Hi everyone- I have been missing for a long time, but have still been working here in Natal, now for some long time, with my own construction projects for popular housing. and have now been spending some time catching up on the news on Sonhos do Mar.
I have personally visited the development, and can only say that the houses have been built 4" raft of reinforced concrete. The system is called Lajes Ravier and can be checked on Google. In the UK the system is called Floating raft, I believe. It is not yet totally clear why it has resulted in subsidence in some houses, with serious cracking of walls being apparent.
Having spoken personally to one of the unhappy owners it is apparent that they have NOT, as of yesterday been offered compensation yet, as intimated by John Broad, although it may be in the minds of the developer to do so. There do seem to be a number of iproblems with the development, which may or may not be able to be resolved amicably, depending on the will of Grupo Natal. IMG seem to respond in timely fashion to problems that arise.
Unfortunately the legal system here is so slow I expect the posters here have taken to this blog here, to air their grievences, rather than engage in protracted and expensive legal action.
This may or may not be the solution for them, I am NOT a lawyer, but would suggest that any owner engage their own surveyors/engineers here, to check the construction and plans, as it also appears that what was delivered was not what was advertised and paid for, and build quality is something that is in the interests of both constructor and buyer, as guarantee claims can be expensive. Maybe a helpful point would be for the constructor or representative here, directs owners as to WHERE they can obtain copies of the entire project for which planning consent was given, apart from the plans of individual houses. It appears that there are obstacles to obtain them from the town hall.
I will take the time next week to visit the site again, and will be able to report what has been done to rectify those houses which clearly have problems, and as to the provision of the infrastructure that was part of the project, which is now said to have been delivered.
Incidentally the development is known to a number of agents who have declined to market it, as I am told. Any posters here would do well to visit the site before making any comment, as obviously there are very conflicting statements being made by the two sides, directly involved, and third party comments will be ill informed without a site visit, and the TRUTH will only be apparent when the reality is confronted.
If I can be of any help to either side to resolve problems, I am willing to mediate.
Regards
Michael