Browse Forums Building Standards; Getting It Right! 1 Oct 19, 2016 6:29 pm Hi All, Firstly based in WA. I have been reading through the many many posts on the H1 forums around getting inspections for all stages of a new build. I fully understand the importance of it, a lot of money goes into building a house and want to make sure it is right. There seems to be different arguments over who you should get to do the inspections and it seems different from state to state, some recommend engineers, some recommend inspection consultants etc etc. As this forum's title states "Getting it Right!" I want to make sure I do this. So in WA, who should you be engaging with to ensure you keep the builder right and honest? I am using one of the bigger WA builders, unfortunately already paid a deposit, but still back and forward over the plans with no date set in for pre-start, no final documents etc. Who do I look at to help me along this path? Who is trustworthy and knows what they are talking about and who are the sharks? For any that are interested, this is the build we are looking at the moment - http://forum.homeone.com.au/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=85194 Thanks for any advise! Cheers Nicjam Re: WA New Build Inspections Who to Use? 2Oct 19, 2016 9:06 pm Hi Nicjam According to surveys trusted & least trusted professions here http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/car ... 2344bec346 Engineers rank at the top... advertising, salesman (& sharks?) at the bottom Designer,Engineer (Civil,Const & Envir),Builder,Concrete & Masonry Contract.Struct Repairs Re: WA New Build Inspections Who to Use? 3Jan 19, 2017 10:48 pm Hi nicjam, My experience as a building consultant (often called many other names) points to their definition of defect firstly, their list of disclaimers secondly and their experience thirdly. The most likely all-round professionals for such a task are builders, architects and possibly structural engineers. Structural engineers are obviously best at structures... but what if they will not get in the roof space or under the timber floor... not much use then. Some building consultants have a mind boggling list of disclaimers including commonly... "we do not traverse pitched roofs / we inspect sub-floor space from door / we inspect roof space from hatch / we do not inspect metal products which are covered under a plumbing warranty". Steer clear of such a firm. As to the definition of defect, I would start there because most do not find even 33% of the defects... because they do not consider time-related life expectancy issues / manufacturer minimum requirements or cheap so-called 'alternative solutions' thought up and carried out by non-experts to save money. Good luck mate. It's not going to be east to find a real expert at that job... my opinion of course. Re: WA New Build Inspections Who to Use? 4Jan 20, 2017 3:51 pm If you believe leonardo_23 you will need a cross between Superman and Spiderman (leonardo23 in disguise), Superman because he knows everything and Spiderman because he can get to spots no human can. Superman is so good that he does not need professional indemnity insurance because nothing can ever be missed and nothing can ever go wrong. Spiderman of course is so good he can traverse roofs and walls, and squeeze into spaces full of pipes and ducting in a way no human can. Spiderman of course does not need to follow occupational health and safety laws because well... he is not human. Good luck with all of that! For us, human inspectors, we need professional indemnity insurance because we can never be as good as leonardo_23 and because occasionally we do get it wrong and even the best inspector (surgeon or a lawyer) will sometimes miss the beat and be sued. To get PII you have to agree to insurer's terms and that includes reporting format and disclaimers, limitations and exclusions all based on AS reporting standard.The law requires us to work safely. Leonardo_23 is at war with AS reporting standard and thinks we should be so good, beyond written standard and beyond human errors. We should risk bodily harm to get into unsafe places in the interest of perfect inspection. Inspectors are all lazy and just use disclaimers to get out of inspecting. And of course, how can human inspectors compete with a perfect defect list that only Superman can produce You can get on to leonardo_23's bus and travel to la la land or you can face reality, that there is no such thing as perfect inspection and it should be viewed merely as a risk reduction. As inspector with close to 10000 building and property inspections I have close to perfect record, I wish I was a Superman Foremost Building Expert in Australia,assisting with building problems/disputes, building stage inspections,pre-contract review advice for peace of mind 200 blogs http://www.buildingexpert.net.au/blog Re: WA New Build Inspections Who to Use? 5Jan 20, 2017 7:08 pm Hi nicjam, You seem to have started off a fiery debate here... and I will say just the following and leave it up to you to decide. To decide which path to take, you must choose between:- getting a building consultant (sole operator) with PPI who is careful but who will still get on a roof if he considers it is safe to do so (because he has no hip disorder, is not overweight, is sure footed, keeps fit and the roof is not wet, not slippery, not over-dusty, not over 26 degrees... and because he has done this thousands of times with nothing close to a mishap, OR getting a building consultant with PPI who calls himself expert, but who will not walk around carefully on a roof because of his interpretation of loosely worded occupational and safety rules for employees (which the other building consultant has actually had it out with OH&S advisors), and so will not find hairline split roof tiles (not yet separated), will not find as many as reasonably possible roof tiles with under-check chips (which often leak), will not discover the extent of rot in Dutch gable fascia boards, will not see actual gaps in flashings, will not find tears in lead flashings, will probably miss slipping roof tiles / peeling roof tile final pointing coats, will not discover some or all flashings that are the incorrect type uphill from Colorbond gutters and many more possible defect items than those listed here... and that is just the one disclaimer. It may also interest you to know that by not making the extra effort, vital experience and knowledge is lost. Only a few years ago, 400mm access was considered to be adequate clearance under floors for pest controllers, but now 600mm is the go... why?... to allow for fatter people?... I don't think so. In my opinion it is because the codes for building inspections writers (owners of larger firms) saw their chance to cover their posteriors in case their employees slipped up by being lazy or unfit or not careful individuals... for insurance reasons. As they say they who doth protest the loudest have the most to lose. I rest my case. You decide the best path to take. Re: WA New Build Inspections Who to Use? 6Jan 21, 2017 9:08 am I am not protesting anything nor do I have anything to loose and am more than happy to stand by my inspection record. I am just pointing out absurdity of your your advice. There is no fire in anything I say, just cool reason. So now you got to get inspector to do a fitness test before you give him the job? You will make more money being a comedian. Perhaps now that you are retired you can. Foremost Building Expert in Australia,assisting with building problems/disputes, building stage inspections,pre-contract review advice for peace of mind 200 blogs http://www.buildingexpert.net.au/blog Re: WA New Build Inspections Who to Use? 7Jan 21, 2017 9:01 pm One thing about you I have noticed is that you must have the last word... let's wait and see. It's not about you!... it's about the consumer getting sufficient knowledge to make an informed decision. And many building inspection reports have a heap of disclaimers... and some do not. That is all. Re: WA New Build Inspections Who to Use? 8Jan 24, 2017 6:44 am No it's not about me, it's about you. You think you are Andre Rieu of building inspecting because you walk on the roof, and presumably other inspectors don't. Therefore they miss defects you pick up.Wrong! I have news for you. Our company policy is not to walk on the roof unless it is safe, but we do get on a ladder and lean it on gutter and have close look at the roof in front. And then with telephoto zoom have a closer look and take hi def photos. If it is necessary and safe we do get on the roof. Similarly we will get into roof space for the purpose of termite inspection likewise under floor space. If I inspected new home at frame and pre plaster inspection I can't imagine why I would have to crawl in the roof space for pre final, because I have already seen structural and roofing elements, insulation I check with thermal imaging. What about you? Have you invested in thermal imaging for detection of building defects? If not (i am pretty sure you have not) why not? Probably because apart from blabbing on about walking on the roof you don't think it is necessary to invest in the best equipment so you customers can have the best certainty. I can assure you have missed tons of defects that I pick up with thermal imaging. What about your education? I am pretty sure you don't have qualification in building surveying (i know you are retired architect). Conformance and compliance are two most important issues in inspection and unless you have qualification your opinion is only lay person opinion, just as mine would be about engineering. So you go around offering unqualified opinion to your customers, nice work! So Andre Leonardo23, before you start grandstanding and playing your tune make sure your Stradivari is not missing strings because all I can hear is noise. Foremost Building Expert in Australia,assisting with building problems/disputes, building stage inspections,pre-contract review advice for peace of mind 200 blogs http://www.buildingexpert.net.au/blog Re: WA New Build Inspections Who to Use? 9Jan 24, 2017 1:45 pm As regards thermal imaging, I imagine the cost would be borne by your clients. Hi nicjam, I hope you can see that some people protest loudly when confronted with basic truths... and simply must have the last word... as I warned. By entering the roof space it is pretty obvious where the insulation is inadequate, and for one or more of a variety of reasons too... which expensive toys like thermal imagers would generally pick up but still not necessarily reveal the ramifications of the inadequacy. And if the insulation must be completely re-laid or merely fitted more snugly. I think that you the owner would like to know what was necessary to fix the problem and whether access was actually safely possible for an insulation installer (by the building consultant actually getting there to see the reason for the inadequacy. Obviously, if you pay someone with expensive unnecessary equipment twice the price 5 times instead of half the price for 3 inspections which reveal the detail of the problems, it will be possible for that lazy or unsure-footed or unfit consultant to pick up things he would not pick up at a final stage inspection or when you are wanting to buy a completed house. As I explained in my previous advice, vital knowledge and experience is not gained when disclaimers are unreasonable, because the mind-set attached to not making the extra (reasonable) effort takes over. That is why so many building consultants hide behind the very (unreasonable for the home owner) sloppy codes for building inspections AS4349 series. Also, by not getting in the roof space at an advanced stage, the truss bracing (both aspects) would not be adequately checked as would also be the case with truss to truss connections and tie-downs. So that building consultant cannot state that the roof structure is sound... just one of several things that most building consultants miss. Also any building consultant can become informed about compliance issues by reading the pertinent regulations. I think I'll leave this topic alone, because it is not telling you anything you wish to know... but you can see out of interest if Mr 'Must Have The Last Word' strikes again with more babble. It is a fact of life that the truth hurts... especially when you have been doing it wrong for so long. You have mandatory building inspections and privately engaged building inspections. The difference between the two comes down to inspecting the building so it's safe and… 3 18075 That sucks! Hope it all works out. Good to move away from steel anyway for all your reasons, but it's also thermally poor. 16 17888 If what you describe is correct then the brick wall has been dry lined with villa board. That basically means that the villa board is glued to the brick wall with… 3 8316 |