Room to Improve.

pilly

the_pen_turner wrote: »

i would agree with you in general but not here on that show. she clearly had no clue about how her dream would be built or what issues there were .
all she cared about was the end result and screw everything else. its the tough **** i want it attude that is the problem.
when the drainage pipe issue discusion happened she winged and cried to get what she wanted.

Hang on, did she or did she not get the under-floor heating? Yes she did so the 3 of them telling her she couldn't have it were wrong, she was right, end of.

Fair play to her I say, not easy as a woman doing a project like that on your own and especially not with builders who just don't want a little extra hassle.

matrim

loyatemu wrote: »

I'd love to see an episode where the client fired Dermot (as he frequently deserves).

"These aren't windows I specified"
"Ah yes, I decided to change the spec without telling you"
"GTFO Dermot"

I don't know if it's true but I remember hearing that a planned episode from a couple of years ago didn't go ahead because the client and Dermot couldn't agree on plans.

Hurrache

GT_TDI_150 wrote: »

I know nothing about nail salons but if i was setting one up id be getting a few costings to see where i stand...

And she did do that, what do you think the QS was there for?

Addle

matrim wrote: »

I don't know if it's true but I remember hearing that a planned episode from a couple of years ago didn't go ahead because the client and Dermot couldn't agree on plans.

Why would dermot have to agree? He works for the client, or is supposed to anyways.

Franz Von Peppercorn

deco nate wrote: »

I'd rather see a realistic look at an upgrade to a house..... Don't be a....

Very condescending remark by you.

Her budget was 140k. Totally normal for RTI.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Sunny Dayz wrote: »

I have to say I'm a bit uncomfortable with how last nights episode went. Leaving aside how the client came across, the attitude of Dermot, the QS and the builder to the client was disappointing. I got the impression that the QS didn't like her, that Dermot wasn't respectful to her and that the builder would have little or nothing to do with her.
Am I picking up things wrong?

I’d be on her side. Even with biases editing it’s clear Dermot was doing his own project. That’s fine for people who don’t have ideas but she did.

I don’t really see her as pushy. She didn’t get what she wanted in most cases. In fact she was a bit of a pushover.

Penn

pilly wrote: »

Hang on, did she or did she not get the under-floor heating? Yes she did so the 3 of them telling her she couldn't have it were wrong, she was right, end of.

Fair play to her I say, not easy as a woman doing a project like that on your own and especially not with builders who just don't want a little extra hassle.

It depends. Steps internally should be a reasonable depth, as a step that's too small could be considered a trip hazard as it's harder to see and may make it seem like the step is deeper than it is. If Dermot's objection was that raising the floor level to accommodate the underfloor heating (given the issue with the drainage pipe) would mean the step would have to be reduced and could be considered a trip hazard, then he was right to point that out to her.

Ultimately, so long as it was still within building regulations, that's her final call to make even if it wouldn't be best practice. But he was right to make a point of it and recommend against it.

Franz Von Peppercorn

GT_TDI_150 wrote: »

Im worried about how budgets are run in the company she is "a very senior person" in if last night is anything to go by

Only relevant if she is in finance.

Sleepy

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Her budget was 140k. Totally normal for RTI.

The last figure mentioned was €175k and it's safe to say with the way her spec kept changing that it likely sailed far north of that.

podgemonster

A lot of comments disregard her project management skills but I think we got a glance at how she operates. She's sets a high standard from the get go with absurdly low budget which ensures she's then consulted about every additional cost or any potential cut. Then compromises along the way (electric gates) but on something's she remains unmoved (underfloor heating).

Her reaction in the coffee shop about the overspend is nowhere near as concerned as she was about the underfloor heating which would suggest to me she had plenty more cash in the kitty but didn't want to reveal to Dermot as she wanted control.

The phrase in the garden regarding the piping "ye guys are the experts ye just have to figure it out and get it done" is something I hear everyday from non-technical PM's. They have a deliver/budget/timeline and what happens in between is noise. I'd say she probably gets a lot out of people shes manages but would be difficult at times to work for.

jodaw

Penn wrote: »

Ultimately, so long as it was still within building regulations, that's her final call to make even if it wouldn't be best practice. But he was right to make a point of it and recommend against it.

He could have maybe offered other options like a low profile retrofit system with tiled floor on top. But everyone flat out said no possible. I was happy she got the uhf in the end.

HeidiHeidi

Wow, I don't think I've ever seen an episode of RTI provoke such a reaction!

I'm incredibly frustrated at not being told the final figure for the job - really the whole thing is pointless without knowing that. I agree that she was probably being canny in having more to spend but not declaring it up front - but the programme giving an initial budget, then some costings and warnings about her wishlist spiralling the costs, and then nothing more is just silly. She could have spent €300K in the end for all we know.

Personally I'd have killed the pair of them if I'd had to deal with them!

Franz Von Peppercorn

loyatemu wrote: »

I'd love to see an episode where the client fired Dermot (as he frequently deserves).

"These aren't windows I specified"
"Ah yes, I decided to change the spec without telling you"
"GTFO Dermot"

He should have been fired yesterday. Of course they wouldn’t show that episode.

baldbear

jodaw wrote: »

baldbear wrote: »

Or maybe some fault lies with the client for having unrealistic expectations.

No it does not. I go to an architect and tell him i have 130K and this is what i want. He proceeds to tell me want i can get. If i am not being real he can tell me then and there.

The lady last night added 14k extra & wouldn't listen when told that's not in the original budget. Nightmare to deal with.

pilly

mfceiling wrote: »

Without doing it the way it was originally planned on the drawings. They had to put a step in to get it to work.

And so what? There were 3 of them telling her that it absolutely couldn't be done when that just wasn't true.

Franz Von Peppercorn

podgemonster wrote: »

A lot of comments disregard her project management skills but I think we got a glance at how she operates. She's sets a high standard from the get go with absurdly low budget which ensures she's then consulted about every additional cost or any potential cut. Then compromises along the way (electric gates) but on something's she remains unmoved (underfloor heating).

Her reaction in the coffee shop about the overspend is nowhere near as concerned as she was about the underfloor heating which would suggest to me she had plenty more cash in the kitty but didn't want to reveal to Dermot as she wanted control.

That’s insane. You don’t show builders or architects your current account. You set a budget. They should meet it or agree a new one.

The phrase in the garden regarding the piping "ye guys are the experts ye just have to figure it out and get it done" is something I hear everyday from non-technical PM's. They have a deliver/budget/timeline and what happens in between is noise. I'd say she probably gets a lot out of people shes manages but would be difficult at times to work for.

She wasn’t PM here, she was the client. I’m sure if your company agreed a budget with clients you don’t get to come back to them and say “no, impossible” or “now that we’ve started you can have what we agreed for 50% more”. That’s a contractual breach.

Sleepy

They were telling her it couldn't be done without creating a trip hazard. She threw a strop. They built it with the trip hazard as she's clearly willing to live with it.

Franz Von Peppercorn

baldbear wrote: »

The lady last night added 14k extra & wouldn't listen when told that's not in the original budget. Nightmare to deal with.

She was fine with the added extras that she added herself. Not with the other added costs.

It strikes me that builders get away with a lot of contractual violations compared to other forms of contracts.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Sleepy wrote: »

They were telling her it couldn't be done without creating a trip hazard. She threw a strop. They built it with the trip hazard as she's clearly willing to live with it.

She didn’t throw a strop. She said “let’s do that”. And you are misrepresenting what happened - they said it was impossible to begin with.

Sleepy

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

She wasn’t PM here, she was the client. I’m sure if your company agreed a budget with clients you don’t get to come back to them and say “no, impossible” or “now that we’ve started you can have what we agreed for 50% more”. That’s a contractual breach.

Most of the over-run was related to changes she made that were outside the work specified in the contract.

The rest was due to unforeseen problems i.e. the reality of renovating an old house. The latter is why you're never supposed to begin such a project without a contingency fund: as was pointed out to her by the QS. She was right that her requirements hadn't changed, the circumstances in which they were to be built, however, did.

Call me Al

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

She was fine with the added extras that she added herself. Not with the other added costs.

It strikes me that builders get away with a lot of contractual violations compared to other forms of contracts.

I think the concern from the qs was that this client had requested changes/extras totalling 14k whilst having experienced structural costs of 6k. And she hadn't given any indication to the qs as to whether or not she could pay for it.

Sleepy

podgemonster wrote: »

The phrase in the garden regarding the piping "ye guys are the experts ye just have to figure it out and get it done" is something I hear everyday from non-technical PM's. They have a deliver/budget/timeline and what happens in between is noise. I'd say she probably gets a lot out of people shes manages but would be difficult at times to work for.

Yeah, I'd recognise that from the IT world too: PMs that don't understand the projects they're managing usually fall back on it and the result is usually a cost over-run, a delay or a poorly developed/implemented solution.

I'd say she's a nightmare to work with.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Sleepy wrote: »

Yeah, I'd recognise that from the IT world too: PMs that don't understand the projects they're managing usually fall back on it and the result is usually a cost over-run, a delay or a poorly developed/implemented solution.

I'd say she's a nightmare to work with.

Again, she’s a client here, not a PM.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Funny reactions here. We did our kitchen a few years ago. Turned out lovely but during the process as they began cabinetry I noticed the colours were wrong. ( I just happened to be there too as we had mostly moved out). We had agreed two tone but it was all one tone. I opened up other boxes to see.

So called the PM/main contractor to fix it. The cost would have been on her even if she couldn’t replace it cost free as far as I was concerned. She didn’t raise a fuss though. The one built cabinet was removed and new supplies arrived that day.

Here Christine was supposed to get red bricks but didn’t. A blue kitchen but didn’t.

And it might have been the editing but I didn’t see her agreeing to either until they appeared at the end.

The Princess Bride

pilly wrote: »

I would have had uproar over that!

Did anyone notice that the press the island went back into was black also? What was that about?

Ugly.

jodaw

pilly wrote: »

I would have had uproar over that!

Did anyone notice that the press the island went back into was black also? What was that about?

The Princess Bride wrote: »

Ugly.

And Dermot looked so proud of himself showing it off. Not so much an island as a chopping block on legs. Ikea sells much nicer ones.

Utopia Parkway

I presume this is the show that was cut from the last series? The way Dermot and Lisa made numerous mentions about how difficult the build was. And the fact that there seems to be some noticeable conflict between the builders and the client. They threw some shade her way at the end too with his mention of "notions".

Your one was a dose alright but Dermot himself tried to pull two sly fast ones on her with the darker red bricks and ordering a different coloured kitchen behind her back.

The portable "island" at the end was worth it for the laugh alone. It looked like a butchers block on top of a trolly.

Ultimately I don't think either her or Dermot came off looking well from last night's show.

GT_TDI_150

Hurrache wrote: »

And she did do that, what do you think the QS was there for?

The qs is there to price dermots designs...


Doing prep work would refer to having done some pricings in advance to measure if your wishlist is achievable in the budget available.

GT_TDI_150

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Only relevant if she is in finance.

Yeah coz a logistics manager or hr manager or it managers doesnt deal with budgets....

seamus

Sleepy wrote: »

It spoke volumes that none of the construction team were at the launch party at the end tbh. According to posters on Twitter this project ended up in court after the initial contractor walked off the job and was eventually finished by another builder. Given the tantrums and tiaras behaviour they actually showed from her, you'd have to wonder what CocoTV edited out for fear of further litigation!

Someone on Twitter also astutely noted that this house is the "missing" episode from last season. And given that she was pestering Dermot on Twitter in October suggests that it wasn't finished until sometime towards the end of the year.

For a build that size, even six months would be excessive, so the fact that they were at it for the bulk of a year would definitely indicate there had been some massive issue midway through.

Addle wrote: »

Why would dermot have to agree? He works for the client, or is supposed to anyways.

Sure, but for some clients it'll be all or nothing. They lay out what they want, and if Dermot says it can't be delivered due to physics or budget, they might just abandon it altogether.