STO Forums

Search

Type your search criteria above and click Search to search the forums.

To see if someone has already answered a query similar to yours, click the Search button above and search for terms related to your question.

Bad Roof construction, the Developer and Insurance

By Gerhard Bezuidenhout on Tue, 17 Aug 2010 at 12:58

In our scheme a stand still has developed 4 years down the line since the first meeting of owners, where the developer fails to repair badly placed roof tiles.
1) The matter is lodged with the SABS to determine whether the tiles were manufactured according to standards;
2) The report received recently from the SABS (after many attempts by the trustees of our BC to get feedback from the developer) states that the tiles might have been badly placed on badly constructed supporting trusses;
3) The developer expressed his dissatisfaction with this report (of course: beacause now the developer together with the building contractors are in a spot) and requested time to further negotiate a report from the SABS;
4) Ridge tiles are slipping of and creates an opening (some places 75mm openings) where the wind forces in the minutest amount of rain;
5) Most owners suffering from water damage has no recourse - the insurer does not entertain claims because of the badly constructed roof;
6) Maintenance of the roofs is withheld, because the developer (the trustees agree) requested no action, as this will be detrimental to any claim against the tile manufacturer.
7) Maintenance of resulting damages is on the hold as well: ceilings and walls and even floor skirtings.

Question: should the trustees take the proceedings in their own hands? The strategy is to maintain a good relationship with the developers, but in the past this brought us nowhere.
Note: the development was registered with the NHBRC.

Replies

You must login to post a reply.

RE: Bad Roof construction, the Developer and Insurance

Annette Stones replied on Tue, 17 Aug 2010 at 23:01

Why on earth would the BC consider it a priority in the circumstances "to maintain a good relationship with the developers"?! The developers, after all, have clearly cut corners and are now stalling for time in order to evade liability. Priorities of this kind are precisely the reason why, in many if not most complexes, problems never get resolved, it seeming more politely politic to sweep them under the carpet instead of confronting those culpable with claims and demands. Why do sectional title owners feel obliged to tolerate this denigration of their rights as property owners? Would they do so in other context???

RE: RE: Bad Roof construction, the Developer and Insurance

Gerhard Bezuidenhout replied on Wed, 18 Aug 2010 at 08:37

Thanks for your (late night) reply. I agree with your questioning...
Do you suggest that the BC give notice to stall all negotiations with the developer and hand this matter to an attorney?
We have been taken so far down the line on a matter which will boil down to getting the Develeoper, supplier of roof tiles, supplier of trusses, building contractor (there were 3 involved to construct 146 units) and the bulding contractor's roof subbies all to work together to resolve the issue.
This is comparable to climbing mount Kilimanjaro.

RE: RE: RE: Bad Roof construction, the Developer and Insurance

Anne Greening replied on Wed, 18 Aug 2010 at 11:12

Hi, Gerhard. It is the Developer who is ultimately responsible: not the individual contractors. I'd agree that your best option would be to consult your lawyer.

RE: RE: RE: RE: Bad Roof construction, the Developer and Insurance

Gerhard Bezuidenhout replied on Wed, 18 Aug 2010 at 17:49

Yes, Anne - agreed. The trustees negotiate with the developer. On his part the developer attempts to resolve the matter by getting the roof tiles rejected on the premise that it does not comply with SABS manufacturing specs.

There are individual owners who wants to take the developer on, but are advised that this is a matter for the BC (via the trustees) to settle....Show More

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Bad Roof construction, the Developer and Insurance

Annette Stones replied on Wed, 18 Aug 2010 at 22:33

On what grounds would individual owners not have the right to institute action against the developers?

On what grounds would the developers "not entertain individal approaches" if individual property owners are affected? Let them explain that in writing to the individuals' legal representatives and then, with the media's pens scratching in the background, in a court of law....Show More

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Bad Roof construction, the Developer and Insurance

Gerhard Bezuidenhout replied on Thu, 19 Aug 2010 at 08:09

Hello, Annette - on the grounds that since registration of the section the BC is in "control" of the common property, which includes the roof.

IMO, in our example, it is not a question of thinking one has no power, rather being advised as such and being guided by a historical policy from the trustees not to mingle owners' private property affairs with the common property affairs.

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Bad Roof construction, the Developer and Insurance

Anne Greening replied on Thu, 19 Aug 2010 at 11:43

Hi, Gerhard. The original contract to build the unit is between the developer and each indivdual owner (unless the units were built on spec.). Thus the owners individually should deal with the developer in the first instance. However, if the problem is common to many units, there is nothing to prevent the owners from instructing the Body Corporate to take action on behalf of all of them. I think you'll find that the NHBRC deals with individual owners.

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Bad Roof construction, the Developer and Insurance

Gerhard Bezuidenhout replied on Thu, 19 Aug 2010 at 12:16

Thank you, Annette.
The units were built following the purchase the right to develop, transferred to each purchaser. The developer appointed the building contractor. owners had to submit a retention (snag) list within 3 months after occupation was certified, which was supposed to be dealt within a period of 6 months. Sad to say, sonme of us are still waiting...
The NHBRC steps in on structural matters - roofs fall out of their interest after 12 months.

1
Advertisements
Banner
Website Statistics
  • Forum Topics: 6409
  • Users: 14295