I and my 5 neighbours will soon be having our foul drainage system repaired/replaced by the NHBC under the Buildmark Warranty.
The NHBC do not consider it necessary to fully resurface the private road or the individual driveways that will be affected - all bitmac. We are not happy with the cut-and-fill repair proposed, given how much of the surface will be damaged by the work, but are unsure how far to press the point.
Is there a rule-of-thumb or other guidance that can be used to determine whether a cut-and-fill approach is workmanlike?
Is there a point beyond which full resurfacing should be considered?
Do you think this point is reached earlier on private roads/driveways vs public roads/pathways?
It's taken nearly 3 years to reach agreement with the NHBC on how to progress this claim. During that time we have had to be forceful, and so far have 'won' every point, but on this point we don't know if we're being unreasonable.
I would be grateful for any advice.
Repairing bitmac - When to repair vs resurface
-
matt h
- Posts: 607
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:14 pm
- Location: gosport
how can we comment when you,ve given us no information other than there will be extensive damage. o f course it should be re-instated in good order, but how long ago was the original work carried out. i agree that the surface should be as original as possible. Any disruption is likely to cause amess, but as to how the contractors carry out the works and to what finish must be specified before the work commences, otherwise the repairing contractor gets caught in the middle, which is unfair. Suggest you seek local arbitration, then both, or better all parties are clear on what is going to happen and so stops all the agro. it is the agro which causes these projects to drag on and on. come to an agreement and the things should run smoothly;)
general builder, maintenance engineer, gas and plumbing installations, extensions etc
-
Sue Bell
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:57 pm
I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear, but I was asking whether there was any general guidance that I could apply to my situation, not a comment on my situation. However, since you ask...
We have a 4m x 55m private road and 3 driveways affected. The road and 1 driveway are black bitmac, the other 2 driveways are red bitmac.
We will have a 500mm wide trench the full length of the private road to a new manhole at the end of the close (to accommodate a new sewage pipe laid at a different fall to the original). There will be 500mm trenches for 6 laterals to this new pipe. These will be as long as is necessary to allow the original laterals to be relaid to the new fall and connected to the new pipe. We expect them to extend the full width of the road and go someway in to the drives. Two of the laterals currently feed in to the original manhole, so their position is known exactly, but there will be further trenches (we assume a stretch from each end of the close) to locate the other four laterals. The old pipe along the length of the close will be cleansed and sealed and the old manhole filled in.
The properties and the road are just under 10 years old. The current bitmac surfaces are in good condition with no damage except for a crack in my driveway from a tree root (unsuitable tree planted by the developer and since removed).
We have had a quote from a reputable local contractor who estimates the cost of resurfacing the road as £6000 and the driveways as £8200 (excl VAT and assuming black bitmac).
My primary concern is the road as this is worst affected. I don't think we can reasonably expect the driveways to be resurfaced, given they will each only have 1 trench and the length is unknown.
We have a 4m x 55m private road and 3 driveways affected. The road and 1 driveway are black bitmac, the other 2 driveways are red bitmac.
We will have a 500mm wide trench the full length of the private road to a new manhole at the end of the close (to accommodate a new sewage pipe laid at a different fall to the original). There will be 500mm trenches for 6 laterals to this new pipe. These will be as long as is necessary to allow the original laterals to be relaid to the new fall and connected to the new pipe. We expect them to extend the full width of the road and go someway in to the drives. Two of the laterals currently feed in to the original manhole, so their position is known exactly, but there will be further trenches (we assume a stretch from each end of the close) to locate the other four laterals. The old pipe along the length of the close will be cleansed and sealed and the old manhole filled in.
The properties and the road are just under 10 years old. The current bitmac surfaces are in good condition with no damage except for a crack in my driveway from a tree root (unsuitable tree planted by the developer and since removed).
We have had a quote from a reputable local contractor who estimates the cost of resurfacing the road as £6000 and the driveways as £8200 (excl VAT and assuming black bitmac).
My primary concern is the road as this is worst affected. I don't think we can reasonably expect the driveways to be resurfaced, given they will each only have 1 trench and the length is unknown.
-
Dave_L
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4732
- Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 8:47 pm
- Location: Somerset
- Contact:
Aslong as the re-instatement of the road surface is of sound quality and is tidy, I don't think there is much you can demand.
Who is carrying out these works?
Who is carrying out these works?
RW Gale Ltd - Civils & Surfacing Contractors based in Somerset
See what we get up to Our Facebook page
See what we get up to Our Facebook page
-
Sue Bell
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:57 pm
Thanks Dave. I thought that might be the case. We're all responsible for the drains, but only 4 of the 6 households are responsible for the road surface. They aren't happy with the solution and want to push it, and I'm stuck in the middle as the current "residents' representative" (it's taken so long to resolve that we take it in turns!). It's best to know what the accepted standards are.
In answer to your question, we don't who the contractor is and that's part of the problem. The NHBC claim they won't engage one until we agree the works and we won't agree the works until we know exactly what they plan to do. They have so far refused to produce a full specification, just a schedule (which seems to be a pricing mechanism). It doesn't include all the work necessary, and what it does cover isn't in any detail. It says things like 'reinstate the paving and put in a ramp or step' without saying which, where, of what material, what tread/riser...
In answer to your question, we don't who the contractor is and that's part of the problem. The NHBC claim they won't engage one until we agree the works and we won't agree the works until we know exactly what they plan to do. They have so far refused to produce a full specification, just a schedule (which seems to be a pricing mechanism). It doesn't include all the work necessary, and what it does cover isn't in any detail. It says things like 'reinstate the paving and put in a ramp or step' without saying which, where, of what material, what tread/riser...