About elephants and fleas

Recently I was criticised by my client following pre slab inspection for not including some items in the report.
I had not reported any significant issues in slab preparation. There were some minor defects that I had not reported because it was my view that concrete crew would be doing some last minute adjustments (as I had done countless of times) whilst waiting for concrete (adjusting chair supports,perhaps adding couple of chairs or ties,adjusting clearance, reo or boxing and checking lines). I am calling those last minute adjustments fleas.

My client did not trust my judgment and got another inspector who surprise surprise went to town on fleas and cross referencing with BCA threw the book at the builder. Whilst busy with fleas inspector missed elephant in the room. What was the elephant?

This is a "P"site and the mother of all slab problems is site drainage. I have identified potential flooding problem and said:

"Expert Opinion:

At the time of inspection no significant defects were noted in preparation for concreting

There were no termite collars installed but it is understood that the protection is not required by local council

In my opinion site could become flooded by trapped water and builder is required to strictly implement recommendations of the soil test report below.

Recommendations: copied from soil test

5. Care shall be taken with surface drainage of the allotment from the start of construction and must be well drained so that water cannot pond beside or adjacent to footings. The drainage system shall be completed by the finish of construction of the house in accordance with AS2870-2011 Clause 5.5.3 (a).

6. Proper site drainage is very important in reactive sites such as this site. It is therefore recommended that the ground surface immediately next to the perimeter footings be graded away or site drainage issues be addressed. Should you the client require detailed design for specific site drainage plans please do not hesitate to contact Intrax Consulting Engineers.

In the end my client got a very poorly done slab and it had nothing to do with my inspection, the fleas and everything to do with a dud concretor and a dud builder.
I offered inspection fee refund but the client did not want that and got me to do another inspection.

I was able to report
"Builder has acted on recommendations from my earlier pre slab report and the surface levels are satisfactory for drainage. Builder has installed temporary downpipes for roof drainage."

About flea catchers

There are some inspectors frequently mentioned on this forum that are very fond of quoting BCA and throwing the book at the builder at the earliest opportunity. One in particular has memorised it and bamboozles owners by reciting from memory. That does not make him an expert it just makes him a parrot and a pretender.

So as you can see this story is about elephant handler, flea catchers and an owner who did not trust his expert

What did my client say?

"Thank you very much Branko!! You have been so helpful. I really appreciate your hard work and generosity.
Regards,"

This story does not yet have a happy ending!

Well said Branko... although I do like knowing the BCA or AS reference if the builder says the the inspector is wrong. If I got a report that was technical mumbo jumbo then I would ask for it to be written in plain English!

Thanks

In my view primary purpose of the report is to identify significant issues and communicate to the builder with request they be addressed.
You will get best outcome if you can have productive relationship with the builder, so it's too early to throw the book, it's better to play nice first.

Throwing the book to early will get him offside and on the road to dispute, that could cost you plenty.
I am not averse to playing hard but it's a question of timing and the nature of the defects.

Quoting a lot of BCA in the report is not productive because you are communicating to builder who already is supposed to know all this or he should not be registered.

But that is not the problem. The problem is production control and production control COSTS MONEY. This is where they don't spend it and you get the crap. Do you know that many supervisors don't attend slab pour? What sort of control is that?

Branko... you know the story of my build from being around the forum long enough and so we don't need to say any more about the quality of supervision on my site!