It has been over seven months since Taylor Wimpey released its results for the full year to 31 December 2015 (1 March 2016). This included a statement from Chief Executive Peter Redfern, which recognised improvement was needed with regard to his company’s poor customer satisfaction levels. Perhaps it is time to take stock and conduct our own ‘Redfern Review’.
Peter Redfern said:
“During 2015, we achieved a customer satisfaction score of 86% (2014: 87%). We are disappointed that this has slipped. Whilst we operate in a cyclical market, we strongly believe that a customer centric approach is needed throughout the cycle. During 2015 we completed an in-depth review of every aspect and stage of our Customer Journey, to identify areas of improvement and to deliver a better homebuying experience for our customers. Throughout the review, our focus has been on understanding our customers’ priorities to enable us to deliver at and ahead of expectations. We have also commenced the process of rolling out our new customer approach across the business with a focus on three main areas: our culture, management structure and process. This is to ensure that going forward we deliver the right product, supported by excellent customer service to all our customers at every stage of their journey with Taylor Wimpey.
Yet more funding for housebuilders! Whatever became of austerity, “there’s no money left” and “balancing the budget by 2020”? So is the country now awash with spare cash? Of course not. According to the national debt clock, the UK is borrowing another £5,170 per SECOND or £1.86m an hour! The National debt is currently £1,762,340,000,000 (1.76trn), this equates to £28,291 for every person living in the UK or £48,600 for each UK taxpayer! So I find it totally incomprehensible that another £5bn is being added, to further and unnecessarily subsidise private housebuilding under the guise of increasing the number of new homes built.We have already had the ‘The Osborne Stupidity’ – ‘Help to Buy’ fuelling house prices and housebuilders’ record profits. Now we have the ‘The May Lunacy’ ‘Help to Build’, yet more funding for housebuilders. Last week the Theresa May’s government announced two major housing initiatives; a £3bn Home Building Fund – £2bn long term funding for infrastructure and £1bn short term loan funding aimed towards enabling smaller developers enter the market. As is often the case with government announcements of supposedly “new funds” £1.2bn of the £3bn was previously announced as the Large Sites Infrastructure Fund in 2015. In addition, a new £2bn “Accelerated Construction Programme” aiming at getting new homes built more quickly on public land.
This was a question I was asked at the APPG last November. Surely, if there was a real problem with the quality of new homes, why is it that so few actually complain and go public with their experiences? It is a question I often ask myself, knowing as I do that 93% of new homebuyers will report problems to their housebuilder very soon after being handed the keys. Imagine the public outcry if 93% of new cars went back to the dealer for faults to be fixed after a few days or weeks! Indeed, if new homes were cars they wouldn’t be fit to go on the roads! So why is it that out of a potential 129,300 people that bought a new home in the year to 30 June 2016 and reported problems to the housebuilder, most chose to stay silent? Even more astounding are 86% that the HBF claim “would recommend their housebuilder to a friend” – although the HBF 8-week customer survey results appear to be being manipulated by the big housebuilders.
Adversely affect the future value – more difficult to sell
Lord Richard Best said: “I think another factor could be that people don’t want to moan about their new home having invested such a large amount of money, and knowing that one day they’re going to sell it to. It’s counterintuitive to rubbish something that you’re going to sell later, which you’ve invested so heavily in.”
It has been nearly three months since the APPG Inquiry Report Into the Quality of New Homes was published along with its recommendations on 13 July 2016.
After some not inconsiderable enquiring to the APPG MP’s, I was contacted by Helen Hayes (pictured below) last week who has kindly updated me and confirmed the current situation:
“The APPG’s inquiry report has now been published and has been presented to the government for a response. Oliver Colvile has met with the Prime Minister to discuss it, and I understand that the initial response was quite positive.
The APPG awaits the government’s formal response, and when Parliament resumes sitting we will seek to chase this if it is not provided in a timely manner. It is not within the power of an APPG to implement the recommendations of the report, as this is a matter for the government, and the setting up of a new Ombudsman would require legislation which it would be for the government to introduce – even if the government takes up this recommendation, which I hope they will, this would take some time to progress through Parliament.
All members of the APPG are fully signed up to the recommendations of the report and will continue to work towards their implementation through the routes that are available to us as back bench MPs and members of the APPG.
The NHBC launched its Register of Site Managers earlier this year. Their press release on 9 March 2016 said:
“Recognising the key role that site managers play in delivering high quality new homes, NHBC has developed a dedicated online resource to support them and assist in their development. With over 1,200 users in the first weeks, NHBC OnSite is an online resource providing site managers with access to a host of technical resources and career support and in addition, allows them to build their personal profile.”
It should be noted that the early take up could have been due to the free prize draw (an iPad Air 2, 16GB) for site managers signing up to NHBC OnSite before 30 April 2015. www.nhbcsitemanager.co.uk
Enough is enough! What will it take before government finally acts, not only to end the misery faced by the majority of people that buy new homes, but also to drastically reduce the likelihood of another death caused by a defect in a new home? Last week a defect in a Taylor Wimpey new home injures a 10 year old girl.
Time for action? APPG Chair Oliver Colvile MP
Since the APPG Inquiry published its Report ‘Into the Quality of New Homes’ three weeks ago, there has been zero coverage of its recommendations in national media. On a personal level, I have written to every single one of the 650 MPs asking for their support and to lobby the DCLG for the introduction of a New Homes Ombudsman. Just one MP has replied so far. Is anyone prepared to do anything before someone else is killed in a defective new home?
On 15th October 2005, a four-year-old boy died from chest injuries after a 50kg (110lb) stone mantelpiece over a fireplace fell on top of him at his Persimmon-built family home in Coulthard Close, Towcester.
In February 2008, Elouise Littlewood was 26 when she died in the flat she owned with Notting Hill Housing Trust built by Barratt Homes at their Bedfont Lakes complex in Hounslow. A post-mortem carried out on the body found the concentration of carbon monoxide in her blood was 77 per cent. Her lodger, Simon Kilby, was left with permanent brain damage after he was discovered unconscious on the sofa.
Only this morning I learned that on 28 July 2016, a radiator had detached from a wall and had fallen on 10 year-old Gemma Fever in the kitchen of the family’s Taylor Wimpey new home at their Rackenford Meadows development in Tiverton, Devon.
The All Party Parliamentary Group Inquiry Into the Quality of New Homes In England has made ten recommendations and says house builders should be “upping their game and putting consumers at the heart of the business model. Alongside this, Government should use its influence to promote quality at every opportunity.” The cross party committee of MPs and construction experts called on the Government [DCLG] to set up a New Homes Ombudsman to mediate in disputes between homebuyers and housebuilders. This is the number one “key recommendation” of 10 recommendations setting out measures to improve the quality of workmanship in new homes and provide consumers with easier and cheaper forms of redress, to get defects and problems fixed.
APPG Inquiry Report Recommendations:
Recommendation 1: DCLG should initiate steps to set up a New Homes Ombudsman.
“The role would include mediating disputes between consumers and their builders or warranty providers to offer a quick resolution procedure paid for by a housebuilders’ levy. We see this is as the key recommendation to provide more effective consumer redress, if things go wrong, and a good way of applying pressure on housebuilders and warranty providers to deliver a better quality service. Our view is that the new service should be funded by a levy on the sector, but it would need to be completely independent and replace the dispute resolution service offered as part of the Consumer Code for Home Builders. Our recommendation picks up on one made by the Office of Fair Trading, in its 2008 market study into the house building industry, which suggested that, if the industry failed to make satisfactory progress, it would recommend further intervention in the form of a statutory redress mechanism for new homebuyers funded by a levy on the industry.
Although funded by the construction industry [housebuilders] it should be a public body not under the industry’s control. It should provide a cheap, quick and effective system of redress and have power to enforce standards and award compensation. This would put pressure on housebuilders to up their game in the first place and spur them on to improve workmanship and increase levels of service.”
MPs call for the DCLG to set up a New Homes Ombudsman in APPG Inquiry Report published on 13 July 2016.
At long last seven months after the last evidence session on 14 December 2015, the All Party Parliamentary Group for Excellence in the Built Environment (APPGEBE) has finally published the findings and recommendations in the report following its: “Inquiry Into the Quality of New Build Housing in England”
Since 2006, Part L of the Building Regulations – The Conservation of Fuel and Power in England and Wales – has required mandatory air leakage testing of new buildings including homes. These regulations were further revised in 2010. But this does not mean every new home will be subject to an air leakage test to comply even under the latest 2010 Part L.
What is air leakage testing?
Air leakage testing basically checks that a new home is air tight and will not let in draughts or provide a route for heat to escape through gaps in the structure. After sealing up all required vents to windows and extractors, air is then drawn out of the home via a large fan in an external doorway, with the pressure monitored for a set period of time to produce a measurement of the amount of air that leaks back into the home being tested.
So you would think that since 2010, all new homes would be relatively air tight, free of draughts and cheap to heat as a result?