How much compensation should I ask for

Had a meeting with Metricon the day before yesterday. Metricon said they were going to cut off eaves (4 meters long) to be compliant with law. I pointed out it would affect the aesthetic of the house and reduce the market value of the house. Metricon should compensate for the reduced value of my house. However, Metricon declined any compensation and said they would sort out this problem at VCAT. They shut the door completely and did not even try to negotiate with you.

Had a meeting with Metricon the day before yesterday. Metricon said they were going to cut off eaves (4 meters long) to be compliant with law. I pointed out it would affect the aesthetic of the house and reduce the market value of the house. Metricon should compensate for the reduced value of my house. However, Metricon declined any compensation and said they would sort out this problem at VCAT. They shut the door completely and did not even try to negotiate with you.

Eaves influencing market value? Lol. That's not how the market or house values work.

Sounds like you went about it the wrong way, which people here were trying to highlight to you, you didn't listen, and now you have to deal with the consequences.

Keep us up to date with your progress

The issue is that OP is entitled to have his home constructed in accordance with the signed contract.
It seems that builder has blundered and cannot deliver and is now saying we will change it bad luck.
It seems that option of taking the dispute to Building appeals board has not been tried
No owner would be happy with the way the situation has developed and the way builder is handling it.
If I was the owner I would be most unhappy about being steamrolled, If I was the owner I would issue notice of substantial breach and threaten to end the contract and then complete the house at with another builder (after going through appeal) at first builder's expense. I think that prospect of terminated contract may wake up the builder "oops we didn't handle this well"
Just my two bob.

Oh agree, but based on OPs series of posts he probably went into that meeting with no other goal in mind than getting some financial gain out of it.

2 sides of the coin - don't think we have all the info here

Just doesn't sound right

yhfg27 ,JUST because your not 100% up with procedures,doesn,t mean you deserve to be attacked,your the innocent party here,and deserve help,not sarcasm,the wrong doing is no less because the clients are green, attack the wrong,not the right please.

Builder is at fault because it is builder's blunder. This is no time for builder to be arrogant

I agree that it can affect market value. A house with no eaves looks terrible and cheap.

Then you'd be just as wrong as the op. It does not affect market value. Have you ever seen a valuation used by lenders?

Besides if the only redeeming feature before your house looks cheap is the eaves, then eaves aren't the problem.

About time yhfg27 posted up his plans.
From what I can imagine the eave he is talking about must be on the N/W at the rear of his dwelling if the shadowing is affecting his neighbour.If this is the case and and yhfg27 has windows there I would be peeved too because of the sun.
Post up some plans so we can all see the proposed eave cut off,then we may be able to give you some plan of attack re energy factors or whatever from this alteration,and give you some ideas on what to confront the builder with.
Seems they have got their levels wrong in the fall of the land when working out the shadow.

Ponzu everyone can have an opinion and you may not always be correct.

It can affect the ability to sell a house due to the fact that it looks awful and there can be problems that can be associated with not having them.

For me the house would have to be beautiful inside for me to even consider buying a house without eaves.

Market value is not the same as what you think would lower the value of a house. Value is determined by factors such as location, condition, adverse features such as easements/flood prone areas or mine subsidence, comparable sales, selling periods, etc. there are about 50 things considered. What the house looks like is the last thing on the list. Why do you think dumps can get a million bucks? It's not because they have eaves

I looked at no less than 20 vals today in the course of my work and the only time an eave was mentioned was when it was water damaged and rotting. And repair cost factored into a lowered val

Opinions are not the same as facts. Fact is, the op flapping gums about how no eaves on his house would affect his market value would have made him look clueless.

And I'm sorry but the ability to sell a house also isn't reflective of how it looks either. You can have an amazing looking house but if it's in a way out place with zero other redeeming features you'll have more trouble than selling a knock down fibro shack in a gentrifying area.

Take a look sales figures. The houses that have trouble selling are usually the near new places in fringe estates, not the rubbish houses in popular areas that could be literally one storm away from collapsing.

You might not buy it, but 100 others will. That's the great thing about the market. It's not dictated by cosmetic appearances of the property

If you had 2 identical houses side by side. Same floor plan, block size, both Nth facing etc. The house with a eave may not have a higher price listed but I am sure it would either sell for more or sell quicker.

Even if it sells first, the buyers that missed out on that identical house will try for the one next door at the auction 15 minutes after the first. It's identical bar the eaves, right? Not only that but could sell for more because there is one less in the market with almost the same demand. Wouldn't be the first time the second near identical house next door sells for 10% more

That's the market

all good. You can keep making your property choices on aesthetics, while the rest of the people who know a thing or two make money on value.

I am not talking about making money. I am talking about purchasing a house to live in and be happy with the house.

Then you're barking up the wrong tree, because my argument is that lack of eaves doesn't lower the market value.

You're talking about paying for a feature that is a personal preference.

It is very rarely built as a personal preference. The only reason it is done is to get more house on a block of land as it can be built closer to the boundaries and also it is cheaper for the builder.

And it's not a personal preference for the OP. The builder messed up and yes they should be held accountable whether it be financial or by other means.