Sutton, Cheam, Ewell, Banstead, Epsom, Chessington, Worcester Park, Morden, Wimbledon, New Malden, Surbiton, Kingston, Croydon, Purley, Coulsdon, Reigate, Walton on the Hill, Headley, Dorking, Effingham, East Horlsey, Leatherhead, Cobham, Byfleet, Esher, Oxshott
The Federation of Master Builders, the UK’s largest construction trade federation and champions for continuous improvement in building standards, selected Happy Building to appear in their TV commercial and online advertisements.
7 Reviews for Happy Building
A subsequent stage was undertaken to provide a structural and building regulations package which is produced by our outsourced structural engineering team. You then chose to progress to construction with your own construction team and whilst undertaking these works, the contractor highlighted that a steel was needed to carry out the proposed design which had been omitted in error by the engineer. Upon raising the concern, we liaised with the structural engineer to attend site and within 48hrs they had attended site and reviewed the situation. Fault was admitted by the engineer and they proposed a valid solution to install a steel which would allow the proposed design to be undertaken.
At this stage, an alternative solution was suggested by the contractor to amend the layout without the need to install the steel which you opted to implement. Our understanding was that the matter was closed, however, this was subsequently followed up to raise your concerns and request a refund.
We responded with requests to coordinate a meeting with all parties including ourselves, you (the client), the structural engineer and the client's Contractor with the view to fully understanding the preceding discussions on site. Despite repeated attempts, your Contractor refused to attend and as such, in the absence of this helpful meeting, we attempted to resolve the concerns with you directly.
In our discussions, we explained that the initial design process had been fully completed and the design illustrated a scheme of your preference. The Stage 2 package was also completed, however, the missing steel by the engineers was unfortunate but a viable solution was provided in extremely quick time. The insinuation that the scheme was not implementable is factually incorrect as the clarification of the missing steel would have ensured that the scheme could have been implemented. Your decision to proceed with an alternative scheme which was subjectively perceived to be a better solution, should not be held against us as a flaw in our level of service. Where delays in responses unfortunately occured, apologies were made and efforts made to progress the scheme through to the next stages, this was further highlighted by the immediate action taken when the client flagged the error with the steel and we responded immediately with useable solutions.
As noted by you, despite fulfilling the stipulated work at each stage, as a gesture of goodwill, the structural engineers agreed to a refund of £500.00 which equated to circa half of the Stage 2 Structural and Building Regulations fee. This was deemed to be an extremely generous refund based on resolution of your concern and proportion of the error against the full scheme. We had requested that you sign a standard disclaimer document to note that the matter was closed and no further action would be requested; you did not agree to sign this and we confirmed that the matter was to be reviewed with senior management to find a resolution, however, in the interim whilst this was being dealt with, you chose to issue your complaint.
Hopefully, as evident in this summary, your grievance would appear to be unwarranted as we have always sought to complete each service stage and offer solutions and resolution to concerns along with the engineer's generous refund as a gesture of goodwill.