be no liability in negligence unless the claimant establishes both that he or she was owed a duty of care by the defendant, and that there has been a breach of that duty Ed Re: BURBANK HOMES 53Jan 05, 2009 2:05 pm hope you dont mind me jumping in here, just a question about the capping saga.
im an owner builder, we have a building inspector (private not council, but some job) and they have to come and check the foundations beofre the concretes poured (then frame, roof, completion etc..) would it not have been something that they would of had to have checked, to okay the next stage of build (concrete pour)? sorry if it a silly question, just something that came to mind. DaneM, sorry you had to fork out 60k Re: BURBANK HOMES 54Jan 05, 2009 2:09 pm I have asked for this to be put elsewhere!
And I will be talking to the other mods about it. DaneM……please start a post in the Building forum. I may well be locking this one, and as Jo has said….where is bec e , did a runner because it is no longer her thread! Internal and External Building and Colour Consultant Online - Worldwide http://www.denovoconcepts.com Re: BURBANK HOMES 55Jan 05, 2009 2:17 pm Mich - think it is needed to be forced along.
Bec e - please don't think harshly of us here at Homeone. Every person has a different building experience. Some are good, unfortunately some aren't. Some things are worth waiting for. Re: BURBANK HOMES 56Jan 05, 2009 2:56 pm Edited
Not worth it! Only want to think happy thoughts at the moment mrs B Re: BURBANK HOMES 58Jan 15, 2009 3:14 pm Hi All,
When I posted the message in the introduction section I was very new to the site and basically didn't know what I was doing hehe!! I believe I may have rectified this now - but apologise for any inconvience. Our building process seems to moving along smoothly which is good. And whilst I understand DaneM has had a very unfortunate experience I was pleased to note that they said that they were happy with the quality of the build. Without really having any expertise nor proper understanding of the situation regarding their build I will not comment- as opposed to saying that I certainly sympathise with them. I'd like to also thank everyone who has made me feel so welcome and assisted me with many questions so far. Cheers Bec |