Recently I appeared in court proceedings in a dispute regarding quality of workmanship.

Owner builder (but a professional in the building field) claimed cost of demolition and reconstruction of paving upon which contractor applied finishing works. The works were around 10k but the owner wanted around 30K for demolition and reconstruction, enough to give any contractor a splitting headache.

I inspected the works and the alleged defects and formed opinion that it was not the contractor’s works that were the problem but the base upon which works were applied. In my opinion the base was already ruined before works started and after examining documentation I found that it was not even documented or part of approved works. As far as design, specification, approval and adequacy the base was a “black hole”

In expert testimony I argued that the quality of finish on the job does not start with contractor who applies the finish but with all those others before him with degrees and diplomas that designed, approved, supervised and failed to project manage so that the contractor had a decent base to work on. How could he do a good job on something which was already ruined?

Builder is the Captain and the ship hit the rocks, don’t blame the sailor!

My expert evidence was accepted and the contractor won!

This is what the client had to say:

Branko, Thank you for helping our  company win it’s court case last month. Your  building expertise proved to be a great benefit in our favourable outcome. Rosemary Bxxxxxxxx, Director  Cxxxxx xxx P/L.  03/07/2013

Of course I don’t win the cases, others do, I simply provide essential brick of evidence with a convincing argument why it should be used in the wall of decision and not some other brick.