NHBC

months of its expiry.⁶ According to NHBC, the arbitration period of 12 months had expired on the 14th September 1984 after which NHBC had no contractual obligation to pay any Award, see Mr Pembroke's letter dated 17th July 1990 to M Debono's solicitors. Mr Pembroke wrote to M Debono 2 months after the expiry date on the 23rd November 1984 saying "...if an Award is made against you in arbitration and you fail to meet that Award, NHBC will make the necessary payment to the purchaser of the property. I anticipate, in that event, that my instruction will be to recover NHBC's outlay from you". On the 14th April 1988 Mr Pembroke wrote to M Debono saying "I confirm that NHBC has made the payment required of it under its Insurance Cover to Mr and Mrs Stanborough following your failure to meet the Arbitration Award".

	National House Building Council NHBC
Ombudsman Response to Ombudsman WDC	Re: 5 Houses & Garages, Bowden Lane, High Wycombe.
Ombudsman Response to Ombudsman WDC	An application was made to NHBC for membership which was acknowledged by the NHBC on the 1^st February 1979 NHBC wrote "The Council will call for a technical report on your house-building capabilites and we are arranging an inspection¹INSPECTION MEANING: "the act of looking at something carefully, or an official visit to a building or organization to check that everything is correct and legal" of the work you have notified as under construction. If we have seen the foundations and your building standards are high enough² "The NHBC Standards define the technical requirements and performance standards for the design and construction of new homes registered with us" , these houses may later earn Certificates if the Council approves your membership, but you must make no promise of the Council's protection to a prospective purchaser meantime".


	On the 23^rdMay 1979 NHBC wrote to acknowledge the receipt of calculations and drawings and confirmed that the proposals appear to meet the Councils requirements and a request for Pearce-Edmunds to be retained to visit the site and check the ground condition. On the 23rd October 1980 NHBC wrote to M Debono saying "your application for registration with this Council has been accepted and that you have been enrolled as a Probationer Builder"......................
	"The period of probation will be kept under review by our Regional Director and you will be advanced to the Full Register when you have completed a number of houses to the satisfaction of the Council".³ THE PERIOD OF PROBATION: "Trial, a test of the performance, qualities, or suitability of someone or something". SATISFACTION: "fulfilment of one's wishes, expectations".

	Building Regulation Approval was granted for the construction of 5 houses and garages in November 1979, Building Plan Certificate. Work commenced November 1979.

	On the 5^th November 1979 Pearce Edmunds & Partners wrote to NHBC confirming that "the above dwellings have been designed in accordance with the following British Standards by a qualifed engineer".

	On the 12^th November 1979 Pearce Edmunds & Partners wrote to NHBC confirming that "the excavation for the foundations is being taken approximately 300mm below the underside of unsuitable material. This material appears capable of sustaining the ground bearing pressure for which the foundations have been designed for".

	A letter was written by Mr J Millbourn, Surveyor on the 28^th February 1983 to Summers & Co, Solicitors..................."We think that a claim could be persued, however, on the basis of the undersized joists, although this can be a protracted course".

	In 1983 a complaint was made regarding the deflection of the joists on property 3 and a site visit was carried out with Mr J Millbourn a representative of NHBC. The joists had deflected and Mr J Millbourn said that the joists needed to be supported with a steel at midspan and explained how it needed to be done. We discussed my carrying out the work and initially I said that I would however after further discussions I realised it would mean that I was accepting liability which I could not do as,

	1. I had no idea as to why the floors were deflecting. 2. The 5 houses had been built in accordance with the approved working drawings. 3. The 5 houses had been built and were inspected and approved by the Local Authority and the NHBC. 4. Mr J Millbourn was now proposing to provide support off of the concrete floor slab which was not possible as the floor slabs were suspended.

	During our discussions Mr Millbourne realised that he could not do what he proposed and put forward an alternative proposal and at our last meeting I said to Mr Millbourne that he would have to refer it back to the NHBC. My reason being was the NHBC were now proposing to prop up the floors on 5 houses that had just been built and approved by the Local Authority and the NHBC without giving time to carry out further investigations so as to provide an explanation as to why the floors were deflecting. 'The 5 houses were built in accordance with the approved drawings and I had no reason to question the Local Authority approvals'
	On the 23^rdNovember 1984 NHBC wrote to M Debono saying that "With regards to claims, there is, as you know, the claim relating to 14 Bowden Lane, High Wycombe. At present, I understand that there is the prospect of arbitration. As you know, if an Award is made against you in arbitration and you fail to meet that Award, NHBC will make the necessary payment to the purchaser of the property. I anticipate, in that event, that my instructions will be to recover NHBC's outlay from you".
	Subsequently I was notified that a date had been made for an arbitration hearing which I did not agree to and did not attend.⁴ I had served my NHBC probationary period. The work had been inspected and approved to the satisfaction of the NHBC. Also................ 'The 5 houses were built in accordance with the approved drawings and I had no reason to question the Local Authority approvals'
	On the 17^thJuly 1990 NHBC wrote to M Debono Solicitors saying ".......Mr and Mrs Stanborough were placed in extreme difficulty. In short your client embarked in an excercise, whenever they attempted to get him to put right defects, of fobbing them off. He showed a complete disregard for the problems that he had caused Mr and Mrs Stanborough and indeed for his obligations under the NHBC Scheme. Mr and Mrs Stanborough entered into their House Purchaser's Agreement on 13^th May 1981. Their Standard Notice of Insurance Cover⁵ Insurance Cover was dated 15^th September 1981. The two year initial guarantee period under the NHBC Scheme expired on 14^th September 1983. The NHBC Agreement contains an arbitration clause which eventually Mr and Mrs Stanborough were forced to take advantage of. The House Purchaser's Insurance Policy limits NHBC's liability as insurers of any- Award made under that Arbitration Agreement to proceedings commenced within the initial guarantee period or within 12 months of its expiry.⁶ According to NHBC, the arbitration period of 12 months had expired on the 14th September 1984 after which NHBC had no contractual obligation to pay any Award, see Mr Pembroke's letter dated 17th July 1990 to M Debono's solicitors. Mr Pembroke wrote to M Debono 2 months after the expiry date on the 23rd November 1984 saying "...if an Award is made against you in arbitration and you fail to meet that Award, NHBC will make the necessary payment to the purchaser of the property. I anticipate, in that event, that my instruction will be to recover NHBC's outlay from you". On the 14th April 1988 Mr Pembroke wrote to M Debono saying "I confirm that NHBC has made the payment required of it under its Insurance Cover to Mr and Mrs Stanborough following your failure to meet the Arbitration Award". Mr and Mrs Stanborough did not give notice of arbitration until- 27^th June 1985. The result was that NHBC had no contractual obligation to pay any Award which your client failed to meet under insurance cover. However in view of your client's appalling- behaviour NHBC considered that it would be entirely wrong to leave Mr and Mrs Stanborough with an Arbitration Award which had not been met when, of course, the defects were breaches of NHBC's Requirements and the arbitration had been commenced under the NHBC Scheme. In View of NHBC's commercial interest in this matter it was agreed to lend Mr and Mrs Stanborough the amount due under the Award plus costs in accordance with the terms of an Agreement of of 3rd November 1986 a copy of which I enclose.......This builder as I mentioned in my previous note to you is difficult in the extreme. As you will have seen from the file he has adopted the tactic- in some sort of effort to avoid liability under arbitration proceeding - of simply sending on the papers sent by the Arbitrator and the purchaser to us,.................made some attempt to knock some sense into the builder over the telephone. Apparently he has adopted this tactic all along and has successfully managed to fob off the purchasers by a system of confusion and bamboozling..........."