000			01470cab a2200181 4500
001			ABS40775
008			090401t1989 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u25959
041			_aeng
245			_aJ E Warner and Another v Basildon DC and Another
260			_c1989
350			_a0
490			_aConstruction Industry Law Letter _v(1989) CILL 484-485(2)
520			_aORC 22 March 1989. Claim by houseowners (W) for damages against (B) for breach of statutory duty. W also claimed damages for negligence from B for the provision or design of foundations inadequate to cope with problems inherent in building on clay soil from which substantial trees had been removed. W had purchased a house, part of a large development by B. Like many properties in the area it suffered from damage due to clay heave . Movement appeared as cracks between 1981 and 1983. W consulted a surveyor who recommended underpinning . If sound, the house would have been worth about £30,000; W sold their home for £3,500 to a company which specialised in buying damaged property. W issued a writ before the sale in January 1985. B accepted that the damage was caused by clay heave arising from removal of trees before construction. Though the judge found B guilty of negligence and in breach of its duty, the point at issue was whether the claim was statute barred , the material date being w
690			_aBUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION-CASE LAW
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c17434 _d17434