Has your property been damaged by the police station redevelopment?

[Steve Hards]

At the end of November, severe vibration during the demolition of the old Lordship Lane police station site caused some cracking in brickwork in our house in Landcroft Road.

We approached Farrans, the developer, for help with the cost of putting it right but they have refused to give a satisfactory response to numerous emails.

It looks like they are hoping we will go away because we are not immediate neighbours and so not covered by the party wall legislation.

My solicitor has asked me to find out if anyone else has been affected by the demolition or building work, hence my appeal here. If you have, please private message me and/or let us know your experience here.

Thanks, Steve

[James Barber]

Hi Steve,

About a month ago I knocked on immediate neighbours of the new primary school site asking about any such problems and was delighted at how positive those immediate neighbours were with how things progressing and how responsive the building contractors have been. I hasten to add one had had issues arise but the description of how they were dealt with was very reassuring.

So please feel free to email me any issues to see if I can help resolve them.

[Steve Hards]

Thanks, James, I shall email you in a moment.

Our experience has been that the site manager was pleasant and cooperative, but other than his acknowledgement of our emails, we have been ignored for three months now by anyone higher up in the company. That includes their managing director, other directors and some directors of Harris Federation, who commissioned Farrans for this work.

Regards, Steve

[landsberger]

You could always try Harris corporately...

[Steve Hards]

landsberger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You could always try Harris corporately...

Thanks for the suggestion, landsberger, but we did copy a couple of Harris Federation directors into some of our emails to Farrans, but they did not respond either. Perhaps one still has to write 'proper' letters to be taken seriously, but in these days one does expect companies to be a bit lighter on their feet, especially because Farrans' publicity trumpets that they belong to the 'Considerate Constructors Scheme'. This now seems to us to be mere PR window-dressing as 'Protecting the local environment' (part of the scheme's code of practice) doesn't appear to extend to nearby neighbours!

[aerie]

I do not have property affected but nevertheless concerned that there is no nightime red warning light atop the crane on this Whateley Road site, either through a dark cloudy night or dismal misty morn, is this even legal? From my terrace I can see 6 crane lights in the distance but none of the crane before us. This morning especially, thick mist and cloud, helicopters take note.

[rupert james]

How high is this crane?

Will anything be flying this low

[Steve Hards]

Hmm... We have just had an email from Farrans saying that the responsible company is called Mace Group, which appears to have been the contractor to Farrans all along.

It has only taken them nearly 3 months to find a person in the Mace Group who should be communicating with us! We are not holding our breath :)

[Growlybear]

I'm sorry to hear that your property has been damaged by this work, but should you not be making a claim from your buildings insurers rather than trying to pursue the developers yourself? It would then be up to your insurance company to sort out the cause of the damage, and to help you in getting the repair work carried out.

[Steve Hards]

@Growlybear, you are right in the normal course of events but there are some additional circumstances to the costs we are incurring, which I don't want to set out in public, that our insurance won't fully cover. It would be small change and not a big deal to the developer to put us back in the situation we would have been if the damage had not been caused and we had hoped that their proclamations of being a 'considerate constructor' would mean that they would be responsive to our issues.

As a result of our appeal for information two other neighbours have been in touch with us with similar experiences.

[Mick Mac]

I wish you luck Steve - and personally don't doubt that the damage could have been caused by the vibration - but with SE22 being a known subsidence black spot it might be difficult to prove and to compensate a group will potentially become public knowledge and lead to a flood of further claims - you might actually be in a stronger position on a sole claim, they will never admit liability but might be inclined to settle with one person.

[kibris]

If you can get more people to contact the company then they might anmit they have a problem, if its just one person then they might say no one else as contacted us about this matter. I wish you luck and get more people or any photos that show that there was no damage on the property before the work. Also if its outside then try Google Maps as that has a date and clear photos of your property.

[Steve Hards]

@Mick Mac and @kibris - thanks, both for the suggestions. It's not clear at the moment whether a campaign or a softly-softly approach will work best. It will now depend on the quality of the response from Mace. HOWEVER, the Streetview suggestion was brilliant, kibris. The photo, which is from 6 months before, clearly shows that there was no crack at that time.

[Lowlander]

First off, approach them on your own if you have time and confidence, try and get in touch with their legal team; don't explicitly say you want to take legal action (I don't know what your costs are, if under ?5k small claims court).

Sometime a well, strongly worded letter (not email) sent recorded delivery referencing the relevant statutes can work wonders.

Otherwise make sure your solicitor is a good one. Good luck.

[Steve Hards]

Thanks for the advice, Lowlander. Our solicitor was recommended by the structural engineer who is coming to look at it.

I'll let everyone know how we get on!

[Steve Hards]

Just updating, as promised... The structural engineer assessed the cracking on Friday. His conclusion was that it was too minor to worry about or worth pursuing the developers over.

However, it doesn't change the fact that Farrans (and Mace, from whom we have still not heard) have badly managed our attempts to complain!

[Mick Mac]

Who engaged the structural engineer? You or Farrans.

[Steve Hards]

@Mick Mac. I did.