Housebuilder Persimmon is to conduct an independent review into the way it handles snagging, construction inspection and customer care, led by chair Stephanie Barwise QC, who is involved in the Grenfell Tower public inquiry.
Barwise, of Atkins Chambers, is representing the larger of the two groups of victims (survivors, bereaved relatives and former residents of Grenfell Tower) in Grenfell inquiry.
She is expected to present the initial findings of the Persimmon review, which will be made public, in the final quarter of 2019.
The areas the review will cover include:
- Customer care approach, systems and culture
- Snagging and finish rectification processes
- Speed and consistency of response to issues
- Construction inspection regime
- Quality assurance processes
- Advertising and marketing protocols
- Alignment of governance and incentives in meeting customer outcomes
The review is expected to take into account the views of customers, suppliers, employees, trade bodies, local authorities, civil servants and experts across the wider industry.
Persimmon said that despite the fact it does not construct high rise buildings, it was also committing to adopt the principles of the Hackitt Review, designed to effect culture change within the construction industry.
Chairman Roger Devlin, said: “Persimmon is committed to listening carefully and changing rapidly as we seek to improve our reputation among the key stakeholders in the business. Our objective is clear: we must ensure that all our customers are provided with the care, service and high-quality homes that they rightfully expect.
“An independent review is an important exercise which will establish whether the many changes we are making are going far enough and fast enough for the benefit of both our customers and our wider stakeholders in the business.”
Comments
Comments are closed.
Persimmon should start speaking to staff that have left the company and ask the reason why.
Good about time.
I speak as an owner of one their houses, shocking detailing and very poor quality.
The quality in volume new house building has deteriorated over many years: a)The NHBC should do its job properly ensuring a high standard, b) An independent C of W should be employed by the developer if the NHBC does not carry out its role in ensuring quality, c) Ensure better training of site operatives, a root and branch overhaul of training and c) Developers using Local Authority Building Control officers rather than the NHBC or other private providers
Some of the workmanship I see today on new build sites today is diabolical which means on site supervision is also lacking. When working for George Wimpey in the mid 1970’s we had up to eight snagging lists, even sales snagged it before hand over, we worked on the principle that it cost £5.00 to knock on an occupied door then, what does all the rectification of this sub-standard work cost today, it is in the interest of the developer to get it right.
That said there are still very good house builders out there, mostly SME’s, they cant afford a bad reputation.
They don’t need a QC to fix it – just call me or any one worked in the industry when we almost got it right!
Satisfied customers are the result of good design and construction. Inspection is a back-stop at best. Let’s incentivise excellence in design and construction through an award scheme adjudicated by the NHBC that the public can use as a benchmark of the quality they can expect from that developer’s products. Better reputation, better sales, reduced after-sales costs, better margin – why wouldn’t you?
I own a Persimmon house & suffered two years of hell with numerous snagging & defects. The service provided by Customer Care was appalling, more often than not they just ignored written requests to address issues.