ESCO BUILDERS LTD

In November 2021, I hired ESCO to complete a extension to our property comprising of a bedroom with en-suite and an extension to our porch.

In August 2023, it isn't completed

The work that has been completed took ages and isn't to a great standard. During Christmas 2021 our whole kitchen, downstairs bathroom and ground floor bedroom leaked heavily due to poorly planned and poorly executed work. We were advised to have 2 extension cabled running from our living room to our kitchen to power the electrics to cook. This is obviously dangerous for a 2 month old baby and a 4 year old child.

Our roof spent a good 10 weeks awaiting roof tiles. We were having our whole roof re-tiled, after 10 weeks, 142 tiles turned up. Once all the tiles did turn up after weeks of my mithering, the roof was fitted completely unprofessionally, causing damage to next door property, which ESCO said they would complete but never did. Our bedroom extension had no windows in it for 4 months. Just bordered up. We were given all manner of cockamamie stories as to why this wasn't done. It was apparently Ukraines fault at one point. Turns out the real reason was that ESCO hadn't actually ordered the windows. Evidence from the window supplier to support this. The property has had render board exposed to the elements for coming up to a year. ESCO have said numerous times that they are striving to get a new renderer, this has never been completed. Our en suite bathroom has a free standing bath that is attached to the wall. The ESCO employee couldn't be bothered rectifying this as "he is fed up of having to do this". I presume that means he had made the same mistake somewhere else too, so we had to make do. The under floor heating was exposed for months before any tiles went down on it. When the tiles did get laid down, some needed pulling back up because they had been laid without the probe being underneath. That took 4 weeks to sort. Our porch has a breezeblock exterior. We had to pay for our own windows and front door to be installed. Our bathroom sink was ordered without any foresight by ESCO, so inevitably the wrong size was ordered meaning the door wouldn't close.

There are all manner of things wrong with this build and ESCO have broken so many promises around this. Our work was proposed to be completed on 7/6/2022. It still isn't completed.

There were days/weeks where no ESCO employees were on site because they were at other projects. We had an apprentice bricklayer laying roof tiles without any professional supervision or professional support.

The directors of ESCO have set up a new company - L&P Holdings LTD (14756664). Please be aware of them

What haven't we tried? We have acted graciously and with integrity throughout our communications with ESCO. We have sent numerous emails, messages, whatsapp messages, phone calls to resolve all of these matters. there was even an intermediary brought in by ESCO whom were far more professional and were going to take the job on on behalf of ESCO but ESCO failed to pay them and they left. I'm not sure what else could have been done on our part to resolve this matter

21/08/2023

In response to the dispute registered please see the below; The first paragraph of the dispute does highlight the fact that do to unforeseen circumstances the weather proofing of the works during some quite bad weather proved difficult, but we were always on hand 24/7 to come and rectify any sheeting that had blown off or become dislodged. Some staff members attending the project 8pm onwards. In addition to this the extension that was built by others had faulty and dangerous electrical installations which ESCO rectified for the client free of charge. The leaking was not the cause of poorly executed work or poor planning but due to unforeseen weather conditions. Regarding the roof the Tiles did take a considerable amount of time to come due to lead times for the specific anthracite double roman tile being difficult to acquire at the time. The tiles that came initially were part of a larger order and due to the logistics of the site had to be staggered in their delivery due to space and safety. This was explained to the client at the time. The damage to next door property that you have referred to was flashing that had to be altered to install the new roof. This ‘damage’ was rectified by and independent bonafide subcontractor at the request of the neighbour. Pictures and invoices can be supplied as evidence for this. In regard to the windows at the project these were ordered through a company that received their units from Hungary (NOT Ukraine). When the delays became untenable a meeting was arranged with the client where ESCO was informed that the client wished to source their own windows. The price of the windows was deducted from the price of the works. Regarding Render this was organised and paid for to another bonafide subcontractor and unfortunately the said subcontractor did not deliver the service. This was explained to the client and due to the financial aspect ESCO committed to arranging the render to be done however it would take some time to arrange and pay for. At no point did ESCO ever shun their responsibility on this matter. Regarding the en-suite bathroom, the client is correct that there is a free standing bath against the wall as the bath that was ordered was changed at the clients request. Due to the size of the bathroom against the wall is the only place to bath could have been installed. The underfloor heating was installed by the electrician ahead of the tiler attending the project. This is normal practice and would challenge the statement that it was left exposed for months however this would have zero effect on the installation. The mistake of leaving the probe out of the floor was rectified in a timely manner and was left all working and fine. The downstair WC was not part of any of the original works and was done for free. The sink that was initially installed was too large and was replaced by a smaller one the day after free of charge. Regarding a different company L & P Holdings, it has no affiliation with ESCO and should be treated as such therefore has no relevance to anything in this dispute. In regard to resolution, the client is correct that open channels of communication were there and were always open and amicable until the client accused one of the directors, being the reason why the couple separated, at this point being blamed for a separation the open channels of communication soured. In addition to this the statement that there was an intermediary brought in is false. There was another member of staff hired to oversee certain projects. This ended when the member of staff was let go due to unprofessional behaviour and brought the company into disrepute. The statement that the weren’t paid is false and statements can be provided to prove this. Ultimately the project aside from rendering is complete and signed off by building control.