I am currently in 'discussions' with Mena concerning the replacement of the planned integrated aluminium corner living room patio doors with individual side and front facing patio doors separated by a concrete rendered pillar. At first, Mena told my lawyer that this was a permitted alteration because it was required for technical and safety reasons. I considered this nonsense as I have seen many buildings with corner patio doors and took an architect on site to meet with Mena technicians. The conclusion, accepted by Mena's technicians, was that for whatever reason, Mena's architect had not anticipated corner patio doors and that was why the structure was not designed to hold them. I.e the pillar was only necessary because of an error in original design. (This may not surprise those of you who had your patio door openings bricked to half height).Thus, I considered the change a breach of contract. MeNow, Mena are saying that the pillar was part of the original plan and forecasted as being required. In consideration of the fact that the pillar does not appear on the plan attached to my contract, nor on the model in the sales office, nor was it known to Mena's own agents until it was pointed out to them, I will not accept their statement and am persisting with my 'discussions'. In this respect, I should, however, be interested to hear from any other purchaser (through private message or website) who was expecting such a pillar to be built, or is also battling Mena on the same, or similar issue and has been fobbed off with lame duck excuses.