Page 2 of 2
Good point by P East, what about the plumbing?
Yes, your inspector cannot see what is in the ground so I have seen some builder's plumbers water test before they get too far but most don't and testing should be mandatory.
Nevertheless, you inspector should check for any obvious damage, number and position of pipes coming through slab as well as termite protection and many many other things not related to plumbing.
The fact is that unless you have someone on the site all the time, you cannot check and control everything, so there are going to be blind spots. Stage inspections are merely best attempt(from experience) at a sweet point between price and value which nevertheless will still leave owner with some risk. No inspections? Much higher risk.
Another blind spot is pre-plaster inspection, it is not mandatory under building regulations but who will check that your perfectly good building elements have not been damaged by subsequent trades, who will check integrity of fire separation walls in units? Who will check that your walls are straight? Who will check that previously reported framing defects have been fixed? and many other things.
Finally, building surveyor's may (and do) rely on certificates, so regularly despite insulation certificates I find insulation a thermal leaking bucket in majority of homes, see below:
Re plumbing...the new home owner should have a camera put down the stormwater and DWV pipes pre handover to check for damage and also for bits of brick and grout etc. You would be surprised at how much rubble is found in pipes and perhaps also surprised to know that about half of all slab heave cases have been found to be caused by damaged pipes. Pressure tests should also be done.
Building surveyors pass a lot of non compliant work and this is especially true for the plumbing. Plumbers self certify their own work and as far as the surveyor is concerned, if they sight the certificate, they pass it. It is like the lunatics being in charge of the asylum.
I was talking to a senior person in the VBA a few weeks ago about the VBA being unable to stop umbrageous coercion used to erode a new home buyer's rights such as those you have mentioned. It is not a good situation that appears to be coming more common and certainly a worry for you so soon along your journey.
What was the outcome of that conversation with that senior person?
It was agreed that the builders were circumventing the spirit of the regulation. The purpose of my conversation was to let someone higher up in the VBA know that at least some people were aware that the VBA was powerless and that the situation needed change, I wasn't reporting a specific case, I just wanted confirmation for myself that they were aware of the situation.
What good is a pre handover inspection going to do the Lunatics have already bolted.. LOL, who's left to blamed,
That should be the builder's responsibility, they put the mark up $$$ on the lunatic's work.
The VBA here in Victoria was set up under Matthew Guy's watch and was a toothless tiger. They have been given additional powers of late but much more is needed...the marriage break ups, bankruptcies and suicides as a direct result of the lack of regulatory control and policing are testament to this.
Yes, and on the other side of the ledger, a monstrous rise and profits of project builders partly built on profits from under delivery.
The sad part is that building industry is a wonderful industry where there is enough for everyone to get paid well and to do a good job, but it has been perverted with poor regulation and non-enforcement and through greed so that few are paid too much and many too little and the ones paid too much don't put enough back into the industry.
That should be the builder's responsibility, they put the mark up $$$ on the lunatic's work.
Granted.. but you need to catch them red handed in the act, too often the blame gets passed around unless there is evidence.. the following trades causes the damage and it gets too hard to police and the regulators give up
It was agreed that the builders were circumventing the spirit of the regulation. The purpose of my conversation was to let someone higher up in the VBA know that at least some people were aware that the VBA was powerless and that the situation needed change, I wasn't reporting a specific case, I just wanted confirmation for myself that they were aware of the situation.
It's a shame that they know it's an issue, volume builders know they are bypassing the the spirit of the law and getting away with it. I know as a single buyer I have zero weight against the industry, and I also want my house built. So I have to bend to their will, I'm just hoping when I'm not beholden to my need of their building my house I can effect change.
My builder has told me that I am "welcome" to use an independent builder inspector and many of their other customers do, however when going though the draft contract I spotted the below clause tucked away.....
Is this normal ?? Seems like a red flag to me
In the event the Client elects to engage an external inspector during a stage
of the build the contract completion date will extended by the duration of 2
weeks for each report provided to the business.
It probably fits the definition of an unfair term.
Australian Consumer Law (contained in schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (formerly known as the Trade Practices Act).Section 23 Unfair terms of consumer contracts (1) A term of a consumer contract is void if:
(a) the term is unfair; and
(b) the contract is a standard form contract.
(2) The contract continues to bind the parties if it is capable of operating without the unfair term.
(3) A consumer contract is a contract for:
(a) a supply of goods or services; or
(b) a sale or grant of an interest in land; to an individual whose acquisition of the goods, services or interest is wholly or predominantly for personal, domestic or household use or consumption.
Section 24 Meaning of unfair (1) A term of a consumer contract is unfair if:
(a) it would cause a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations arising under the contract; and
(b) it is not reasonably necessary in order to protect the legitimate interests of the party who would be advantaged by the term; and
(c) it would cause detriment (whether financial or otherwise) to a party if it were to be applied or relied on.
(2) In determining whether a term of a consumer contract is unfair under subsection (1), a court may take into account such matters as it thinks relevant, but must take into account the following:
(a) the extent to which the term is transparent;
(b) the contract as a whole.
(3) A term is transparent if the term is:
(a) expressed in reasonably plain language; and
(b) legible; and
(c) presented clearly; and
(d) readily available to any party affected by the term.
(4) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b), a term of a consumer contract is presumed not to be reasonably necessary in order to protect the legitimate interests of the party who would be advantaged by the term, unless that party proves otherwise
I don't dispute that it will take time for the builder to come and fix issues, esp. if they have to organise their subcontractors to return.
But if they are arguing that I don't need my own inspector, by that logic their own inspectors should be ensuring that any work is to the requisite standard.
If my inspector then picks up something that their inspector missed it should not be my problem and at my penalty
In fixing defects after handover time some of the project management and time cost is borne by the owner as well as the builder. Some builders (Metricon in our case) either do not inspect their contractors work, or they simply accept poor work which will covered up by subsequent works (e.g. waterproofing) for the customer to deal with later when problems arise. The reason they don't inspect the work is a combination of trusting, naive first time customers and state governments who appear not to police and enforce their own published building standards. This allows the building companies to maximise their profits at the expense of their customers by employing sub standard contractors who know that most times they will get away with poor workmanship, as it is not checked. Some contractors, I suspect, are employing inexperienced, unqualified and unsafe workers on student and holiday visas to do quick, cheap, substandard work. This should be ringing alarm bells to the Federal Department of Industry and Trade and MP's that the building industry, the state governments, and consumers accept these 3rd world practices. I am wondering what happens in Germany, for example. Norfolk
I don't dispute that it will take time for the builder to come and fix issues, esp. if they have to organise their subcontractors to return.
But if they are arguing that I don't need my own inspector, by that logic their own inspectors should be ensuring that any work is to the requisite standard.
If my inspector then picks up something that their inspector missed it should not be my problem and at my penalty
In fixing defects after handover time some of the project management and time cost is borne by the owner as well as the builder. Some builders (Metricon in our case) either do not inspect their contractors work, or they simply accept poor work which will covered up by subsequent works (e.g. waterproofing) for the customer to deal with later when problems arise. The reason they don't inspect the work is a combination of trusting, naive first time customers and state governments who appear not to police and enforce their own published building standards. This allows the building companies to maximise their profits at the expense of their customers by employing sub standard contractors who know that most times they will get away with poor workmanship, as it is not checked. Some contractors, I suspect, are employing inexperienced, unqualified and unsafe workers on student and holiday visas to do quick, cheap, substandard work. This should be ringing alarm bells to the Federal Department of Industry and Trade and MP's that the building industry, the state governments, and consumers accept these 3rd world practices. I am wondering what happens in Germany, for example. Norfolk
I am happy to come up with some sort of letter and sign it collectively re: Metricon Quality and Delays which arn't regulated at the moment fairly. Everything at our cost!!! They use our money, do not comply and dragging it as much as they want to.. We can take this letter to ACCC, CURRENT AFAIR, METRICON HO and etc... If we complain separetly it been unnoticed or doesnt get us anywhere. Metricon. has been good at some stage maybe but not in my case...this is with true honesty!!! I am continiously been given excuses from day one about my build and its not acceptable.
We are about to sign up with Metricon (nsw) was wondering where we stand on the appointment of the PCA who chooses as my understanding the law changed recently and the client can now choose ?
We are about to sign up with Metricon (nsw) was wondering where we stand on the appointment of the PCA who chooses as my understanding the law changed recently and the client can now choose ?
I would get this clause changed, get a pre contract inspection, don't even need a solicitor, look for someone like this forums Building expert who does this service also, otherwise still get your own guy or pull out of contract, worst case is you get into your home two months late, not ideal but so so so much better than ruining your lives from a poor quality build that will 100% eat years and years of your lives, please be strong and don't cave in, your future happiness is at stake.
Yes builders are using tactics to pressure home owners to use their surveyors in Victoria.
Good reputation of surveying company ......
remember if the builder selects them they work for the builder.
And as someone else above said , sales staff of builders are delightful. They disappear once you sign the contract and most know nothing of building standards.
My SS and the trades were delightful people. Does that mean that they had the time to check workmanship.... no.
If the builder didn’t have anything to gain they would not be sweet talking clients to use their surveyor.
It is worth the extra $ to have someone independent on your side.
QUESTION THE BUILDER WHO DEMAND YOU USE THEIR SURVEYOR. KNOW YOUR RIGHTS. They do want you to sign the contract. Until you sign you have some leverage.
If you builder is asking for 2 weeks to rectify after inspection reports
Are they ok with you delaying stage payments for these 2 weeks?
Will they respond in writing to each item? Is that what they need 2 weeks?
2 weeks seems excessive for a large company who has trades on call at other jobs they can pull in. For a small company that builds a handful of homes a year, I agree trades such as bricklayers and framers can be hard to get back.
But if this 2 weeks was used by my builder to fix stuff and check work done by trades or even show understanding of some items in the inspection reports like what complete separation meant when sending me photos to say it was fixed, I would have been happy.