Here we discuss the peril of ignoring the building safety guidelines
Family Left £250,000 Out of Pocket After Home Collapses During Renovation
Imagine going on a relaxing holiday and coming back to find your home... gone. That’s exactly what happened to James Hobby, 54, and his family. Their West London terrace house collapsed mid-renovation and now, they’re facing a staggering £250,000 repair bill. The kicker? Neither the builder nor any insurance company is willing to cover the damage.
The plan had been simple enough: a £38,000 loft extension to transform their modest two-bedroom Windsor home into a spacious four-bedroom haven. But when builders removed the roof without properly supporting key structural elements namely the gable, party wall, and chimney the upper floor caved in, crushing everything below. It's a textbook case of what happens when you fail to comply with building safety regulations every homeowner should know.
Tragically, their son suffered a broken leg in the incident, having been inside the house when the structure gave way. A subcontractor was also seriously injured. Emergency services rushed to the scene as the building crumbled.
And the family? On holiday, completely unaware.
James recalls the moment they found out: “We were in deep shock. I just couldn’t understand how something like this could happen. The destruction was unreal and someone got seriously hurt.”
But the disaster didn’t stop with the structural collapse. The family's building insurance flatly refused to pay out, citing a clause that excludes coverage for poor workmanship. The liability, they were told, rested with the builder.
Except plot twist the builder’s insurer, Direct Line, later declined to pay as well. Their reasoning? The builder had failed to disclose three County Court Judgements (CCJs) when taking out the policy. That voided the agreement. Direct Line claims the builder “misrepresented material facts,” invalidating the cover.
The builder says he didn’t know about the CCJs at the time, but that he's since paid them. Still, that’s no comfort to Mr. Hobby, who isn't even allowed to lodge a complaint with the Financial Ombudsman because he isn’t a Direct Line customer. It's like being the one run over by the car but not allowed to sue because you weren’t the one driving or insuring it.
“With everything that’s happened, I’ve got fewer rights than anyone else involved,” James said. “How did I end up responsible for cleaning up this mess? It’s completely unjust.”
The family has since moved back into the repaired home but only after draining their life savings and borrowing from relatives. It wasn’t the extension they dreamed of. It was a financial nightmare with scaffolding.
James had originally found the builder through Rated People, a tradesperson comparison platform. He says he was confident in his choice at the time. But after the collapse, Rated People removed the builder from its site following what it described as “routine vetting and monitoring.”
Back to Homepage
In response to the case, a Rated People spokesperson explained:
“We now check for CCJs as part of our vetting. That said, we’re not the insurer it’s up to insurance providers to verify these details themselves. When issues arise, we take fast and appropriate action. This case was no different.”
Direct Line also issued a statement, underscoring the importance of honest disclosure:
“We sympathise with Mr. Hobby’s situation. Unfortunately, he’s not our policyholder, so we can’t comment on details of the voided policy. But all business insurance relies on customers providing accurate, complete information and policies can be voided if that doesn’t happen.”
In the end, this isn’t just a story about structural collapse it’s about the cracks in consumer protection, the weight of fine print, and a system that often leaves homeowners holding the bag. Or in James Hobby’s case, holding the rubble.
