Your friends are fundraising. Don't miss out, opt in.

Page closed

This page is now closed. Take a look at other inspiring pages on JustGiving

Closed 31/12/2019

0%
£0
raised of £60,000 target by 0 supporters

    Weʼve raised £0 to For Mum, cheated out of her life savings by a cowboy build firm after a 2 year legal battle. View 'Full Story' litigation details, as below

    Closed on Tuesday, 31st December 2019

    Don't have time to donate right now?

    Story

    Our poor Mum paid a build firm to construct a granny annex, the company built her an annex which failed every building regulation and unfit for purpose. She then suffered a brain aneurysm, needed full time nursing in a care home and left permanently in a wheelchair. After a two year legal battle with the build company, they liquidated owing hundreds of thousands of pounds to their customers, Mum being one of them. She has lost her home and her life-savings to this company, plus legal fees and now lost her Continuing Health Care which means she will have to move from the nursing home where she's become settled as she cannot self-fund.

    Since this has been featured on-line with the Daily Mail, there have of course been the 'doubters' out there leaving comments, so I have included the details of our claim here as drawn up by our solicitors, just for the record:

    IN THE COUNTY COURT MONEY CLAIMS CENTRE

    Claim No:

    BETWEEN:

    HOLLY ANN ELMHIRST

    Claimant

    -and-

    HUDSON GARDEN ROOMS LIMITED

    Defendant

    PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

    1. The Defendant is a private limited company incorporated under Company No: 09271135. The Defendant specialises, amongst other things, in the supply and installation of bespoke garden rooms. The products supplied by the Defendant include ‘The Hudson House’ which the Defendant represents via its website (and has at all material times so represented) is capable of being used as a “Granny Annex”; a living space ancillary to a main residence incorporating a kitchen, bathroom and / or bedroom.

    2. On or around 24th August 2015 the Claimant contacted the Defendant and requested a quotation for the supply and installation of a “Granny Annex” for the benefit of the Claimant’s elderly mother (“the Annex”). The Annex was to be built at a property to be purchased by the Claimant’s sister, Ms Samantha Elmhirst. Initially this property was at XXXXX but this changed in or around December 2015 to XXXXX (“the Property”).

    3. The Annex was to include a living area, kitchen, bathroom and bedroom. At all material times the Defendant was aware that the Annex was to be used as a “Granny Annex”.

    4. On or around 17th March 2016 the Defendant emailed the Claimant a quote for the Annex to be supplied and installed at the Property (“the Quote”). The Quote included various technical specifications chosen by the Defendant relating to the design of the Annex, and to the type and size of the materials, parts and fittings to be used in its construction. Given the Defendant’s specialism in supplying garden rooms and the Claimant’s standing as a lay consumer, the Defendant thereby assumed responsibility for the choice of the said specifications. The purchase price was £48,600 including VAT.

    5. The Claimant accepted the Quote by paying a deposit of 95% of the purchase price on the same day as requested by the Defendant, by and emailing the Defendant to confirm that that payment had been made. In accepting the Quote, the Claimant relied upon the specifications chosen by the Defendant in the Quote.

    6. The Claimant thereby contracted the Defendant to supply and install the Annex at the Property (“the Contract”).

    7. For the avoidance of any doubt, and to the extent not expressly provided for in the Quote or otherwise expressly agreed or instructed by the Claimant, the services to be provided by the Defendant pursuant to the Contract included:

    (a) The design / specification of the Annex;

    (b) The choice of materials, fittings and / or parts;

    (c) The sourcing and supply of the said materials, fittings and / or parts;

    (d) The organisation and planning of the works;

    8. The following were implied terms of the contract:

    (a) Pursuant to section 9 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (“the CRA”) the Annex would be of satisfactory quality;

    (b) Pursuant to section 10 of the CRA, the Annex would be fit for purpose as a “Granny Annex”;

    (c) Pursuant to section 49 of the CRA, the Defendant’s services were to be supplied with reasonable care and skill;

    (d) To the extent not included as part of the term particularised at (c) above, the Annex would, pursuant to the officious bystander and / or business efficacy tests, conform to the relevant provisions of the Building Regulations 2010, to the Approved Documents thereunder and / or to any relevant British Standards.

    9. The Defendant began installing the Annex on or around 4th April 2016. Around the beginning of July 2016, the Defendant purported to complete the performance of its obligations pursuant to the Contract and / or failed or refused to re-attend the Property to carry out any further works.

    10. The Defendant is in breach of contract as particularised in the attached [below] Schedule of Breaches and as set out more fully in the attached report of Mr Daniel Moles, Chartered Building Surveyor, dated December 2017.

    11. By virtue of the Defendant’s said breaches, the Claimant has suffered loss and damage in the total sum of £37,536.20 as particularised in the attached Schedule of Breaches and as set out more fully in the report of Mr Moles.

    12. Further, or alternatively, the Claimant claims specific performance as set out at paragraph 19 of the attached Schedule of Breaches.

    13. Further, the Claimant is entitled to interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 on such sums as may be awarded to her at such rate and for such period as the court sees fit.

    AND the Claimant claims;

    (1) Damages limited to £37,536.20;

    (2) Specific performance;

    (3) Interest;

    (4) Costs.

    IAIN BAIN

    IN THE COUNTY COURT MONEY CLAIMS CENTRE

    Claim No:

    BETWEEN:

    HOLLY ANN ELMHIRST

    Claimant

    -and-

    HUDSON GARDEN ROOMS LIMITED

    Defendant

    PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

    IN THE COUNTY COURT MONEY CLAIMS CENTRE

    Claim No:

    BETWEEN:

    HOLLY ANN ELMHIRST

    Claimant

    -and-

    HUDSON GARDEN ROOMS LIMITED

    Defendant

    SCHEDULE OF BREACHES

    No.

    Term breached1

    Particulars of breach2

    Remedial works required3

    Loss4

    Lounge – Water Damage

    1.

    8(a) – (c) (and see 7(a), (b) and / or (d))

    The pipework serving the immersion tank in the loft has not been lagged. (DM, para 5.3). This caused water inside the pipe to freeze and the pipe to burst. As a consequence, there is significant damp staining to the ceiling in the lounge and the laminate flooring in the lounge has warped (DM, paras 5.3 and 5.4). In addition, the ingress of water has damaged furniture belonging to the Claimant.

    The pipework needs to be lagged and the ceiling, flooring and chipboard replaced (DM, paras 5.4, 5.31, 6.5, 6.13 and Schedule paras 1.2 – 1.6, 1.8, 1.12, 1.13 1.16, 1.17, 1.19 and 1.20).

    The damaged furniture needs to be replaced at an estimated cost of [INSERT].

    £5,220.00 (DM, para 6.13 and Schedule paras 1.2 – 1.6, 1.8, 1.16, 1.17 and 1.19)

    [INSERT]

    Internal Doors

    2.

    8(a) – (d) (and see 7(a) – (d))

    The internal doors are not fire rated and the door frames are not fitted with intumescent seals contrary to Table B1 of Approved Document B – Fire Safety – Volume 1 (DM, paras 5.5 and 5.6). The door leading from the lounge to the kitchen is damaged at the top corner where it has been planed to enable it to be fitted in the door frame, but left unfinished (DM, para 5.5).

    The doors must be replaced and intumescent seals added to the existing door frames (DM, para 5.6 and 6.12 and Schedule para 1.14).

    £1,100.00 (DM, para 6.12)

    Bedroom – Means of Escape

    3.

    8(a) – (d) (and see 7(a) and / or (d))

    The bedroom window must serve as a fire escape but has an openable area of less than 0.33m2 contrary to paragraph B1 Section 2, para 2.3 of Approved Document B, Fire Safety – Volume 1 (DM, paras 5.7 to 5.10).

    The window should be replaced with a door. In doing so the external ground will need to be levelled to the door threshold and the fence opposite will need to be removed in order to open the egress point up to the adjoining patio (DM, paras 5.10 and 6.11 and Schedule paras 1.9 and 1.11).

    £1,500.00 (DM, para 6.11)

    4.

    8(a), (b) and / or (c) (and see 7(a) and / or (d))

    Further or alternatively, regardless of its openable area the bedroom window is wholly unsuitable for use as a fire escape for the Claimant’s elderly mother.

    Ventilation

    5.

    8(a) – (d) (and see 7(a) – (d))

    No means of background ventilation has been provided to the windows and doors contrary to the ventilation levels provided in Table 52A of Approved Document F (35,000m2) (DM, paras 5.11 and 5.12).

    Trickle ventilators should be retrospectively fitted to the windows and doors (DM, paras 5.12 and 6.9 and Schedule para 1.15).

    £500.00 (DM, para 6.9)

    6.

    8(a) – (d) (and see 7(a) – (d))

    The hood over the cooker in the kitchen is an internal recirculating type extractor fan that is not ducted to the atmosphere. It does not achieve the requirement of 30L/s for intermittent mechanical extraction ventilation contrary to table 5.1a and diagram 5.2a of Approved Document F – F1 (DM, para 5.13).

    The hood should be replaced with a ducted equivalent or an additional wall mounted extract should be installed (DM, paras 5.13 and 6.10 and Schedule para 1.18).

    £450.00 (DM, para 6.10)

    Foul Drainage

    7.

    8(a) – (d) (and see 7(a) and / or (d))

    The waste water pipes are connected to a macerator at the rear of the toilet, the pipework to which is fed through the external wall of the Annex, retuning round the rear flank and on to the kitchen where the pipe re-enters and the sink waste is connected to it. The waste pipe then tracks vertically, enters the roof void, then exits the external wall and travels along the boundary for approximately 20m before connecting into a sink waste outlet to the rear of the adjacent bungalow. There are many changes in direction before the waste pipe reaches its final discharge point and ‘tight’ 90o bends have been used at all changes of direction contrary to manufacturer’s installation guidance. The system is highly unlikely to meet the testing procedure set out within section 5.0 of BS EB 12050-3:2015. (DM, para 5.15). The system has been poorly planned and designed (DM, paras 15.7). The foul waste connections should have been connected into the mains sewer drain run (DM, para 15.6). Further, the Defendant expressly agreed that they would connect the waste to the mains sewer and provided for such a connection in the application for planning permission.

    A connection has been made to the mains sewer drain run which is now ready for foul waste connections from the Annex. This has been at the Claimant’s cost by Plumbing & Heating Co. (Norwich) Ltd.

    The existing waste pipework needs to be isolated and removed and all affected above-ground drainage pipework within the annex made good. A new stub stack will need to be provided to the bathroom together with a connection to the close couple WC pan and waste connections for the bath and basin. A gully trap will need to be provided for the kitchen waste water. New pipework to prepared trenches with inspection chambers will need to be installed and a final connection made to the existing mains sewer run (DM, paras 5.18 and 6.8 and Schedule paras 1.24 and 1.28).

    £700.00

    £2,700.00 (DM, para 6.8)

    8.

    8(a) – (d) (and see 7(a) – (d))

    The macerated waste connections above ground do not comply with the requirements of Approved Document H (including paras 2.2 and 2.13 of section H1) and the relevant sections of BS EN752:

    (a) The macerator pipework is susceptible to damage and failure through jointed connections leading to the potential for foul effluent to discharge onto open ground;

    (b) The pipework is affixed by plastic brackets to the brick columns / wall along the boundary and is susceptible to deflection due to being insufficiently supported. Some of the pipework has started coming away from the wall;

    (c) The pipework crosses the concrete hardstanding via a recessed channel and consequently is susceptible to damage from foot traffic;

    (d) The exposed pipework is susceptible to damage where any residual waste would be able to freeze allowing for expansion which may crack the pipe.

    (DM, para 5.16).

    Cold Water Supply

    9.

    8(a) – (d) (and see 7(a) – (d))

    The water supply pipework is currently provided in plastic push fittings, follows the same line as the foul waste pipework and is also fixed to the boundary wall. It does not comply with Approved Document G, G1. The water supply being above ground is susceptible to freezing. It should be at least 750mm below the surface (DM, paras 5.19 to 5.21).

    The existing water supply pipework should be isolated and removed and reinstalled to a protective duct below ground level. The electricity supply cable should also be laid in the trenching at the same time (DM, paras 5.21 and 6.14).

    £4,490.00 (DM, para 6.14)

    External Walls

    10.

    8(a) – (d) (and see 7(a) – (d))

    The rear flank wall of the Annex does not provide the requisite 30 minutes of fire resistance pursuant to Approved Document B – Volume 1, para 8.2 of section B4 and table A2 at Appendix A (DM, para 5.22).

    The external cedar weatherboarding needs to be treated with a coating to achieve the necessary Class O spread of flame rating and 30 minute resistance, or be removed and replaced with an equivalent material (DM, paras 5.25 and Schedule para 1.23).

    £1,225 (DM, Schedule para 1.23)

    11.

    8(a) – (d) (and see 7(a) – (d))

    All of the walls of the Annex have a u-value of 0.33 W/m2K. This exceeds the elemental u-value of 0.28 W/m2K as set out in Approved Document L (DM, para 5.23).

    The existing plasterboard needs to be removed internally and additional PIR insulation installed between the studs. An additional layer of 25mm thick Kingspan Thermawall will need to be installed (DM, para 5.23, 6.4, 6.19 and Schedule, paras 1.2, 1.3, 1.10 and 1.21 to 1.22).

    £3,985.00 (DM, Schedule paras 1.2, 1.3, 1.10 and 1.21 to 1.22

    Floor Structure

    12.

    8(a) – (d) (and see 7(a) – (d))

    The overall u-value of the floor is 0.34W/m2K. The Quote stated that the Annex floor would achieve 0.18 W/m2K on the basis that it would ‘fully insulated’. In order to ensure compliance with Part L of the Building Regulations a minimum elemental u-value of 0.22 W/m2K is needed (DM, paras 5.26 to 5.28).

    A large proportion of the existing floor structure (including the laminate flooring, electric underfloor heating, chipboard floor boards, and the 25mm Celotex boards) needs to be taken up. A minimum board thickness of 75mm Celotex insulation or equal equivalent is needed between the joints (DM, paras 5.30, 5.31 and 6.5 and Schedule paras 1.2 – 1.8, 1.16, 1.17 and 1.19).

    £5,095.00 (DM, Schedule para 6.5)3

    Roof

    13.

    8(a) – (c) (and see 7(a) and / or (d))

    The mitre joints at the intersection of the hip and ridge tiles have been poorly cut and are misaligned, with silicone sealant used at the junction leaving the roof susceptible to water ingress. If a support tray has not been provided between the ridge and hip tiles it should be (DM, paras 5.33 to 5.34).

    The hip and ridge tiles should be removed and re-installed (DM, paras 5.36 and Schedule para 1.27)

    £620.00 (DM Schedule para 1.27)

    14.

    8(a) – (c) (and see 7(a) and / or (d))

    The roof sarking felt has not been carried over into the rainwater gutters. As a consequence, any rainwater that is able to pass underneath the slates may be able to infiltrate the building fabric resulting in damage (DM, para 5.37).

    The first few rows of slates and hip tiles should be removed to enable a 5u undercloak to be installed to lap the gutter (DM, para 5.37).

    £580 (DM Schedule para 1.26)

    Rainwater Goods & disposal

    15.

    8(a) – (d) (and see 7(a) and / or (d))

    The downpipes at the annex discharge onto open ground rather than a soakaway contrary to Approved Document H, Section H3 (DM, paras 5.38 to 5.43).

    Soakaways should be installed at the site into which the downpipes can drain (DM, paras 5.43 and 6.7).

    £900 (DM, para 6.7)

    Superstructure

    16.

    8(a) – (d) (and see 7(a) – (d))

    The ceiling joints and rafters are undersized and exceed the maximum permissible span in order to comply with Approved Document A, Section A1 (DM, para 5.52).

    The rafters should be doubled up in order to ensure compliance with Approved Document A (DM, para 5.52).

    £2,000 (DM, Schedule para 1.31)

    17.

    8(a) – (d) (and see 7(a) – (d))

    The joists end bearings sit on a stud wall which is built directly off of the suspended floor structure and do not appear to be bolted or strapped. The rafters do not contain collars or ties at ridge or mid-span to counteract the lateral thrust from the rafters at eaves level (DM, para 5.53).

    The ceiling joists should be securely connected to each rafter at eaves level and lapped and bolted together over the internal partition. Collar ties should be added to the rafters along with the middle range span to ensure compliance with Approved Document A (DM, para 5.55).

    18.

    8(a) – (c) (and see 7(a) and / or (d))

    The plaster skim jointing the underside of the ceiling / wall junction has blown in numerous locations (DM, para 5.54).

    The ceiling needs to be re-skimmed (DM, Schedule para 1.20).

    £190 (DM, Schedule para 1.20)4

    19.

    8(d)

    Structural engineering calculations have not been provided to Building Control for the superstructure (DM, para 5.57).

    Structural calculations should be provided to by the Defendant to Building Control.

    Miscellaneous

    20.

    8(a) – (c)

    No timing or manual controls have been provided for the hot water (DM, para 6.15)

    Controls should be supplied and installed.

    £180.00 (DM, para 6.15)

    21.

    Furniture will have to be removed and stored offsite whilst the above works are undertaken (DM, para 6.3)

    £470.00 (DM, para 6.3)

    Sub-total

    £27,290.00

    [AMEND]

    In addition to the costs particularised above, the Claimant will incur contractors’ preliminaries of 15% on the works yet to be carried undertaken

    £3,988.50

    VAT upon the above costs

    £6,257.70

    TOTAL

    £37,536.20

    [AMEND]

    *In addition to the foregoing, Mr Moles has not been able to confirm the suitability of the ground screw piles used in the construction of the Annex, having not been provided with any site tests or design calculations from either Stop Digging (the piling supplier / sub-contractor) or the Defendant. The Claimant will seek disclosure of this information from the Defendant and reserves the right to amend these pleadings in the event that the said information evidences any further breach of contract.

    Ashtons Legal

    Trafalgar House

    Meridian Way

    Norwich

    Norfolk

    NR7 0TA

    Ref: TB/260559-0002

    Updates

    0

    samantha elmhurst

    Updates appear here

      5 years ago

      samantha elmhurst started crowdfunding

      Leave a message of support

      Page last updated on: 2/6/2019 15.42

      Supporters

      0

        What is crowdfunding?

        Crowdfunding is a new type of fundraising where you can raise funds for your own personal cause, even if you're not a registered charity.

        The page owner is responsible for the distribution of funds raised.

        Great people make things happen

        Do you know anyone in need or maybe want to help a local community cause?

        Create you own page and donʼt let that cause go unfunded!

        About Crowdfunding
        About the fundraiser
        samantha elmhurst

        samantha elmhurst

        Report this Page