Recently lived in a new(ish) build for a year (rented).
On that basis.
Plumbing (particularly the primary circuit) that doesn't leak.
Kitchen appliances that work and aren't *the* cheapest that money can buy.
Carpet. And by carpet I mean something thicker and more durable than paper.
Laminate floors, see carpet.
Doors that (a) fit (b) shut (c) have functional handles and latches.
A front door that locks.
Sewage pipes that don't deposit their contents right under the house & front lawn, and are instead connected to the main drains.
sorry, can we rewind a bit here?
OP, you're thinking of buying a new house, and they're not tiling he bathroom for you, or including a doorbell?
is that standard for new builds?
With our new build (2007) we got a load of money to spend on 'options' as an incentive - didn't really have to haggle. Could have had it as a discount instead.
There was no turf in the back garden by default (we landscaped it before turfing so that suited us) this is normal afaik, it was the same in 1980 when my parents bought our new build house, and I think also in 1977 when they bought the previous one. We got loads of great topsoil though - stuff grows really well in there. 6ft fencing was an extra we paid for, because whilst you did get a free fence it was only 4ft high chainlink.
We specced up the kitchen and bathrooms with the rest of the money, and had a few extra sockets and lighting points etc. With hindsight I'd have gone for extra paving in the back garden instead of the token 8ftx8ft section, as doing it myself was a ballache. Likewise full tiled bathroom - we got shower and bath surrounds free, but all walls tiled was extra. Showers were not included in the bathroom, but we also had a shower room which obviously had one in.
We also did not get a doorbell, likewise in any of the new builds I can remember.
As for why do people buy new builds - because they're new, and it's quite nice to have a completely clean new house that no-one else has lived in. There were snags in ours, of course, but nothing major - and there were no rotten/broken/leaking/scruffy bits and no dodgy DIY disasters either! Nor are the boiler/heating/oven/electrics near the end of their lives or in any kind of bad condition. It's also very well insulated.
Old is not necessarily better.
PS this was Wimpey, for the record.
Ask for a pot of the paint they have used. It'll be like a magnolia chalk board in there. You only have to look at the walls for them to mark. And you cant wipe off the marks, as they only put 0.001nm of paint on the walls.
Our Bovis home came with tiles and door handles and all the while goods. It also came with plaster dust everywhere. Hairline cracks on the stairs, smallest garage ever and a lovely rubble garden.
Bovis do give you a 2 yr warrantee on everything, including white goods, then a 10 yr guarantee on the building.
...... and door handles
No expense spared eh ?
"Old is not necessarily better"
Nor is new.
At least with old you dont mind fixing a few issues , if it was new id expect it to be perfect. The only new house ive been in that was perfect was when i rented off a couple who had refurbed their steading into two houses , they clearly spent money and kept on top of the builder. It was a great place to be.
My dad was foreman on a large housing companies site and actually walked off the job when he snagged a street of newly completed houses and his area manager told him " just see if the customer complains about it and we will sort it out eventually"
Nor is new.
Of course. The thing is, the way they have to work, snags are inevitable. The stuff that was wrong in our house was all fairly minor and what I'd expect given it had just been a building site full of builders. It would be nice to have someone go over every detail carefully finishing everything off perfectly, but I'm not sure it's realistic in a bog standard property. There was a development of luxury houses nearby around the same time, to a much higher spec, and I'd have expected them to be much better finished cos they cost far more.
We did rent a brand new flat once that was in a block advertised as luxury, and to be fair that was spot on, very nicely finished.
After buying a couple of new houses in the past the only experience I'd put forward is to just plan on getting stuff fixed yourself rather than getting involved in the whole snagging 'proceedure'.
Easier, less hassle and at least it's your money therefore you can demand the quality you want.
I have a similar opinion to new builds as the negative people here but wonder if that's mostly just the lower price ones? Once you get to 4 bed detached things are they generally OK?
BTW, often wondered how 'Executive Homes' got their name - do executives really live in them? The just seem to be fairly dull 4/5 bed places though with a bit more to them than the average estate box I suppose.
My brother is a quantity surveyor for the civil part of housing estates, and he comments that the building companies only allow 27 days including laying the foundations to make a house ready to be moved into........
He's worked on sites where you can only dig foundations when the tide is out as its so wet, and they have to have life rings due to the flooding. Also most houses are also going up before the concrete in foundations has cured.
Personally I would avoid new builds, but you can have this wonderful wish list of what conditions they will have to accept for you to buy a house, however they are plenty of people who will buy the house without the list, so they will just sell it to them.
Mind you my dad worked on houses post war, and he remembers houses being built on ash blocks on there sides are there wasn't enough concrete around for the foundations, so those are ones to avoid as well...
Foundations.
....and they have to have life rings due to the flooding.
So keep away from a house if it comes with life rings/buoys......is that what you're saying ?
So keep away from a house if it comes with life rings/buoys......is that what you're saying ?
No, buy a boat instead...... or don't buy a house built in marshlands
No, buy a boat instead....
That sounds suspiciously like saying 'keep away from a house if it comes with life rings/buoys'.
Although you're claiming no.
How confusing !
I have a similar opinion to new builds as the negative people here but wonder if that's mostly just the lower price ones?
Hard to say - shoddy small local builders perhaps?
We went around the completed houses (and not-quite completed) in our development and I had a good look around for evidence of shoddy workmanship.
It would be nice to have someone go over every detail carefully finishing everything off perfectly, but I'm not sure it's realistic in a bog standard property. There was a development of luxury houses nearby around the same time, to a much higher spec, and I'd have expected them to be much better finished cos they cost far more.
It's this lack of expectation and further willingness to accept poor workmanship/service which has blighted not just the construction industry in this country.
The quality of fittings and finishes in a new home will certainly effect the cost of the property, but why should it be acceptable or even expected that because you pay a little less you should get not only less spec, but have what you do get installed or fitted with less care.
It's easy to make a laminate worktop as neat as a granite one. Yes the overall effect will be less pleasing and that is what the cost difference should show. Not s**t workmanship or a lack of caring because.... Oh these f***kers aren't spending as much so we don't need to give a s**t on this pile of crap.
It's this lack of expectation and further willingness to accept poor workmanship/service which has blighted not just the construction industry in this country.
What choice do I have? Hassle the builders when on-site? We did that.
The reason it's cheaper to do it less well is that it takes less time, and you can employ less people do finish the houses, of course.
I lived in a new build once, was a small developer who used a small local builder (Who is now, unsurprisingly, bust). Everything about the build was bad - plumbing, insulation, drains collapsed... and on and on. I remember being out front one day, and one of the new builds across the road was being inspected by the clerk of works (or whatever they're called now) As far as I could see, he was snagging the path down to the pavement from the front door for being too steep for wheelchair access.
Up came the ground workers, after he had gone, and they proceeded to lift the turf on the lawn, and dump down the slabs straight on the topsoil, so that it ran at an angle across the lawn, and was hence not as steep. No footings or anything, just slabs onto dirt.
I lasted 7 whole months in that house before getting rid.
Just for balance, my best man bought a new build from Stewart Milne homes, one of the biggest developers in Scotland, when he put a socket checker in it failed. It failed on all the sockets. Turns out there wasn't any earthing in the entire house, only live and neutral.
Anyway, back to the OP. Why do you need extras? Is the house not worth what you are paying?.
...willingness to accept poor workmanship/service which has blighted not just the construction industry in this country.
So what else do you think has been "blighted" in this country ?
I'm sure you can figure that out for yourself Ernest. You're a clever lad after all.
Sewage pipes that don't deposit their contents right under the house & front lawn, and are instead connected to the main drains.
My folks moved with Dad's job when I was a teenager and had the above. 2-3 days in, Mum emptied the bath and the ground floor loo exploded. New hall carpets and skirtings...
Concrete mix was splattered all over the back windows so asked for it to be cleaned before we moved in. All rear windows were scratched and had to be replaced.
Mum put a picture up in the middle of a wall and the hammer was blown out of her hand and a live nail left sticking out, they had used diagonal cable runs off the sockets to the wall lights to save a bit of cable.
The 'snagging' list run to several sides of A4. My current 1870 house had nearly as bad when we moved in but these are supposed to be the Pro's, not DIY SOS!
I'm sure you can figure that out for yourself Ernest. You're a clever lad after all.
I can't imagine that I'm as clever as you.
So what else according to you has poor workmanship/service "blighted" in this country, apart from the construction industry ?
You're making the claim - explain it.
Or can't you ?
What choice do I have? Hassle the builders when on-site? We did that.The reason it's cheaper to do it less well is that it takes less time, and you can employ less people do finish the houses, of course.
"What choice do I have?" Really?
I'm fully aware of the logistics and reasons behind cost savings. I'm just asking. Why it should be acceptable. In my opinion and experience, it ultimately takes less time to do a job properly in the first place. Les expensive materials don't come with instructions to fit with less care.
haha nobeer
mr milne has previous up here..... having a party and your kitchen floor colapses....i know...ill put up signs saying maximum occupancy.....
"What choice do I have?" Really?
Yes, really. What choice do *I* have, when buying houses? Shall I only look for perfectly finished houses? That'll discount 80% of what's out there, even if I could afford the 20%.
Les expensive materials don't come with instructions to fit with less care.
The same forces that require less expensive materials also require less expensive labour, which means more rushed. I'd have thought this was fairly obvious.
The same forces that require less expensive materials also require less expensive labour, which means more rushed.
What's obvious is you're already defeated.
Note. There's no such thing as perfection, but that doesn't mean the pursuit should be abandoned.
So what else according to you has poor workmanship/service "blighted" in this country, apart from the construction industry ?
I don't know if I'm more or less clever than you. But I am clever enough to know that if you took the time to read my post correctly. That's not what I said.
That's not what I said.
It's exactly what you said :
...willingness to accept poor workmanship/service which has blighted not just the construction industry in this country.
So according to you poor workmanship and service has blighted "not just" the construction industry in this country.
OK you don't want to give me examples of other areas where poor workmanship and service has blighted this country, so you're now back-tracking and suggesting that you didn't mean what you said. Fair enough.
What's obvious is you're already defeated.
I chased up the builders, I got most of the big stuff fixed, but some small stuff remained and I had to fix it myself. There comes a point when the reward doesn't justify the expenditure.
As you're struggling to read it Ernest. I'll do it for you.
It's this lack of expectation and further willingness to accept poor workmanship/service
I guess I am cleverer than you after all.
Yeah you're back-tracking alright.
You claim there is a willingness to accept poor workmanship in "not just" the construction industry and that it has "blighted" this country.
But you can't back up that claim. As I said, fair enough.
We had, from memory:
Drains in the street blocked, bubbles coming out of the downstairs toilet. When we told the builders they looked shocked and literally dropped (well, put down) what they were doing and ran down to unblock it - it'd filled with rubble.
A kitchen cabinet had a chip in it. They tried to spray it (white cupboards) but it a crap effort, so they got some guy in a day later who did it flawlessy
The cooker was fitted slightly too low - fixed
Boiler control unit failed (common according to Google, design flaw). They had a stash of new units and fitted a new one
Something happened to the bath, I forget what - the guy came round and fixed it but fitted the side panel badly. I complained and they came round and fixed it
Patch of insufficient grout in the shower, top corner - complained, never fixed.
There were quite a few other little things.. can't remember now tho.
Ernest. Your pettiness is tedious and I can't imagine why you think I need to explain myself to you. What are you, the post police?
I made the point I wanted to make, but Christ, I'm hoping this will shut you up.
I'm old enough to have experienced the crap products that have been offered to English consumers and ultimately faded away. (Yes some have returned years later but not in their original guise.)
BSA
Norton
Aerial
Triumph
Rover
Austin
Hillman
Lucas electric
These are just some of the manufacturers that produced items so poorly designed and assembled that as soon as alternatives became available, consumers quickly forgot their loyalties.
The managements arrogance and belief that they had the market stitched was reflected in particular within the motorcycle makers ranks. They couldn't accept people would purchase Japanese machines and refused to develop technologically to keep up.
However, what I was saying in my post is that [b]a willingness to accept mediocrity fuels apathy in service.[/b]
Edit: What I'm referring to has been quite effectively described in the latest advert for Plusnet broadband.
However, what I was saying in my post is that a willingness to accept mediocrity fuels apathy in service.
I disagree, actually. This is a rather interesting economic topic.
People shop on quality and price. Some people will go for quality but more will go for price. The market for cheaper things is far greater than that for quality items, so companies try as hard as they can to make stuff cheap. As long as it's acceptable to enough people it's worth their while.
It's nothing to with being ripped off or conned - it's just market forces at work.
If you need two cars, would you rather have two Fiestas or one Mercedes? Woudl you rather have a 4 bed Wimpey home or a 2 bed luxury flat, when you have 3 kids?
We would all rather have better quality, but in many cases that exists - we just can't afford it.
I understand your argument molgrips and it's a valid one for sure. I can't argue that you're wrong. But I honestly think it's a double edged sword.
Consumers are a very complex species... Don't you think that maybe it's because the market is swamped with similar products. Some are about the same price but not the same quality.
Companies rely on the unwillingness of a lot of consumers to follow through with complaints and use that to make extra profit from inferior products.
I can't imagine why you think I need to explain myself to you.
You don't have to. I asked to a question, you didn't have to answer it.
So anyway, after initially denying you meant what you said you eventually changed your mind and offered me examples of things which have "blighted" this country, other than the construction industry. Only they are all examples of products from decades ago which unsurprisingly are no longer in production.
So it would appear that, according to you at least, it's just the construction industry which is "blighting" this country now. Jolly good.
Jesus Ernie, You're like a dog with a bloody bone!
Ernest. Honestly, I mean it. Please leave me alone. I will never be your friend. I don't care how clever you are. Frankly it's boring. Well done.
I'm small, you're large.
I'm sad and humiliated.
My arguments and opinions are crap, yours are brilliant.
You've put me in my place and I realise now.
Can you send me your email address and I'll forward the money.
Just leave me alone.
Companies rely on the unwillingness of a lot of consumers to follow through with complaints and use that to make [b]extra profit[/b] from inferior products.
Well yes, this is a good point. Are the builders cutting costs to line their own pockets, or are they doing it to compete with other builders who are undercutting them?
The former would be their fault, the latter ours (as consumers).
Former. It also works in the commercial market. Some contractors are more aggressive them other. Bottom line and balance sheets.
Are the builders cutting costs to line their own pockets, or are they doing it to compete with other builders who are undercutting them?
I would say both occur depending on the builder. There are builders who will unscrupulously cut corners to save costs. And those that are conscientious and will try to cut costs to be competitive without compromising their own ethics and quality.
The former is of course harder, but reputation and recommendation is any tradesman's best advertisement and these tradesmen are nearly always busy.
To go back to something in one of your previous posts. I think that track home builders (large) produce more consistently poor quality products. Small builders are more hit and miss and so that's why a good one is so sought after. Yes people want cheaper, but only to a point and why tradesmen often get jobs even though theirs is not the cheapest quote.
I think that demand allows the bigger firms to operate and survive even though they are probably less likely to insist their product is finely finished for the mass market.
Incidentally, I have worked in the construction industry for many years and experienced first hand bullying from agents attempting to force a job along without a care in the world for the resulting quality issues.
One reason that I turn down any request to work for them now. I don't need the stress or the bad karma.
Jesus Ernie, You're like a dog with a bloody bone!
Like I said, I asked question, he didn't have to answer it. I didn't repeat it. He chose to falsely claim that I hadn't read his post properly. Obviously he thought I would drop it because presumably that's what usually happens when he makes patronising and condescending comments to people. Unfortunately I couldn't give a monkeys how patronising and condescending someone is 🙂
Our house was built by one of the biggest, but we had nothing like the horror stories mentioned here. Lucky maybe.
Problem is, there are so few houses to choose from at any one time.
Lived for 18 years in a inter war solid brick built, hipped roof semi. Spent thousands on it and continued to do so up until the rats came which was the final straw. Damp, dry rot, wood worm, the rats (mentioned earlier), drafts under skirting, constantly crumbling mortar, hollow and crazed plaster, quarry tiles on sand on half the downstairs floors, cold solid external walls which would insist on growing mildew on anything that was leant against it, a loft floor full of the torching that fell out of the roof, overspanned timer rafters that had bowed and cracked every upstairs ceiling, rising damp, slipping wall plates overhanging the external walls. The place cost a fortune to heat despite new windows, insulation, new heating system.
The house looked great from the roadside but you have to live in one to appreciate the money pit that old houses can be.
Sold it, bought a new build from Miller Homes 4 years ago and apart from a handful of popped plasterboard nails and a loose letter box flap I couldn't be happier with it. The place came with a 2 year no quibble call out for anything we had an issue with and the usual 10 year NHBC warranty. Yep heard horror stories about the NHBC thing but that's still far better than the sold as seen arrangement you get with non new builds.
Much rather spend my weekend biking than repairing whatever the hell fell off my house that week and nice not to be chucking money at DIY materials.
The reason it's cheaper to do it less well is that it takes less time, and you can employ less people do finish the houses, of course.
If the construction industry grasped prefab properly they could get far higher standards at the same cost and a lot less time on site.
It is a conservative industry and unfortunately, legislation largely supports it. Houses are given permission on how they look over how they perform is one example. Building is largely inward-looking and only meets the minimum standards rather than aspiring to better and making that a feature of the house.
