A HAMPTON resident and building firm look set for a long legal battle over the £50,000 paid to carry out work on a "dream home".

Barbara Carr, a resident of St Andrew Road, says only 15 per cent of work on a one-room extension on her bungalow was completed - but Ian Arthurs, from Sedgeberrow Build and Extend, that was contracted to do the work, has hit back saying in fact 70 per cent of work was completed but to the wrong specifications given to him by Mrs Carr.

The dispute could now end up in the courts, after both sides brought in their solicitors.

Mrs Carr told the Journal: "After my husband died two years ago, I decided to move to Hampton to be nearer to close friends and family.

"I bought the bungalow and using a small inheritance from my mother and aunt, I planned some internal alterations and a one room extension to make my dream home.

"I like to use local businesses where possible and was told by Ian Arthurs, of Sedgeberrow Build, that he could undertake all the work.

"Work began in late August. By October, when the planning permission was approved, he stopped the internal work and began the new build. I raised several issues regarding the quality of the work and was assured all mistakes would be corrected.

"As the work progressed it became obvious that the building wasn't square and the workmanship was of a very poor standard. When an attempt at installing a resin roof resulted in rainwater pouring through in 10 different places, I told the builder to stop work and I called out the Building Control Officer."

Mrs Carr said the building control officer and a surveyor who inspected the extension found various issues.

"He left me with a kitchen with no ceiling or floor, a broken ceiling in my lounge, a half tiled unfinished bathroom with no facilities, a hallway with part of the ceiling missing and an exposed, live fuse box, unfinished new windows and doors and a broken driveway," Mrs Carr said.

"He has been paid 93 per cent of the money and 'done' 15 per cent of the work."

Mrs Carr added that Mr Arthurs had been paid £50,400, but with the majority of the work left to do, she cancelled the contract and found a new builder "to rectify all the problems, make the building safe and to complete the project".

But Mr Arthurs, the owner of the firm, hit back explaining the issues had been caused by the wrong specifications.

Mr Arthurs said: "There has been issues, it is in the middle of a legal process now. "We asked for any specifications at the start, but the only thing we were told was that it was a standard specification building. "Then months later, in January, we were told building control had been out and we were handed different specifications. She was given those last June, the dates show that.

"Those were previous specifications were weren't told about, but work had begun.

"In total 70 per cent of the work was completed. All the material, the timber and fabric, she has kept. She wants the whole of the £50,000 back, but has not taken the VAT off that.

"The people looking at this for me (building regulators) had said she actually owes me money. "Any court in the land would rule in my favour.

"I have responded to every call, every email she has sent. But once solicitors become involved, which she did first, I can only say so much.

"And she has written things on Facebook about this, that my solicitors are also looking at.

"We have lose work sorting this out, people cancelled work after seeing the Facebook posts."