FAULTY BUILDING

Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 105, 28 January 1935, Page 6

FAULTY BUILDING

Education Board Contracts

The report o£ the recent meeting of the Education Board, at which reference was made to faulty work by a builder or builders, was referred to Mr. A. B. Fraser, president of the Wellington Master Builders’ and Contractors’ Association, who stated that the report had created quite a lot of discussion among those interested in the building industry, and, at the samfe time, had cast a suspicion on a large number of honest builders. “Accepting the statements made by the board that the work was unsatisfactory as being correct, it appears that the work is of a very poor and unsatisfactory class,” he said. “It is regretted that the members of the Education Board did not make known the name of the builder and give particulars of the schools where the work was performed. There seems to be no justification for withholding such, as by making it known the public would to some extent be safeguarded. “The difficulty in some cases seems tc be,” continued Mr. Fraser, “that the price is the (most important point when considering the letting of work. This is a very wrong principle to adopt, as a cheap article very often is unsatisfactory. This applies particularly to the building industry, where honest workmanship is essential. The association has been contsidering this aspect of the natter for some time past, and favours a system adopted by some of the leading architects, who keep a list of approved builders, and do not let work .out to persons unless they are satisfied that they are reliable and competent to carry out and give & 11 honest job. The association is strongly in favour of all local bodies, architects, and Government departments adopting the policy of letting the work only to ap: proved builders. It is possible that if the Education Board had adopted a similar policy the unfortunate happenings could have been avoided.”