Probuild360 have attempted to remove my factual review dated 3/12/2025 claiming defamation. It can be seen on Trustpilot’s website under review- probuild360.co.uk- transparency that PB had negative reviews removed from Trustpilot. Reviews were removed Not because Trustpilot had concluded they were untrue or wrongful as such, but because the reviewers did not respond to Probuild’s challenge that “Trustpilot’s guidelines were not followed”. Having just gone through this myself, it is my opinion that some reviewers would find the whole process of replying, a little confusing and with Probuild’s accusations of defamation, I can see how normal people, could feel intimidated to back off. Probuild has made a new statement: “If the issues described genuinely existed, they would have been raised at the time. Building Control did not identify any such failings during construction, aside from minor routine items typical of works in progress.” It is not Building Control’s neither role nor responsibility to raise these failings to Probuild. Probuild, making this statement, within this context, to members of the public, who wouldn’t normally have a deeper understanding of the role of Building Control is, in my opinion, intentionally misleading. PB’s comments have been presented to the Director of the Building Control Company involved with the project at the time. The director (BSc MRICS FCABE) has clarified; ”The Building Control Inspector has not issued a certification of compliance for Probuild’s work. “Probuild cannot remove their responsibility by simply suggesting that if the Building Inspector did not raise anything, then that per se, makes the work compliant.“ “The lack of a comment from a Building Inspector during progressive works does not mean that the work is compliant. You will note the wording in our site inspection record where it states that “it does not constitute evidence that the building regulations have been complied with” “.He further comments on the project: “I would agree that the Inspector could have identified any locations where padstones did not match the structural engineer’s design and requested that confirmation of any variations from the design be submitted by the Engineer. Whilst this is not essential for performance of his statutory function, it would have allowed you, as the applicant, to have visibility of a potential problem. This, in no way, alters the responsibility of the contractor for any noncompliance but it would have provided a better level of service to you, as the applicant.” Probuild is making another new claim; “ The fact that it has taken nearly five years for the clients to seek out individuals willing to comment retrospectively speaks for itself. Most clients address concerns promptly and logically. “Probuild’s statement is factually untrue. There have indeed been multiple professionals (structural engineers, chartered surveyor, drainage consultant), that not only “were willing to comment” but have provided relevant official reports to them. We promptly reported issues to Probuild. When Probuild ignored or dismissed us, we followed a logical successive escalation to higher level experts, as again PB either ignored or dismissed or disputed their reports. This has been a long process, because of Probuild, not us, unfortunately continuing to this date. To support our statement above, and as it is not possible to provide a full report of everything that transpired to date here, we choose a specific element of the project, the new roof, to demonstrate.We promptly notified PB that there were issues with their newly installed roof. PB replied there is nothing substantially wrong with it, and were hostile to us for suggesting there could possibly be a problem. So, we asked the official roof product company’s inspector to review PB’s work. He has provided PB with an official report, describing extensive delamination, defects and concluding their installation is dissatisfactory. PB rejected his independent report. PB were also dishonest in reassuring us, that their subcontractor was willing to provide a warranty for their installation, for us to discover that their subcontractor had already folded months ago. So, we had to escalate to a higher level expert. A court approved chartered surveyor provided his report on PB’s roof installation, concluding that it has Not been installed with adequate skill and care. Although, it is not understood why PB is suggesting that checking their construction work and reporting to them "promptly" is in any way my responsibility in the first place? PB did Not construct a whole foundation (quoted and billed for), But it is My fault? for not spotting and reporting it?
Claim your business profile now and gain access to all features and respond to customer reviews.
Established in 2011, ProBuild360 provide turn-key solutions for the built environment with an integrated model that includes all the products, services, functions, and facilities required to successfully deliver optimised outcomes for domestic and commercial construction projects.
Our focus is on enhancing homes through a client-centered design and build approach, offering the complete 360 experience from concept to completion.
With a vertically integrated structure, we cater to various needs, including home renovations, bespoke new builds, and major developments.
Our approach includes complete design solutions to support our activities, covering architectural design, structural design, mechanical and electrical design, interior design, and landscape design. Crucially, we provide the technical details, calculations, and specifications to turn concepts into reality.
With dedicated departments for each aspect, ProBuild360 doesn't bring clients problems but solutions. In the absence of issues, we offer enhancement and value engineering to elevate every project. Your vision is our mission, and we're here to deliver seamless, high-quality solutions from start to finish.
See more
