|
|
Buying a Wimpey
Home in
NHBC:
Two days later (29 June 2000) the NHBC vindicated my
position and condemned some of the brickwork. Unfortunately the NHBC only
condemned the small jobs (rebuild a window sill, pointing and cleaning)
and not the large one. (Rebuild the top half of the flank wall) Wimpey
Homes (having threatened to rescind the contract) initially challenged
the NHBC, and then reluctantly agreed to carry out some remedial work.
The flank wall was cleaned and the large mortar joints were
‘painted’ to match the brickwork.
LIES: (one example)
The NHBC investigator Mr Bullen,
agreed to re-inspect the remedial works if I requested it, and the
Wimpey representative, Mr Care agreed to arrange another meeting when the
remedial work was complete.
Wimpey Homes and the NHBC did not arrange another meeting
with me but arranged to pass the remedial work without my knowledge or
presence. I was only 5 minutes walk away at the
time, but no one bothered to contact me. I have since discovered that the NHBC
has very small teeth and is largely funded by the building industry. When you
purchase a new property with NHBC 10 year insurance, you are paying a premium
to insure the builder against faults in their own work.
MOVING FENCES:
In April 2000 I was sent a second ‘Transfer Plan’ to sign. This is
a small plan with the plot highlighted that looked identical to the first one.
The scale (1:1000) is very small and impossible to measure accurately. As it
appeared identical to the first one, I innocently signed it, not realising that
Wimpey Homes had moved the back fence a further 0.6M into my garden. I lost
about 8M sq. It seemed like ‘theft by deception’
to me, as I was
contracted to buy the larger plot, but I did not question it. However, that was
not the end of the matter. Before I moved into my house, my neighbour paid£ to
have the side fence moved towards my property. This time I did question it. The Wimpey Homes site manager at the
time, Tony Jenner, said he had moved the fence and widened my neighbours gate
and path, as a favour to my neighbour.
Wimpey Homes moved the fences on a first come, first served basis.
Wimpey Director Mr Dodds said: (Friday 08 June 2001) ‘Wimpey have no
record of the fence being moved’, (it was unofficial), yet shortly before
completion (August 2000) my solicitor was given a 1:200 scale plan with
two fence-lines for one boundary.
Wimpey Homes legal department cannot explain whether
these two lines are due to fence movement or incorrect surveying!
One fence-line is marked ‘as surveyed on 05 April’ (2000) and
the other is marked ‘fence-line as now.’
The fence-line ‘as surveyed at 05 April’ is fictitious and was never in the position indicated by this
plan. The fence actually moved approx 1M at one end, not 158mm as
indicated by this plan. On the ground, this ‘T’ junction is the only one with
no post at the centre of the junction (until the fence was rebuilt in
July 03). This is because the fence was moved from the post 1M to the
north side of existing.
Even the Wimpey director Mr Dodds (on
08 June 2001) did not believe that anyone would pull up a fence, and
rebuild it at the same position one end and 158mm different at the other end as
shown on the Wimpey Homes plan.
PARENT PLANS
I asked to see a larger scale (1:200) ‘Parent’ of the
‘Transfer Plan’. Wimpey legal director Mr Phillips, wrote in his letter dated
30 November 2001, that he is ‘unable to provide me with a large scale ‘parent’ of the ‘Transfer
Plan’ as ‘my Client Company (Wimpey Homes) as well as their external Land Surveyor having searched high and
low for an “original” or better quality copy of the 1:200 plan, they have been
unable to locate the same’.
Wimpey are still building houses 100 metres from my door (till
2003) and I find it hard to believe that CAD (Computer Aided Design)
drawings cannot be reproduced at the click of a mouse.
(Wimpey managed to find a corrupted plan
on 16 January 2002, but not the plan in force at the time of purchase.)
CHANGING CONTRACTS:
My garden and my contract, were
altered to my detriment, twice.
When the fence position was queried, Wimpey Homes
attitude was ‘accept a
smaller garden or we will rescind the contract.’
I now find that the garden is smaller than the third and final plan
that my solicitor was given on completion!
On 08 June 2001, (10 months after completion) Wimpey Director Mr Dodds said the
final plan “was of no
legal consequence. I don’t know who produced it or what its purpose was”.
COVERING THE TRACKS OF PREVIOUS EMPLOYEES
The land in question is small, but it has become important, because
of:
1.
Wimpey Homes position of ‘covering the tracks’ of their previous employees, who reposition fences
unofficially on a first come, first served basis;
2.
Wimpey Homes providing incorrect and altered plans.
3.
Wimpey Homes threats and intimidation.
4.
The bigoted attitude of my racist neighbour.
I was not concerned about the loss of a few square metres of
land until my neighbour Jim Dunn, (now ex-neighbour-who has a previous conviction for theft) pulled
up my hedge from my front lawn, assaulted and racially abused my wife, all
for another strip of my land just 2 inches wide. He and his wife made false
statements to the police, then took me to court on a
false charge, with the help of his friend Ray Whiteman (also a petty
thief, now ex-neighbour, with a police warning for harassment) who made
a false statement, three and a half months after the event! (he was not at home at the time)
This led to a court case, after a corrupt and biased police investigation. A Greenwich Police Officer lied in a
letter to my MP John Austin Another officer was economical with the truth,
providing a misleading statement, and unfairly supported my racist neighbours. The
police spent 18 months investigating themselves and concluded no officer had
committed a criminal offence.
SURVEY:
Further to the incident with my
neighbour, both my solicitor and myself communicated
with Wimpey Managing Director at the time, Keith Cushen,
in an attempt to correct the position of the boundary fence.
Mr Cushen
authorised a survey, which turned out to be a farce.
When asked for a copy of the surveyors
report, Wimpey Director Mr Dodds originally said it was
with the legal department. He later denied the existence of any report and
wrote to me saying:
“I believe the fenceline is in accordance with the boundaries as shown on
the transfer plan lodged with the land registry”. Mr Dodds may believe he can walk to the moon but it is not
necessarily true.
It is a matter of facts and figures – not
beliefs.
Mr Dodds did not
produce any report or figures to support his claim,
and the fenceline does not comply with the plans
supplied by Wimpey Homes themselves.
FALSIFICATION OF PLANS:
16 January 02
Wimpey Legal Director, Mr Phillips, sent me a 1:200 copy of the ‘Record Survey’. As he well knows, it is of no use to my
surveyor or me, as heavy black lines (equivalent to 0.6M on the ground),
obscure all the boundary lines. I asked for another copy of the plan where the
boundary lines are visible.
13 February 02
Mr Phillips sends me another version of the ‘Record Survey’.
Although it has the same drawing number and revision number as the
16 January plan, some boundary lines have disappeared and others have been
altered!
CONTEMPT
John Austin MP wrote on my behalf,
to Keith Cushen, MD George Wimpey UK Ltd, to ask for
his comments regarding these two different plans with the same Title,
drawing number, and revision letter (531 13-01 J Record Survey). They show
significant differences (Boundary lines moved, altered or deleted) and
they were produced 11 months after I purchased my property.
Mr Cushen chose to ignore my MPs request and failed to mention
these plans in his reply, dated 17 June 2002. The variations in these two plans
are yet another example of deceit, deliberate falsification and evasion of the
truth by George Wimpey PLC.
Managing Director Mr Cushen, ignored my MP’s request for an explanation of the falsified plans.
BULLYING & GET OUT CLAUSES:
I asked for compensation for the three months
delay in completion.
A modest sum (to cover basic expenses) was put forward by
Wimpey Homes and it was accompanied by totally unreasonable ‘get out clauses’, forbidding me
from ever complaining about the substandard brickwork again.
Once again, Wimpey Homes attitude
was: ‘accept the poor brickwork and complete on our terms, by a certain date,
otherwise we will rescind the contract.’
COERCION:
I was forced to complete under ‘economic coercion’. I was fortunate in that I was not in a chain like many homebuyers,
nevertheless I could not wait longer than 3 months for my house.
INDIFFERENCE:
Wimpey Homes appear to have little regard for the quality of their
products, or the legitimate complaints of their customers. There is a total
lack of concern by the management and legal department, for the welfare
of the purchaser. It appears that Wimpey only want your money as fast as
possible. It is a matter of concern, that if I had
not been so insistent, then Wimpey Homes would have happily sold me the house in
much worse condition than at present!
SUMMARY:
My complaint concerns the bullying, lies, corrupt practices
and indifference of Wimpey Homes & George Wimpey management.
The above case is minor compared to some horror stories, never the
less; there are important principles to consider. Buying a house is a major
investment for most people, yet buyers of new homes have few consumer rights, compared
to purchasers of electrical goods or a car. Just as nobody would expect to buy
a new car with scratches or dents, nobody should be expected to buy an
expensive item such as a house, with poor brickwork and the fences in the wrong
place.
Large building companies such as Wimpey Homes should not be allowed
to bully and intimidate buyers into accepting poor work and revised contracts,
whilst threatening to
rescind the contract if
it is not accepted. This may be illegal, but the builder has the upper hand.
Although it may well be possible to win a long and expensive court case, this
is clearly not a viable proposition in most cases.
THE LAW:
New-home buyers need greater protection than that provided
by the NHBC.
New Homes are exempt from the
contact
WimpeyRawDeal at…
All personal details will be treated with confidence and not
passed to a third party without your permission.
Sistersite of www.wimpeyrawdeal.co.uk
A CAMPAIGN SITE – THE
NOMINETRAWDEAL.CO.UK WEBSITE IS PRESENTLY SUSPENDED BY NOMINET
While dealing with a request from WIMPEY HOMES to obtain the domain georgewimpey.co.uk,
(legitimately purchased
by myself) Nominet appear to have bent their own rules to favour the company
George Wimpey,
who did not respond to Nominet in the specified time allowed
during the resolution process.
Nominet emailed me to inform me that George
Wimpey had not responded within the time limit.
Later Nominet rang me to say that George
Wimpey had emailed the wrong address and the resolution
process could now continue.
WOULD NOMINET HAVE BENT THE RULES FOR
ME, OR ANY OTHER INDIVIDUAL?
I DOUBT IT.
…BUT A LARGE MULTI NATIONAL
COMPANY – YES
COULD THIS BE CORRUPTION?
When I first purchased this domain name, no
website was set up.
NOMINET emailed me on 16 Nov 05, to say
that they believed the registrant details were incorrect. They were not
incorrect but nevertheless, I supplied further details to NOMINET on the 18 Nov
05.
As I did not receive any reply from
NOMINET, I emailed Kate Scott of NOMINET again on 27 Nov. 05 asking for
confirmation that the additional information had been received.
NOMINET DID NOT REPLY TO MY
EMAILS
My web hosting company emailed in Sept 06
to remind me that the domain
nominetrawdeal.co.uk was due for renewal in November 06.When I tried to
renew the name nominetrawdeal.co.uk, I
was informed that…
NOMINET HAD SUSPENDED THE DOMAIN
NAME ‘nominetrawdeal.co.uk’
apparently
claiming that the registrant is not a valid entity.
NOMINET DID NOT INFORM ME OF
THIS SUSPENSION
I understand the domain was
released in June 06
I have re-purchased the name
‘nominetrawdeal.co.uk’ for the second time in 10 months.
I am an individual with a
valid campaign site to expose the
bullying
and corrupt practices of NOMINET.
Contact nominetrawdeal
via Nominet@wimpeyrawdeal.com
Thank for visiting this
website