Mitchells Plain woman furious over R85 000 botched pool
Cape Town - An irate Mitchells Plain couple are angry after multiple problems with their new pool which cost close to R100 000 and has caused more stress than joy.
Jacinta Haskin, 37, from Westridge said they approached BK Pools in May last year to install a pool.
The costs, which totalled around R85 000, came with plans and was inclusive of everything explained Haskin.
“Additional costs were added for a waste tank while the installation was in progress,” she said.
Haskin said the sum of money which she and her husband had saved from their bonuses for two years was paid in four parts during the installation of the pool.
During the installation Haskin said the first problem arose “when 'dropping' the shell into the hole - the shell cracked”.
“After a few weeks we called Zodiac, the company who we purchased our pool vacuum from to come and test the vacuum as it wasn't cleaning the pool, and they found cement in the weir. BK pools dismissed this as our fault because we were supposed to clean the basket,” she said.
Haskin said the company did not instruct them to do so. Then the solar panels which were installed began leaking.
“They sent someone out to fix this, but it's still leaking. We requested a call out for various issues which they say was due to our negligence,” she said.
She blamed the foreman who she said didn’t do a proper handover.
"I have also told them that I did not want him on our property due to his attitude,” Haskin said.
Haskin said it’s almost a year since the completion of the pool and when she requested the pool’s plans she found out that the plans were never submitted.
“We were given the run around and sent from pillar to post, which I did because it was needed, only to later find that the plans were never submitted.
“I was in a state because this could have had detrimental implications if we had to be inspected by the City for any reason,” she said.
Haskin said they eventually received the plans last month. She just wanted to highlight the problems they had experienced in case other clients had experienced similar problems.
However, Alicia Lewis, the owner of BK Projects slammed Haskin’s allegations, stating that most of their client’s problems had been addressed.
Lewis referred to a statement where the agreement of work states that should any property damages be caused accidentally, BK Projects SA would not be held liable.
Lewis said that in September Haskin was informed about “the shell incident”.
“The pool was taken over her vibracrete wall, and unfortunately while taking the pool over her wall it took a slight beating. The manufacturer of the pool shell was notified and the repair was done within the same day.
“As explained to Mrs Haskin, the pool comes with a structural warranty, which is still in place and was verified by the manufacturer.
“The damage to the vibracrete wall was also repaired and the slabs were replaced,” she said.
Lewis also blamed the broken basket on the client’s negligence in keeping it clean.
“The basket broke because it was overfull and not cleaned and the suction of the pump stretched it and it broke. The basket was full of sand and leaves, there was no cement. The weir was not cemented closed,” she said.
Lewis said like all their other clients, a walk and talk through of the maintenance requirements was done with Haskin.
“This includes the backwash of the pool and the cleaning of the weir basket.
“This was a maintenance error and not a warranty claim. Fortunately, Mrs Haskin cannot shift the blame to poor workmanship simply because she did not maintain her pool properly,” she said.
Lewis also refuted claims about a faulty solar panel, saying a team was sent out to fix the solar leak, even though Haskin had contacted them after her 6-month plumbing warranty had lapsed.
“We informed Mrs Haskin that we will send someone out the following week to have a look and explained there will, however, be a call out fee charged for the repair as the plumbing was out of warranty,” she said.
Lewis added that she was also thrown a curve ball when she learnt her staff was verbally abused.
“As a company we have a policy in place to note all communication from an unreasonable client, especially the ones who verbally abuse our staff, in the event of the matter becoming a legal one. We have all communications between Mrs Haskin and our office, photos of the processes and disputes and we have no problem defending our company legally,” she said.
Lewis, however, admitted that when Haskin approached the company last month for the pool plan she learnt that the person who was responsible for it was no longer available.
“We do realise that we were at fault in this situation and we attended to the problem immediately.
“Unfortunately, rectifying this problem cannot be done within a day or two, as the council has various stages and different people that must sign off on a plan.
“We immediately had our current draughtsman draw up the pool plan and submit the same to council.
“The average approval time on a swimming pool plan is between four to eight weeks, Mrs Haskin’s pool plan was approved on July 8, in less than a month,” she said.
Lewis concluded: “Mr and Mrs Haskin received a product which they paid for according to our agreement and the contract was accepted in a shorter time period than that was requested. As a standard we request 10 working days, Mrs Haskin’s installation was done in five working days. Issues that were raised, were dealt with within seven working days, with the exception of the pool plan approval. We did not once refuse to assist Mr and Mrs Haskin with any of their queries.”
Weekend Argus