borg
The site should be inspected before it was poured.
But you can't tell it is done and it was in the contract as DaneM's responsibility... they signed and accepted that. What could have been done is another story...
Browse Forums Introductions Re: BURBANK HOMES 22Jan 03, 2009 3:31 pm Hmm, well there are quite a few of us knock downers, how many other knock down ppl have heard of sewage/sewer capping, I wonder I am astounded that we were just 'lucky'!
Why can't you tell whether it's been done Ed? Burbank homes 23Jan 03, 2009 4:02 pm Um! in response to you all and I thank those who have shown support... You CAN tell if the sewage has been capped according to a Privale plumber and the numerous people we spoke to at Yarra Valley.... (1) if the sewage had of been capped it would have been petruding from the ground and (2) the plumber would have provided me with a "certificate of authenticity" and according to YVW Burbank should have asked to see that certificate B4 they started... I mean they were anal about getting something in writing re the "Electric pit" they we had to install .Yet dont care about sewage and stormwater. PLUS they had copies of the sewage plan and the plumber had to know where it was because he installed all the new sewage pipes ETC B4slab was laid Re: BURBANK HOMES 24Jan 03, 2009 4:24 pm I would love to see the contract. I bet it was danes responsbility to get it capped, but not his reponsbility to ensure it is capped before building began.
Two different things. Also you cant just put something in a contract and expect people to understand it. After all the works including demo and new house was contracted out because the owner wasnt in a knowledgably position to be able to do it himself. It was negilant of the buildr not to explain something. Re: Burbank homes 26Jan 03, 2009 4:36 pm DaneM and according to YVW Burbank should have asked to see that certificate B4 they started... I mean they were anal about getting something in writing re the "Electric pit" they we had to install .Yet dont care about sewage and stormwater. PLUS they had copies of the sewage plan and the plumber had to know where it was because he installed all the new sewage pipes ETC B4slab was laid If this is the case why did you pay the 60k you said to fix it!! I would have taken it further if it was their responsibility to look into it.. as ecoclassic just said I would be talking to your solicitor about it. Re: BURBANK HOMES 27Jan 03, 2009 6:53 pm donuts I am astounded that we were just 'lucky'! I asked another builder who has nothing to do with this and that's what he said... the homeowners responsibility. And it is what the contract said. Remembering that Burbank was the builder and did not demolish the house. donuts Why can't you tell whether it's been done Ed? I am told that site disturbance hides capping work. Plus the only way to know for certain what needs capping is during demolition, only then can you know what was uncovered and whether the plans are accurate. I will still talk to my contacts. Ed Re: BURBANK HOMES 28Jan 03, 2009 7:05 pm This is how I see it...
2 Burbank refused to cap the sewer as they did not demolish the house. 3 Burbank refered DaneM to DaneM's service provider - Yarra Valley who DaneM says gave them the wrong advice which left the sewer uncapped. 4 Burbank commence work and the uncapped sewer is blocked costing DaneM $60,000. The demolisher is not responsible as they refused that responsibility. The service provider gave the wrong advice and they bear the responsibility for that. Burbank could have asked if the sewer was capped but had no responsibility to do that and had already advised DaneM to ask their service provider which DaneM did but got the wrong advice. In the end DaneM signed a contract accepting responsibility and unfortunately in the end they had to pay. I would sue the service provider if there is evidence that the advice is wrong. Meanwhile I will talk to my contacts at the highest level and see how they see it. Ed Re: BURBANK HOMES 29Jan 03, 2009 9:14 pm We are doing knockdown and rebuild too and I have never heard of capping of sewer until now! I have just looked through my contracts and variations again, no mention of such thing!! Contract from my demo company also got no such mention. My guess is that not having it mentioned in the contract means my builder is taking responsibility of getting things right.
Since Burbank intentionally states in their contracts as client responsibility, sound like cost cutting to me.... Doesn't sound like a common practice??!! DaneM, hope you will find the support you seek from this forum. From my short stay here, I already find this forum full of helpful people. Good luck. Building Clarendon Brighton - Done and moved in Sept 2009 Re: BURBANK HOMES 30Jan 03, 2009 10:56 pm eho Since Burbank intentionally states in their contracts as client responsibility, sound like cost cutting to me.... . If Ford sell you a car and the contract says "without wheels" is that cost cutting? No - becuase you know the conditions under which you are buying the car. You can buy other cars with "no wheels". It is a condition of the contract and sets down accountability. eho Since Burbank intentionally states in their contracts as client responsibility, sound like cost cutting to me.... . Sounds like accountability to me... eho Doesn't sound like a common practice??!! . Well it is... as is being held to a contract you sign - whether you understand it or not. It's your choice to sign or not to sign... Ed Re Burbank homes 31Jan 04, 2009 8:21 am ECO classic Please be objective!!! It is obvious from you replys that you have spoken to Burbank. What you are saying is from a point of view of someone in the industry.. who knows a little bit about what they are doing... the average person who builds a house, will be their first timeand will rely totally on the builder to EXPLAIN the contract they are asking US to sign... The way it is written in the TENDER is ambigious and not clear at all-which is why I asked TEnder presenter to explain it to us.... Just think if she had of taken 15 seconds to explain to what to do, all of this would have been avoided and I would be possibly telling everyone on this forum how GOOD they were... instead here we are.... anything that is written in a Tender/contract, becomes the responsibility of the company to explain in full what each clause means...I would have thought that was obvious Re: BURBANK HOMES 32Jan 04, 2009 8:43 am Is there not a 'duty of care' from the builder to ensure their clients are not only given the best possible advise but are helped through the building process? I cannot believe such such an important aspect as capping a sewer ( I also have never heard of this and have built 3 times) was not followed up by this builder.
Now, legally Burbank may be right that it is not their fault because it is in the contract that it was the homeowners responsibilty, but instead of having a satisfied customer, they now have a customer who has lost financially, very distressed and here on this forum. A few phone calls to the appropriate company make sure the capping was done was all it would take...but that obviously is too much extra work (and not in the contract) Eco Classic...once again, it is much appreciated that you are giving an alternative view at least we have all learnt from this and it may help someone in the future. Mrs B Re: BURBANK HOMES 33Jan 04, 2009 8:46 am $60,000??? OMG, I feel SOOO sorry for you! We too have in the past done a knockdown and rebuild....and I heard nothing about this capping of sewage business! I'm sure you would have taken care of your obligations if it were clear to you what they were...and it astounds me that your builder did not check that everything was in order prior to commencing the build!
Where to from here for you? Re: Re Burbank homes 34Jan 04, 2009 9:22 am DaneM ECO classic Please be objective!!! It is obvious from you replys that you have spoken to Burbank. I am not saying what I am saying because I have spoken to Burbank... I have spoken before Christmas, but not about any specifics as I did not have any details the last time I spoke, and now they are on leave. What I am doing here is listing the facts. If these are incorrect let me know here. DaneM ] What you are saying is from a point of view of someone in the industry.. who knows a little bit about what they are doing... the average person who builds a house, will be their first timeand will rely totally on the builder to EXPLAIN the contract they are asking US to sign... You did not have to sign... I emphasise to anyone reading this, DO NOT SIGN WHAT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND. But you did sign and asked how you could ensure that the sewer was capped and you got advised to talk to your service provider, Yarra Valley, which you did, but YV it appears did not act in accordance with their words. DaneM The way it is written in the TENDER is ambigious and not clear at all-which is why I asked TEnder presenter to explain it to us.... Just think if she had of taken 15 seconds to explain to what to do, all of this would have been avoided and I would be possibly telling everyone on this forum how GOOD they were... instead here we are.... anything that is written in a Tender/contract, becomes the responsibility of the company to explain in full what each clause means...I would have thought that was obvious Your issue is capping the sewer and I think you fully understood at the time that it was not in the contract as Burbank's responsibility to cap the sewer and that is why you spoke to YV for them to resolve that. What you did not understand was the implications and consequences if this did not happen - and unfortunately the cost was $60,000. What does your legal advice say? Ed Re: BURBANK HOMES 35Jan 04, 2009 9:27 am Mrs B Now, legally Burbank may be right that it is not their fault because it is in the contract that it was the homeowners responsibilty, but instead of having a satisfied customer, they now have a customer who has lost financially, very distressed and here on this forum. Mrs B Yes and that is how I see it too... $60,000 is a lot of money for an iundividual and it's also a lot for a company to reimburse when they may not be at fault. (even when at fault some companies would make this hard). Ed Re: BURBANK HOMES 36Jan 04, 2009 11:15 am Afternoon folks.
Just on a side note here, does anyone else find it a little peculiar that Burbank Homes would even consider discussing the specifics of DaneM's job with someone other than DaneM or an authorised representative? It just seems like there may be a few privacy issues here if Burbank are willing to discuss a clients personal information with someone other than the client. I can see that Ed (EcoClassic) is offering a means to get the communication channels open here -between Burbank and DaneM- but, really it is DaneM's duty to do this and Burbank should not be discussing his job with just any John Doe. DaneM, I hope you find a satisfactory resolution to you sewer saga soon. Re: BURBANK HOMES 37Jan 04, 2009 11:22 am IkonInteriors Afternoon folks. Just on a side note here, does anyone else find it a little peculiar that Burbank Homes would even consider discussing the specifics of DaneM's job with someone other than DaneM or an authorised representative? It just seems like there may be a few privacy issues here if Burbank are willing to discuss a clients personal information with someone other than the client. I can see that Ed (EcoClassic) is offering a means to get the communication channels open here -between Burbank and DaneM- but, really it is DaneM's duty to do this and Burbank should not be discussing his job with just any John Doe. DaneM, I hope you find a satisfactory resolution to you sewer saga soon. If you follow earlier posts you will find that I asked DaneM's permission, and I have it. On the other hand it would appear to be OK to defame without permission. Ed Re: BURBANK HOMES 38Jan 04, 2009 11:49 pm 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! 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. 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? 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. I was also, until now, totally oblivious to this requirement (as were several other forumites) and, as such, I am grateful that the issue was raised; who knows it may even save someone else's hide! 'We make a living by what we get, but we make a life by what we give.' - Winston Churchill Re: BURBANK HOMES 39Jan 05, 2009 12:46 am DaneM My husband has written a PM to "ED"so probably will not say anymore on this subject Enigma, I think you would find it here... Fair point though. --- I think the insight ed has given us here is good, I also think the he presents an unusual opportunity to contact some builders higher up the chain and that can only be a good thing. I personally dont see what is being said by ed as a defence but more as "the other side of the fence" and I think staunch is a bit harsh The fact that he has even bothered to look at this thread and bring it to the attention of the builder I think we should be grateful for and if there is an outcome or better resolution for Danem ... great! Re: BURBANK HOMES 40Jan 05, 2009 7:49 am 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. 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. 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. 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! |