Give the responsibility to whoever is also responsible for securing building regs. So probably the builder

I recommend, having someone qualified and certified as a structural engineer to do all the calculations and the drawings, for the builder then to follow.

There are standards and safety standards that structural engineers take into account, and in my experience builders often say that they over-engineer it, but structural engineers are actually liable to make sure that it will indeed be safe and consider every contingency. Their primary objective is to make the building safe. While a builder might decide that cost and ease of work are more important and would just do what they are used to doing.

Builders are not structural engineers! Architects normally hire structural engineers to do all the static calculations as they are complex and time-consuming. So I would check with the team that has done the plans, and confirm that all that has been done correctly.

Builders are people who follow the building plans that are prepared by the architects, who have checked and calculated static forces, either by themselves or have that work sourced out, and then specify exact materials and construction for the builder to follow.

I think Puir completely misunderstood.

Let your builder coordinate the structural engineer if they are also responsible for building regs.

Jonathan, I don't believe I misunderstood at all.

I was just expressing words of caution,. Can you honestly say that building inspections are adequate and always done?

Unfortunately, not every builder consults structural engineers, even when they should, as some think they already know what they are doing and think that structural engineers, over-engineer stuff from my experience. So they think they don't need an engineer. They have some set guidelines that they follow, but by no means is that the same as structural engineering.

It's standard practice to get one but just wanted to point out that it is something to be mindful of so that this steep is not missed, since I don't know the builder they are considering using.

And I'm rather cautious than trusting a random builder's judgment. But maybe I'm just overly cautious because I have studied engineering and know how bad things can get if done wrong.

Nope you have still misunderstood Piur. The question was do we get the builder or the designer to instruct the structural engineer. Everything you have said was unnecessary waffle.

Jonathan, it seems like that unnecessary waffle, as you call it, has struck some nerve, that you have lost the civility of your usual posts. Might I suggest a good night's sleep might help you have a more positive outlook?

Ursa it’s odd to defiantly refuse to believe you are wrong and continuing to berate me. I trust this is a lack of experience on your part or a second language issue where you are unaware that you sound supercilious.

You suggest your approach is thorough but instead it’s over dramatising what should be fairly straightforward.

The original poster has made no suggestion this builder is random or not experienced to have more than one structural engineer contact, or lacking the knowledge to understand they will need building regs- that all came from you.

You also cast aspersions on building inspectors suggesting they don’t attend and aren’t adequate. Every time I have needed building regulation sign off the council have required structural engineer plans and attended to check the installed steel and the structural support matched the specification. If you are spending £500- 700 of your clients money to secure buildings regs on a typical extension and not being aware of the inspectors visit or failing to ensure they do then you are perhaps not as thorough as you believe. Furthermore you have proved my point that the person on site every day is a good choice for securing building regulations and coordinating the structural engineer and as we all know that’s the building contractor.

Jonathan,

I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong. And Yes I agree that their original question was very straightforward, to whom to entrust with a structural engineer. I just wanted to offer some words of caution since they didn't provide enough information about the builder. I didn't make an assumption on who they are or their qualifications and building practices, and while I agree that a good builder would of course get everything done correctly, unfortunately, you do get bad actors in the industry, which you can't deny. They can do with my information as they wish, if they don't think it applies to their situation they can completely disregard it.

However, I don't understand why this has struck such a nerve with you, that you took it personally and started to berate and attack me.

Yes English is my second language if you must know, but I have been speaking English since was 9 years old, I also speak 3 more other languages in case you are wondering and currently learning French as well.

English is by far the easiest language and the not-so-subtle nuances of your insults do not escape me. Since you brought it up like it's something that I should be embarrassed by.

For the record I never berated you but only pointed out your incivility towards me, which again you took personally and lashed out.

I see a good night's sleep didn't help to improve your temper, which I do regret, as I do find myself often agreeing with your answers on Houzz, which I'm always happy to state if that is the case. However, I don't remember seeing you giving that courtesy to anyone.

I do want to say thank you for taking the time and finding out my name, not entirely sure what the motivation was, but I will just say thank you and leave it at that.

Hope you have a nice day and a good easter holiday and in the spirit of holidays let go of this silly grudge against me.

Let's be respectful to each other and help the Houzz community with our own opinions and advice.

If you disagree with something that I write and feel compared to say something my DM is always open for a friendly debate.

Nope- you have misunderstood once more Ursa.
It is you that has been personal not me and it is you that has taken offence. If you choose to think of my pushing back against your continued bad behaviour as me being uncivil then I would suggest it is you that could benefit from a better nights sleep.

hahaha sure Jonathan, whatever you say. If it means that much to your bruised male ego. Sure I was wrong you are right.

Come on get over it.

I'm sure your extension is already built by now, but leaving this here for anyone else weighing up the "all-in-one" service. Going with an in-house engineer from your design/build team is convenient, but it’s a massive conflict of interest. If the engineer works for the builder, they will often over-spec the steel or design it in a way that makes the builder's life easier on site, not what's cheapest or best for your pocket.

You always want a completely independent structural engineer who answers directly to you, not the contractor. When I did my home renovations, I hired Alan Wood & Partners for the structural design specifically to keep my builders honest. Their calculations were spot on, and because they were independent, they acted as a proper shield when the builders tried to claim certain things "couldn't be done" without extra cash. Always go independent for your structural specs.

@Wayne Prest. - like the designer commenting on this post two years ago you are over dramatising.

The structural engineer needs to satisfy the building control at the local authority. I feel you have to be deeply suspicious to worry about impropriety when you have two different independent organisations. Furthermore in my experience builders do NOT appreciate extra steelwork as it means additional time, weight and effort, often in a fixed price contract. Therefore there is zero motive for a structural Engineer who is an acquaintance of your builder to give him a tougher job .