Summary
The apartment was purchased on 31st March 2025, from Azure Capital (Dorchester) Limited.
Initially all appeared well, apart from a few snagging issues, which the developer said he would get looked at.
This included a small area of squeaking flooring in the kitchen.
After moving in, the squeaking flooring rapidly became worse and there was no sign of the developer or builder.
A section of flooring was opened up,
which revealed that the 'floating floor' had been screwed down into the base layer below.
It also revealed that the fire proofing to the ceiling in the garage below was inadequate, along with the insulation.
An architect was commissioned to produce a report, which confirmed that there were indeed
serious structural defects to the floor and ceiling below.
The developer arranged for the main contractor to undertake remedial works to the ceiling above the garage
and the remedial works were carried out on Monday 28th April 2025.
The remedial work did not look to be of a good standard and there were obviously serious outstanding defects.
A chartered surveyor was commissioned and their report indeed confirmed that the remedial works to the
ceiling were inadequate. The report also highlighted that there was
no fire protection to any of the structural steelwork below the apartment.
It has been a battle ever since to get the defects resolved. This has included the involvement of Dorset
Building Control, the building warranty provider (BuildZone) and Dorset & Wiltshire Fire Service.
Fast forward a couple of months and there were serious concerns regarding the validity of the building
insurance and also if a Fire Risk Assessment had been carried out. Despite numerous requests,
the developer failed to produce either of these documents.
Eventually, after making an 'Application for an order under section 20C of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985',
the insurance documents were produced.
The developers also produced a Fire Risk Assessment, dated 25th September 2025.
It was not until 2nd September 2025 that the developers arranged for a builder to come and inspect the squeaky flooring.
Remedial work was started on 29th September 2025, which required the apartment to be vacated until works were completed
on 7th November 2025. The remedial work included, removing the entire kitchen, the boiler cupboard and
removing all of the flooring in the kitchen/lounge and second bedroom. The bedroom stud wall had been
built off of the floating floor and so had to have addtional support installed from below.
There were no noggins between the floor joists and there was also inadequate insulation under the floor.
Remedial works to the ceiling in the parking area below the apartment started on 10th November 2025,
and were completed just before Christmas.
Remedial works to the structural steelwork are still outstanding.
On 30th August 2025 a leak started causing stains on the lounge ceiling and on 31st August 2025 a further leak started causing
stains above and around the bathroom door.
Upon investigating the ceiling void, It was discovered that there was
no fire compartmentalisation between my apartment and the apartment next door.
Building Control have inspected the ceiling void and have advised the developer what remedial works are required.
The remedial work is still outstanding.
None of the snagging defects, identified
in a professional snagging survey on 26th August 2025, have been addressed
(other than the squeaking flooring).
A number of further serious issues have been identified in the SPASE Surveyors report, dated 19 December 2025.
I am awaiting proposals for the required remedial works.
I bumped into George Aldridge today (one of the developers) and asked him if he had come to see me and if he had any news
on my outstanding defects. He refused to give me any update. And so it continues....
Timeline
March
- 31/03/2025 - Purchased
April
- 25/04/2025 - Architect's report identified a "danger to life" and a "serious fire risk posed by the inadequate fire resistance" to the ceiling in the parking area below the apartment
- 29/04/2025 - Remedial works to garage ceiling (i.e. 1 day)
June
- 05/06/2025 - 2nd Architect's report identified a "Risk to Life" and "inadequate fire protection" in the parking area below the apartment
August
- 26/08/2025 - Snagging report identified incorrectly fitted fire doors and a water pipe in the lounge was non-compliant with Building Regulations
- 30/08/2025 - Leak above bathroom ceiling
September
- 02/09/2025 - Developers arranged for a builder to inspect the squeaky flooring
- 18/09/2025 - No fire compartmentalisation above party wall discovered
- 25/09/2025 - Fire Risk Assessment report issued
- 29/09/2025 - Remedial works to flooring started
November
- 07/11/2025 - Remedial works to flooring completed
- 10/11/2025 - Remedial works to garage ceiling fire proofing started
- 22/11/2025 - A large rat was seen entering the sewer through a poorly constructed gully in the car park
December
- 02/12/2025 - Environmental Health visited site regarding the rats
- 19/12/2025 - 3rd Architect's report confirmed further major issues
- 22/12/2025 - Remedial works to garage ceiling completed
- 15/12/2025 - Building Control notified regarding dangerous structure, i.e. Soffit above car park entrance
- 22/12/2025 - Temporary repair carried out to soffit above car park entrance
A number of further serious issues have been identified in the SPASE Surveyors report, dated 19 December 2025.
I am awaiting proposals for the required remedial works.
Status of Defects (28th January 2026)
- Identified: 25th April 2025 - Downs Merrifield Architect's Report
- Comments: It was not until 9th September 2025 that a builder was engaged to inspect the defective flooring.
- Status: RESOLVED
- Identified: 5th June 2025 - SPASE Surveyor's Report
-
Comments: An initial attempt was made to resolve this on 29/04/2025, but was totally inadequate.
Proper remedial work has only recently been completed. - Status: RESOLVED
- Identified: 5th June 2025 - SPASE Surveyor's Report
- Comments: There is no fire proofing to the structural steelwork, supporting the apartment, above the parking area.
Remedial work has only recently started. - Status: OUTSTANDING
- Identified: 19th December 2025 - SPASE Surveyor's Report
- Comments: There is no fire compartmentalisation in the ceiling void between the two first floor apartments.
- Status: OUTSTANDING
- Identified: 26th August 2025 - Professional Snagging Report
- Comments: There is a large water pipe entering the lounge from outside.
- Status: OUTSTANDING
- Identified: 19th December 2025 - SPASE Surveyor's Report
- Comments: There is a poorly constructed gulley allowing rats access into the car park from the sewer.
- Status: OUTSTANDING
- Identified: 26th August 2025 - Professional Snagging Report
- Comments: There have been no proposals for any resolutions regarding the reported defects.
- Status: OUTSTANDING
- Identified: 25th September 2025 - Fire Risk Assessment
- Comments: There are gaps and loose fire board lining in the soffit above the car park access route.
- Status: OUTSTANDING
- Identified: 1st August 2025 - email to Developers
- Comments: There was a leak from the roof terrace above. A temporary repair has been made.
- Status: OUTSTANDING
A number of further serious issues have been identified in the SPASE Surveyor's report, dated 19 December 2025.
I am awaiting proposals for the required remedial works.
Squeaky Floor
Early in April 2025, it became obvious that there was a problem with the lounge/kitchen and bedroom
flooring, due to the excessive squeaking.
From Downs Merrifield Architect's report (25th April 2025):
The noisy floor is almost certainly because the engineered floor has been screwed down to the subbase through the floating floor construction. This means that the floating floor will no longer be acting as designed. The noise caused by trafficking this floor is completely unacceptable and demonstrates a lack of understanding of how interlocking engineered flooring should be laid with glued joints and not screwed.
The proprietary vapour barrier is missing between the floor and the ceiling below this, along with the void between the two - this has already resulted in condensation to the underside of the 19mm ply flooring and will cause further degradation over time. This is in contravention to the requirements of part C of the Building Regulations –Resistance to Moisture. The stud walls have been built directly onto the floating floor, and not over the joists.
From SPASE Surveyor's report (5th June 2025):
The floor construction is finished in carpet and laminate flooring over chipboard. The floor construction is designed to be a floating floor, however boards are not glue jointed, rather screwed though the underlying insulation and plasterboard into the plywood. The chipboard is also not bonded to the underlying plasterboard layer. Accordingly the floor is not floating, leading to disturbing creaking in any use of the floor. The quality of the floor construction is poor and undulates; this may be either due to poor floor joist levelling, and/or, the poor quality of chipboard screw-fixed to the substrate. This poor quality of floor creaking is further exacerbated by poorly fitting partition walls bearing directly on to the chipboard floor and without adequate perimeter gaps for expansion. These walls are clearly erected without due skill and the finishes are poor, whilst settlement cracking is widely apparent. The insulation of the exposed floor is inadequate. The original floor construction incorporated 100mm of mineral wool insulation, which does not comply with the required U-values. Recent attempt has been made to upgrade this with a vapour barrier and further insulation between this and the cement board soffit. However this has compressed the insulation to have little benefit. The original absence of the vapour barrier has already led to significant mould growth to the underside of the floorboards. This vapour barrier needs to be reapplied and with fully sealed joints and perimeters. The above works raise serious questions of the quality of build and competence of the builder and developer. These are Relevant Defects under the Building Safety Act 2022, and Relevant Steps are now urgently required to safeguard the occupants and building. The Developer of the building is required to correct the works properly and to the true extent of the Building Regulations, under the Defective Premises Act 1972.
The squeaking flooring has now been resolved. This involved removing the entire kitchen and all of the existing flooring, down to the floor joists below. The cupboard in the lounge had to be rebuilt and the bedroom stud wall had to have additional supports installed from below.
The apartment had to be vacated for a period of six weeks.
Ceiling Above Parking Area, Below Apartment
Following an intrusive inspection of the floor construction, it became obvious that the floor and ceiling below had serious defects and were non-compliant with Building Regulations. This was identified in the Downs Merrifield Architect report, on 25th April 2025, as follows:
- More seriously and causing a danger to life – is the change from the specified 2 layers 15mm Masterboard (to provide a 1 hour fire resistance from the garage) down to 9mm which only provides 30 mins fire resistance . This is in contravention to the requirements of Part B3 of the Building Regulations –Fire Spread - structure.
- The proprietary vapour barrier is missing between the floor and the ceiling below this, along with the void between the two - this has already resulted in condensation to the underside of the 19mm ply flooring and will cause further degradation over time. This is in contravention to the requirements of part C of the Building Regulations – Resistance to Moisture.
- There is only 100mm insulation within the suspended floor over the garage – depending on the building regulations requirements and the SAP calculations (which will have been carried out as part of Building Regulations) this needs to be a minimum of 125mm up (if it is classed as an existing house) or 280mm thick (if it is classed as a change of use /new build house) – I am not party to these calculations, but this is definitely sub-standard and will not comply with part L (Conservation of Fuel and Power).
- I understand from my client that he has requested you remedy these defects immediately. This is a reasonable request bearing in mind that the flat is occupied and there is a serious fire risk posed by the inadequate fire resistance.
The developer arranged for the main contractor to undertake remedial works, which were carried out on Monday 28th April 2025.
It was obvious that the work was inadequate and a second surveyor's report was commissioned which identified further defects.
Structural Steelwork
Following the inadequate attempt at remedial work to the garage ceiling, and other concerns, a second Surveyor's report was produced by SPASE Architects Limited, on 5th June 2025. This identified the inadequate remedial work to the garage ceiling and further serious structural defects:
-
The insulation of the exposed floor is inadequate. The original floor construction incorporated 100mm of mineral wool
insulation, which does not comply with the required U-values.
Recent attempt has been made to upgrade this with a vapour barrier and further insulation between this and the cement board soffit. However this has compressed the insulation to have little benefit. The insulation needs to be fitted between the joists without compression, and the vapour barrier applied beneath. - The original absence of the vapour barrier has already led to significant mould growth to the underside of the floorboards. This vapour barrier needs to be reapplied and with fully sealed joints and perimeters.
- Fire Safety – we have significant concerns for fire safety of this floor, which has the car parking bays below:
- The original construction was inadequate and not as specified on the Architect’s drawings. We understand this was replaced on 28 April 2025, but without Building Control inspection and our findings below show that the workmanship is inadequate.
- The boards are unmarked; you should obtain proof that the installed boards are a Masterboard product.
- The boards are fitted without adequate laps between the two layers, and there are large open joints between boards.
- The boards are fitted without adequate number of fixings.
- The boards have damaged corners and there is no intumescent sealant between the boarded perimeter and the masonry walls.
- The boards are uneven in their fixing, with staggered heights through the area over the car parking.
- The boards are not finished, or sealed to the steel frame on the west side; the finish is irregular; the vapour barrier is also left unfinished at the steel frame; the area is gappy and fingers can pass through showing there is inadequate fire protection.
- Light fittings have been connected with cables drilled through the boards, and no intumescent fire collars are fitted.
- The steel frame, supporting the exposed first floor, loadbearing masonry wall and roof structure above, has no fire protection. Paint is clearly visible as being applied over the grey primer layer only. This steel is also exposed to the car parking area. The steelwork is also showing signs of surface corrosion where there is inadequate protection.
- The balcony structure is supported with steelwork, finished without any fire protection, and largely finished with timber joists and boards, which are a fire safety risk.
This was also identified as 'High Priority' in the Fire Risk Assessment, dated 25th September 2025:
The structural steels in the car port area below flat 1 were observed with incomplete paint coverage on the flanges and web. This could be observed by looking through the decking and seeing the corrosion on the flange edges. It could also not be confirmed if the paint used on the observable sections was intumescent as there is no product data. These are elements of structure and must be boxed in fully with fire boarding or fully coated with intumescent paint.
The definition in the Fire Risk Assessment of 'High Priority' is 'Urgent', i.e.
It is strongly recommended that a written program be put in place for resolving the issue and remedial measures put in place to control the risk in the meantime. Considerable resources should be provided to resolve this as soon as reasonably practicable.
Remedial work is still outstanding.
No Fire Compartmentalisation in Ceiling Void
Following a leak coming through the bathroom ceiling, a section of ceiling was opened up to find the cause. Inspection revealed that there was no fire compartmentalisation in the ceiling void, between the two first floor apartments. This was identified in the SPASE Surveyor's report on 19th December 2025 as follows:
- The ceiling over the entrance hall, bedroom and bathroom was exposed to see the void below the flat above. This shows a suspended MF ceiling with two layers of plasterboard and a layer of 50mm insulation above the ceiling. The upper structure is suspended timber joists and chipboard.
- There is no insulation to the eaves below the roof coverings and as such there will be greater heat loss than should be permitted under the requirements of the Building Regulations. This should be properly fitted. The fire compartmentation can be achieved with two layers of plasterboard at ceiling level, however the plasterboard should be fire-rated and we found no evidence for this (it is often coloured pink, which is not found on site). Furthermore, all light fittings, service entries and other penetrations should have intumescent seals and be fire rated; all perimeters should be well sealed with intumescent sealant. There was no evidence that this has been considered.
- For a fire rated ceiling in this design, the insulation should be 150mm thick as the requirements of the White Book. There should also be no gaps and it should be well laid. The insulation provided does not achieve this and therefore the structure is not sufficient for fire protection.
- We note that this construction between first and second floor flats has not been built as the Architect’s drawing or specification. Work is required to make this safe for fire compartmentation and acoustic performance.
- The above should be read in addition to our letter of 5 June 2025, and these further findings raise additional serious questions of the quality of build and competence of the builder and developer. The present built arrangement remains a Risk to Life matter; we note there seems to be little progress with the findings in our 5 June letter, some 6 months following. These are Relevant Defects under the Building Safety Act 2022, and Relevant Steps are now urgently required to safeguard the occupants and building.
- The Developer of the building is required to correct the works properly and to the true extent of the Building Regulations, under the Defective Premises Act 1972.
Dorset Council Building Control commented as follows:
There should be suitable fire compartmentation between units to prevent the spread of fire in concealed spaces. This should have been installed at time of construction as per the architectural details.
Remedial work is still outstanding.
Non-Compliant Waste Pipe
This was identified in the New Build Inspections Snagging Report on 26th August 2025 as follows:
Could building control confirm the reason why an external water outlet has been allowed to enter the apartment, this posses future maintenance issues and future sale implications also if the outlet has been inspected to meet fire regulations before it was covered in, as it passes through the apartment, also the legal side, who is responsible for maintenance of the pipe.
Dorset Building Control commented as follows:
The connection between the down pipe and the 110mm pipework is non-compliant and brown underground pipework should not be used above ground. The workmanship is non-compliant, and the builder should be asked to resolve this issue.
Remedial work is still outstanding.
Rats Exiting Sewer
This was reported to the developers in an email on 24th November 2025.
It was also identified in the SPASE Surveyor's report on 19th December 2025 as follows:
There is a gulley to the north east side of the hairdressers unit and this has a number of pipes entering, all with very poor finishes and this passes through to the ground finishes too which are poorly laid. Improvement is required as it is presently a route for rats/vermin as witnessed by residents/owners.
This was also reported to Dorset Council Environmental Health on 28th November 2025.
Property owners have a legal obligation under the Prevention of Damage by Pests Act 1949 to keep premises rodent free, or, if rodents pose a threat to health or property, to report infestations to the local authority.
Remedial work is still outstanding.
Snagging Report
The following significant items were identified in the New Build Inspections Snagging Report on 26th August 2025:
- Throughout the apartment the fire strips to the door linings have been damaged, and pieced in, this goes against the manufacturer fitting instructions, could these please be replaced.
- The margins of the door should be a minimum of 2mm, but a maximum of 4mm as it is a fire door, please could this be adjusted. This comment applies to all of the internal fire rated doors.
- There are no trickle vents to the window/ background ventilation in the front bedroom.
The report also identified problems with the flooring and the kitchen units. These specific defects have now been resolved as a result of the flooring being replaced.
None of the other items listed in the snagging report have been acknowledged or resolved by the developers.
A total of 61 points were identified in the snagging report.
Soffit Above Car Park Entrance
This was first identified as 'High Priority' in the Fire Risk Assessment, dated 25th September 2025:
- Gaps and loose fire board lining in the soffit above the car park access route below flat 2.
- The definition in the Fire Risk Assessment of 'High Priority' is 'Urgent'.
- Immediate actions required or if it is not feasibly practical to immediately resolve the issue, it is strongly recommended that a written program be put in place for resolving the issue and remedial measures put in place to control the risk in the meantime. Considerable resources should be provided to resolve this as soon as reasonably practicable.
Nothing had been done to resolve the issue.
The condition of the soffit was identified in the SPASE Surveyor's report on 19th December 2025 as follows:
The undercroft which is exposed and open to pass through beneath the range of the building facing the high street, has an old fibrous boarded to the soffit. The age of this is such that asbestos contaminated material may well be present and this should be included within the Asbestos Register for the building; if this is not available then a sample should be tested for asbestos content.
The age and condition of this material is poor and it is failing with damaged corner and edges parting from their fixings. It is no longer a suitable layer of fire protection to the building. The material should be competently removed and replaced with a suitable fire board to achieve at least 60 minutes fire protection. The floor should also be insulated to the current standards of the Building Regulations.
Building Control were notified, as it was now a dangerous structure, and a temporary repair was made just before Christmas.
Leaking Roof Above Bathroom Ceiling
On 30th August 2025 a leak appeared above the bathroom ceiling. The developers arranged for their contracter to undertake a repair.
The repair was identified in the SPASE Surveyor's report on 19th December 2025 as follows:
There was a water leak in the ceiling which was reported by others to be through a defective detail at the threshold of the French doors to the flat above. Work has been undertaken to complete this repair in leadwork, however the workmanship is very poor and does not comply with any of the recommendations of the Lead Contractors Association.
It is very likely that this will fail in the not-too-distant future. The leadwork has unprotected screw fixings through it, lead is sealed to the door frame only, and laps are horizontal with a sealant applied; this is all inadequate. This is also reliance of Flexicryl or similar waterproof paint, which is rarely durable in this type of application.
This can only be regarded as a temporary repair.
