Paving query - Views on completed works

[Slabhappy]

Greetings all, I worked on a recent project which included the replacement of an existing driveway. My specification replicated the marshalls recommendations for new tegula setts for a flexible construction.

The work was completed right at the end of the job and prior to commencement of the paving the existing driveway setts had been removed and the area used as a loading area for the refurbishment of the property. At no point did I see levels reduced for sub base, and nor was existing ground appear to be a suitable sub base. Ground is made up shaley slate and soil.

Imagine my surprise to find paviours being laid on sand directly over this ground. When queried have had the following responses from contactor. 1 Ground was rock hard. 2 No need for sub base as I've put cement in the sand. At this point I reffered back to specification and the next day and to the final 30% of the area, ground was suddenly reduced and type 1 installed. Thereafter I raised the issue of final alignment and compaction and sand filling of joints. Minimal sad filling only followed.

Needless to say we are in dispute but I would be interested in views, particularly use of cement in sand?

I am able to remove individual setts easily with screw driver, just in case you were wondering!

[dig dug dan]

Oh dear.no subbase and cememt in the sand? He was a clown, and its not right. Once the blocks are properly laid, compacted and kiln dried is in, they are not easily removed.

[r896neo]

This is an easy one because you had an agreed specification.

This kind of nonsense happens frequently but in your case you had the spec which the quote was based on and he has completely ignored it.

If he hasn't done what he quoted for then why should you pay him until he does?

In this case if what your saying is all true he has deliberately tried to pull a fast one on you and is therefore a dishonest cowboy.

But there are two sides to every story so are you sure of all your facts?
est You really need to dig down in 4/5 test areas to confirm what exactly is in there? Perhaps he isn't lying about the sub base?

The cement though is a bit of an alarm bell though that he is clueless

[lutonlagerlout]

I guess you were the architect and by the sounds of it they wanted to get out quickly
is there a retention on the job?
ground *rock hard* is a load of old bollox
get them to redo it properly
LLL

[sy76uk]

I agree with with the above. The MINIMUM amount of compacted hardcore should be 150mm compacted in 2 75mm layers after the edge restraint has been installed so that nothing can spread.

Please do not except any less.
There are far to many cowboys in the paving trade driving prices down for reputable contractors.

[Slabhappy]

All very helpful. Yes I'm a surveyor (please try not to use the A (rchitect) word). I thought I'd post it as I've found this website really helpful in the past and as somebody has pointed out, you always have to consider both sides of the storey. What I actually did was document what he claimed to have done at the time and that was to install a sub base to part of the ground. I'm dealing here with a contractor who appears to shun assistance and direction when offered. He stated at the time that neighbours could vouch for the sub base, though my and his client visited site practically every day, so when I pointed out following the sub base install on last 30%, the extent of excavation and waste that arises from such work, the client or I just can't recall at what point in the job he actually installed sub base in the initial area. Let's face it it's not the sort of thing you miss when doing site visits nearly every day. His actual words were 'do you think I've just laid it soil!'

Personally if you're in a hole I say stop digging but he just wanted to carry on so I just let him and I haven't included the work in any valuation. He made a poor attempt at compaction, well no attempt actually as he stated this wasn't required and that I was talking out my arse. As I say when in a hole, so I waited for him to finish as the client would otherwise be left with waste ground in front of their house and haven't paid. He went of holiday so I went back and was just able to pull odd setts out. A raked through the sand (and cement - yes I still have no clue why he thought this was right), anyway I just found what IO thought I would and that was soil/slate shale, the original made up ground)

Anyway, despite telling me he had laid the sub base to about 70% at the time, the other 30% being rock hard, his latest offering is that the whole ground was bedrock. His actual words in writing are the external driveway has been largely founded on rock substrata. The blocks have been subsequently been laid on a sand and cement bed overlying either the rock or sub-base up to 150mm. This construction detail provides an extremely robust footing. I am unclear as to why I have not been paid for this work particularly as I have agreed to offer assurances that I will undertake remedial works should any blocks subside (however, as I have stated above this will not occur given the rock substrate)

I should point out as I'm hoping you're all loving this that this is the same contractor who's made a big deal of the fact the ground is actually made up ground on this site when it came to digging the footings at the back of the house, about 5m away and is shit for digging in. This is the only thing he's right about and for which we paid some additional monies and awarded a reasonable extension of time.

Once again thanks in advance for any comments. This is worst aspect of overseeing work, dealing with contractors who lack knowledge and the experience, and also the humility to accept when things don't go right you need to put it right.

[lutonlagerlout]

anyone who swears during site meetings is a goner for me

if the spec says 100mm or 150 mm that is what MUST go in.
its not optional
its not the hardest thing in the world to put right
the rutting likely will start within 6 months and then he will be too busy to come back

the sand and a sprinkle of cement is pure ignorance of flexible paving
LLL

[Slabhappy]

Thanks LLL - Difficult though when experience is substituted by arrogance. It was all avoidable but with hindsight I don't think the guy understands the role of the designer, the importance of sticking to a specification, after all it's there to protect him just as much, as if it later failed on account of incorrect specification at least he could refer the client back to me. It appears a question of, this is what I think is right irrespective of what I have in fact priced and instructed to do.

Would I trust him to rectify it properly - no, as he clearly doesn't understand the basics of flexible driveway design. Clearly printed out the Marshalls domestic driveway specification and handing it to him wasn't clear enough for him on this occasion. Once again thanks.

[mickg]

who decided to use this contractor you or the client ?

[Dave_L]

Pay 50% of the valuation now and 50% in 12 mths upon no defects in the paving?

[Slabhappy]

Tenders for property refurbishment requested from 5 contractors, a small part of which was this element of paving.

I'd consider paying a %, but would first have to agree a saving on the work not carried out and then the client would also ultimately have to make the decision. Personally, I would rather the job done right and no potential for latent defects.