Case Study

The buyer’s complaint

The buyer claimed the builder had not dealt with their complaints regarding snags and defects with the kitchen, flooring and painting and that these issues had been left unresolved for approximately 14 months.

The buyer requested the builder be directed to take action to resolve the issues.

The builder’s defence

The builder did not produce a defence in the matter and made no offer of settlement.

The adjudicator’s findings

The adjudicator noted that by failing to provide a defence, the buyer’s evidence had been assessed on the assumption that the factual matters raised in the buyer’s claim and evidence were undisputed. The adjudicator was satisfied that the builder had not resolved or dealt with the issues satisfactorily as they remained outstanding for a considerable length of time.

The adjudicator commented that a home builder bears a heavy burden in explaining why a delay of 14 months in dealing with complaints is reasonable and found in this case that there was no such explanation from the builder.

Although some of the delay may have been caused by a third party supplier, this did not automatically excuse the builder from its responsibilities under the Code.

Decision

The claim succeeded. The builder was directed to deal with the buyer’s complaint in accordance with the Code and resolve the remaining issues with the kitchen, the under-floor heating and the remaining snags and painting.

Learning points

For buyers

  • The code clearly sets out that builders must provide an accessible after sales service and complaints process – and that these must be followed. If you are unable to resolve complaints with your builder, you can raise a dispute with the Code’s Independent Dispute Resolution Scheme.
  • For more information, download our handy guide to complaints and disputes.

For builders

  • Don’t ignore the Independent Dispute Resolution Scheme. How you respond to disputes can make a material difference to the outcome. The adjudicator can only make decisions based on the information in front of them. Failing to engage with the IDRS is discourteous to the home buyer and could be interpreted as a lack of commitment to customer service in general. In fact, you could face sanctions from your home warranty provider if you don’t engage with the IDRS process, which is a requirement of the Code.
  • It is not enough to have a complaints process – you must also implement it effectively, providing timely updates and keeping buyers informed. Even if you don’t agree with a buyer’s assessment of a situation, you should explain your perspective and aim to resolve issues collaboratively.

Adjudication case HOME008653

Tags

Complaints handling, After-sales, Snagging, Third party services, Succeeded, Remedial works, Flooring

Related Case Studies

Who's supporting The Code