Confederation of Roofing Contractors  Opiniones 

From my experience they are very helpful and informative!

Not worth the paper they're written on-despite paying the roofer in full, despite him writing on the paperwork that once I had paid in full I would get a 10yr insurance backed guarantee I didn't get anything, when I contacted this useless company for help they did nothing-CORC were dissolved 2018 and reappeared with 2000 in their name in the same office and carried on trading-just a change of company number according to gov.uk-utter rubbish and the one 5 star review I cant believe is real if you read all the other reviews here and all over the internet-

Made a complaint against one of their members and nothing was done. They only wanted to exchange emails from the comfort of their armchair.

As others have stated, totally biased in favour of their members with no interest in following up bad work. Sent them pictures of bad workmanship and having waited 2 weeks had no choice but to get roof fixed by another contractor. At this point they said there is nothing they can do.

Trevor Lamb came to have a look at our roof with his team. He was extremely helpful, efficient and professional. He felt that we had no problem with our roof and we were very reassured by him.

This is a by builders paid association representing the interest of their members only. In case of a building dispute CORC’s services will not mediate independently between parties. Instead, a civil mediator will be required and you would only be wasting your time and nerves with CORC, probably even money as they will negotiate for a favourable result for the paying members / builders. Avoid them and go straight to the civil mediation service offered by the courts.

I hired a roofer on the basis that they were listed on the CORC website as I believed this afforded me protection from poor standard and rogue behaviour. In fact this made me more vulnerable to the pressurised sales tactics and insistence on upfront cash payments that left me with a poorly constructed leaking roof for an extortionate cost. My complaint to the organisation was initially taken seriously, but after a few weeks everything was dropped and the company was relisted despite all the irrefutable evidence I provided that this trader was completely rogue. Avoid them at all costs and don't trust a roofer if he displays the badge, it's not worth the paper it's written on

If consumers believe that the Confederation of Roofing Contractors offers any protection from rogue roofers then consider the following facts based on personal experience.
1) The CoRC provides no protection from cowboys and rogue traders . Until late 2018 they listed as one of their members a company called New Style Building and Roofing Ltd who carried out sub-standard work on my house, and then refused to deal with a complaint, which I had made through CORC complaints resolution process.
2) Proof of the sub-standard state of my roof caused by New Style Building and Roofing Ltd was provided to CORC who agreed I had good cause cause for complaint but were unable to resolve it with contractor making their published “complaints policy” of little worth to consumers. If a trader is a 'rogue' they have no power! And you have no recourse.
3) New Style Building and Roofing Ltd had their membership of the CORC removed, and are currently in the process of being dissolved, leaving unpaid creditors, including myself with a CCJ against them. Standard practice of dodgy traders!
4) The director of New Style Building and Roofing Ltd then did what many similar unscrupulous traders do, he started a new roofing company called Hanson Roofing and Building Ltd. AND GUESS WHAT HAPPENED NEXT – CORC listed the trader under his new trading name. CORC ARE NO BETTER THAN THE MANY OTHER “TRUSTED TRADER” LISTING WEBSITES WHO'S MAIN FOCUS IS COLLECTING THE FEES OF TRADERS AND OFFER NO PROTECTION TO CONSUMERS.
5) Trustworthy and honest traders who are members of the CoRC and use their logo may wish to consider the value of being listed alongside a trader that has been proven to produce poor standards of work , has a CCJ against them and previously had membership removed.