Terry Pawson lodges defence against £3.5m ‘defective’ house claim

The architect and co-defendant, builder GPF Lewis, have both lodged defences to the claim made by Rob Burdett and his former wife Patricia, who claim that the property’s construction caused them ‘serious inconvenience, discomfort and distress’.

When the Burdetts put the five-bedroom property with basement swimming pool on the market in 2023, they claim estate agents estimated that faults with the property had knocked millions off its potential value.

‘Had the property been sold free from defects, it would have been sold at a price of £6.5 million,’ the particulars of claim noted. ‘However, as a result of the defects, it was sold [in 2025] at a price of £3.1 million.’

In their defence filings, both the architecture practice and GPF Lewis denied that they were responsible for the diminution in the value of the property at 42 Parkside Gardens, which was eventually sold late last year.

TPA began work on the scheme in early 2010 and construction started in 2014, with completion initially scheduled to complete by July 2015. But progress was allegedly delayed by problems with waterproofing the property.

In the first half of 2016, Burdett claims that construction was delayed after ‘multiple instances’ of water leaking into the basement and garage. The claimants moved into part of the property in April 2016, but moved out again within a month, considering that even these spaces were ‘not fit for habitation’.

The claimants moved back into the property on 21 June 2016, three days after Terry Pawson’s practice issued a certification of practical completion.

In its defence filing, TPA states: ‘It is denied that the property was uninhabitable at the date of practical completion, since it was as a matter of fact inhabited by the claimants (of their own volition) and was occupied by the first claimant [Patricia] for several years afterwards.’

In the following years, the claimants say, both they and GPF Lewis had sought third parties to carry out investigations into the supposed problems with the property, but these were inconclusive.

‘TPA continued to attend the site to inspect and to issue defects lists. As far as the claimants are aware, however, TPA did not review its design nor otherwise take any steps to rectify any defects therein,’ the Burdetts aid in their claim.

In December 2022, the claimants allege, independent experts agreed there were ‘fundamental issues with the design and/or construction of the property and that the only proper way to rectify them would be to demolish large parts of the house and rebuild them’. It is a claim which both defendants deny.

Rather than knocking the property down and rebuilding it, the Burdetts – who had separated in 2020 after 20 years of marriage – agreed to sell it.

But the problems with the property meant this proved challenging, with prospective buyers put off by the property’s defects, they allege. It was eventually sold for £3.1 million in September last year.

In its defence, TPA argued that the Burdetts had ‘failed to identify causative design defects in any of TPA’s drawing and/or the specification. In all instances the cause of the relevant defect (if established) was workmanship failures, for which TPA is not responsible.’

The architects also denied that drawings or information prepared by the practice lacked ‘comprehensive detail or adequate referencing’ and noted that ‘no specific inadequacy [was] identified by the claimants’. The defence also states that the Burdetts had ‘failed to adequately identify the aspects of TPA’s design that were allegedly defective’.

The Burdetts’ particulars of claim include mentions of ‘several serious issues’ linked to waterproofing.

Regarding this, Terry Pawson Architects’ defence states: ‘A green roof holding water is not indicative of water ingress as it is an intrinsic characteristic of the roof design. The issue that was being identified was excessive water retention caused by a workmanship issue.’

The practice also denies the claim for ‘distress and inconvenience’. The defence goes on: ‘Any distress or inconvenience caused to the claimants was suffered as a result of GPF Lewis’s failure to remedy the defects during the defects liability period and/or as a consequence of cover under the policy and/or as a consequence of the claimants’ delay in marketing and selling the property, the latter representing a failure to mitigate.’

Meanwhile GPF Lewis has pointed the finger at the architects in its defence. Its document, filed with the High Court, reads: ‘It is denied that GPF’s (alleged) breaches were the effective cause of the losses being claimed.

‘The relevant or effective causes of the claimants’ loss were the defects in TPA’s designs and the defective performance of its duties.’

The builder also claims the property was not unfit for habitation, that water ingress was intermittent and remedied, and that the Burdetts’ action was time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980, as the ‘cause of action accrued more than six years prior to the date the claim was brought’.

A spokesperson for Mills & Reeve, TPA’s solicitors, said: ‘Terry Pawson Architects Limited has filed a defence, disputing the claimants’ allegations in full. The company looks forward to defending its position and will not comment further on the ongoing litigation.’

TPA was founded by Terry Pawson in 2001. The practice’s projects include the Musiktheater in Linz and the Carlow VISUAL Centre for Contemporary Art.

The court documents reveal that Terry Pawson Architects ceased day-to-day trading in October 2016.

GPF Lewis has been contacted for comment.

The claimants have until 26 March to serve replies to the defendants’ defences. The case continues.