Yes Harts, maybe they could .. But unfortunately Daniel Andrews is only prepared to talk about the cladding crisis. And the only reason this is front of mind of anyone in government is because the industry itself is bleating.
In the latest news I see that he is asking the Commonwealth to cover half of (the) cost of cladding rectification.
See
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-16/flammable-cladding-removal-fund-victorian-government/11311518
Josh Frydenberg has already sent him packing on that one.
And the rest of the funds are going to come from an increase in the levy on building permits!!
The article does state that this increase will affect larger buildings with works worth more than $800,000. In the very next paragraph however it says The cost increase for a two-bedroom apartment worth $610,000 would be $2,200..
So it's not clear exactly who is going to be affected by the increase..
Builders Collective petitioning for a Royal Commission
Page 2 of 3
Predictably some members of the property sector aren't too happy about the plan to increase the building levy.
This sparked a backlash from members of the property sector, with the Property Council of Australia (PCA) warning levies were expected to increase 700 per cent for some buildings worth more than $1.5 million.
"The increases, which are being proposed for new projects, are disproportionate and unreasonable when you consider that the buildings being targeted for rectification have previously been lawfully approved under the Victorian building code," PCA Victorian deputy executive director Matthew Kandelaars said.
See:https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-17/apartment-owner-welcomes-victorian-combustible-cladding-fix/11315278
Somebody else makes the very real point that:
such an approach......... could easily force the cost of the entire project into the billions, especially as other issues of non-compliance are exposed when the cladding is removed.
Highly likely.
This sparked a backlash from members of the property sector, with the Property Council of Australia (PCA) warning levies were expected to increase 700 per cent for some buildings worth more than $1.5 million.
"The increases, which are being proposed for new projects, are disproportionate and unreasonable when you consider that the buildings being targeted for rectification have previously been lawfully approved under the Victorian building code," PCA Victorian deputy executive director Matthew Kandelaars said.
See:https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-17/apartment-owner-welcomes-victorian-combustible-cladding-fix/11315278
Somebody else makes the very real point that:
such an approach......... could easily force the cost of the entire project into the billions, especially as other issues of non-compliance are exposed when the cladding is removed.
Highly likely.
Secondary to the cladding debacle is the rubber stamping of a dangerous product by Building Surveyors and those responsible for fire safety in high rise buildings. It is a very sad indictment on the majority of industry professionals that include the regulatory bodies who ignored warnings from the few more responsible building professionals that dared express their concerns.
Insurers have already started putting up general building insurance
My renewal is up 10%... I certainly don't want to also have to pay a premium on my federal taxes?
Cladding insurance crisis hits owners of affected apartments
OT, Battlers and punters should start collecting data and taking photos of their new builds. my2c
Forewarned is forearmed
My renewal is up 10%... I certainly don't want to also have to pay a premium on my federal taxes?
Cladding insurance crisis hits owners of affected apartments
OT, Battlers and punters should start collecting data and taking photos of their new builds. my2c
Forewarned is forearmed
Cladding rectification is undoubtedly going to open the can of huge worms that is our building industry at the moment if this story which appeared today is anything to go by.
The residents of an apartment block in Frankston in Melbourne's south east, that is the subject of an emergency order due to combustible cladding, have apparently been flagging concerns with the Victorian Building Authority (VBA) about a range of issues for years.
There's mushrooms growing in the building, there's leaking windows and doors," Mr Finch said.
"We're on our third balcony collapse."
"I don't care what that means. They've let us down in such a bad way if they find stuff under there that needs to be fixed, it needs to be fixed. They just can't just patch work the problem."
See: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-18/ ... s/11318746
(Yes, I'd like my house brought up to code as well. And not just have the builder and surveyor given a little tap on the fingernails and told to do better, while the building designer walks away scot free.
Some other choice bits from the article:
engineers are concerned removing the cladding will expose a litany of fire safety problems.
"I have never seen a compliant building," engineer Jonathan Duler said.
Mr Duler, who works for a fire and forensic engineering firm, Basic Expert, said common problems include faulty fire detection, smoke ventilation and sprinkler systems, walls and plumbing not sealed properly, and unsafe fire exit and elevator systems.
"I would put aside about $3 billion," Mr Duler said.
"It's going to be the biggest and most expensive exercise we've experienced in decades.
"We've got a lot of buildings here. They haven't been done right since 1995, 1997.
How can there not be an inquiry into something that is going to be the biggest and most expensive exercise we've experienced in decades??
The residents of an apartment block in Frankston in Melbourne's south east, that is the subject of an emergency order due to combustible cladding, have apparently been flagging concerns with the Victorian Building Authority (VBA) about a range of issues for years.
There's mushrooms growing in the building, there's leaking windows and doors," Mr Finch said.
"We're on our third balcony collapse."
Quote:
"We want the place brought up to code," Mr Finch said.
"I don't care what that means. They've let us down in such a bad way if they find stuff under there that needs to be fixed, it needs to be fixed. They just can't just patch work the problem."
See: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-18/ ... s/11318746
(Yes, I'd like my house brought up to code as well. And not just have the builder and surveyor given a little tap on the fingernails and told to do better, while the building designer walks away scot free.
Some other choice bits from the article:
engineers are concerned removing the cladding will expose a litany of fire safety problems.
"I have never seen a compliant building," engineer Jonathan Duler said.
Mr Duler, who works for a fire and forensic engineering firm, Basic Expert, said common problems include faulty fire detection, smoke ventilation and sprinkler systems, walls and plumbing not sealed properly, and unsafe fire exit and elevator systems.
"I would put aside about $3 billion," Mr Duler said.
"It's going to be the biggest and most expensive exercise we've experienced in decades.
"We've got a lot of buildings here. They haven't been done right since 1995, 1997.
Quote:
"As time went on builders knew they could get away with things, so it's just been increasing since.
How can there not be an inquiry into something that is going to be the biggest and most expensive exercise we've experienced in decades??
How can there not be an inquiry into something that is going to be the biggest and most expensive exercise we've experienced in decades??
An inquiry or Royal Commission will be resisted tooth and nail by pollies because with few exceptions, most have chosen to ignore numerous widespread well known issues.
The VBA for example was set up as a laughing stock toothless tiger when there was the opportunity to set it up as the benchmark for other Australian States and Territories.
The ongoing broken state of the Australian building industry and the reasons it has been allowed to fester is one of the biggest scandals ever in Australian history.
In the news today
State and territory building ministers agree on national approach to industry reform
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-18/ ... y/11320444
It looks like the recommendations of the Shergold-Weir report are going to be adopted by all states and territories after an emergency meeting of state building ministers.today.
The recommendations centred on the registration and training of practitioners, fire regulations and the role and integrity of building surveyors and regulators.
The Federal Government says states and territories need to help owners.
May not be retrospective though and could be confined to apartment buildings.
State and territory building ministers agree on national approach to industry reform
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-18/ ... y/11320444
It looks like the recommendations of the Shergold-Weir report are going to be adopted by all states and territories after an emergency meeting of state building ministers.today.
The recommendations centred on the registration and training of practitioners, fire regulations and the role and integrity of building surveyors and regulators.
The Federal Government says states and territories need to help owners.
May not be retrospective though and could be confined to apartment buildings.
In the news today
State and territory building ministers agree on national approach to industry reform
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-18/ ... y/11320444
It looks like the recommendations of the Shergold-Weir report are going to be adopted by all states and territories after an emergency meeting of state building ministers.today.
The recommendations centred on the registration and training of practitioners, fire regulations and the role and integrity of building surveyors and regulators.
The Federal Government says states and territories need to help owners.
May not be retrospective though and could be confined to apartment buildings.
State and territory building ministers agree on national approach to industry reform
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-18/ ... y/11320444
It looks like the recommendations of the Shergold-Weir report are going to be adopted by all states and territories after an emergency meeting of state building ministers.today.
The recommendations centred on the registration and training of practitioners, fire regulations and the role and integrity of building surveyors and regulators.
The Federal Government says states and territories need to help owners.
May not be retrospective though and could be confined to apartment buildings.
I do hope that this is not just confined to apartment buildings. You just have to read the posts on here to see how many others suffer with non compliant and unsafe homes due to the greed of many in the building industry. I thank all the honest people on this site that offer endless advice and support to those, like me who have suffered at the hands of others greed and dishonestly.
Yet another story on the ABC this morning:
Brisbane luxury apartment defects force owner out of home still unliveable two years later
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-29/ ... y/11335478
Same tale of inaction by the government authority - in this case the Queensland's Building and Construction Commission (QBCC).
Despite lodging a series of complaints, more than two years later the defects are yet to be fully rectified.
The QBCC ordered construction company Maxcon to fix the leak and later closed the case file after some works were carried out.
After complaining to the Office of Fair Trading that her unit was not fit for purpose, Dr Carter was told the matter was classified as a "warranty" issue, suggesting she could take civil action in court.
The owner of the apartment also mentions the fact that developers are allowed voting rights on the body corporate in the first year. Why?
Dr Carter said developers should not be allowed voting rights on the body corporate in the first year to give new owners greater power.
"That's just ludicrous — that's the year you're finding out what's wrong with the building," she said.
For their part the QBCC are arguing that:
"Due to the ownership structure of the building, and because the roof is considered common property, the QBCC would need to receive a complaint from the body corporate in order for the commission to legally carry out an inspection and investigation into the roof of the building.
"At this stage the QBCC has not received a complaint from the body corporate but will continue to provide advice to Dr Carter on the options available to her."
Brisbane luxury apartment defects force owner out of home still unliveable two years later
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-29/ ... y/11335478
Same tale of inaction by the government authority - in this case the Queensland's Building and Construction Commission (QBCC).
Despite lodging a series of complaints, more than two years later the defects are yet to be fully rectified.
The QBCC ordered construction company Maxcon to fix the leak and later closed the case file after some works were carried out.
After complaining to the Office of Fair Trading that her unit was not fit for purpose, Dr Carter was told the matter was classified as a "warranty" issue, suggesting she could take civil action in court.
The owner of the apartment also mentions the fact that developers are allowed voting rights on the body corporate in the first year. Why?
Dr Carter said developers should not be allowed voting rights on the body corporate in the first year to give new owners greater power.
"That's just ludicrous — that's the year you're finding out what's wrong with the building," she said.
For their part the QBCC are arguing that:
"Due to the ownership structure of the building, and because the roof is considered common property, the QBCC would need to receive a complaint from the body corporate in order for the commission to legally carry out an inspection and investigation into the roof of the building.
"At this stage the QBCC has not received a complaint from the body corporate but will continue to provide advice to Dr Carter on the options available to her."
Unit owners in Sydney's evacuated Mascot Towers building are facing a bill of at least $10 million to repair the 10-storey building.
In the minutes of an owners meeting to be held on August 22, owners will be forced to vote on the $10 million levy to fund the works, with the money paid in quarterly instalments over 15 years. See:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-03/ ... l/11380902
Also in the article:
This week the ABC revealed residents of Opal Tower have tabled a class action suit in the NSW Supreme Court against the State Government.
In the minutes of an owners meeting to be held on August 22, owners will be forced to vote on the $10 million levy to fund the works, with the money paid in quarterly instalments over 15 years. See:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-03/ ... l/11380902
Also in the article:
This week the ABC revealed residents of Opal Tower have tabled a class action suit in the NSW Supreme Court against the State Government.
Four Corners is airing an investigation into the apartment building fiasco, Cracking up, tomorrow night (19 August) at 8.30 on ABC TV and Iview. See related information at:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-18/ ... e/11413122
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-18/ ... e/11413122
Another news report about the problems with apartment buildings across Australia aired on Channel 9 yesterday. Here is the link if you are interested:
https://www.9news.com.au/national/opal- ... b247f5ffaf
The story includes some very strange allegations. For example:
Electrical Trades Union NSW branch secretary Justin Page said there were 30,000 licenced electrical contractors in the state but in the past 12 months only 8000 lodged the safety and compliance certification required by the Department of Fair Trading for each installation.
Is there a plausible explanation for this?
Also:
In the past fortnight, the union found 28 advertisements seeking electricians who were unlicensed or qualified overseas, or for trade assistants to do electrical work. That's in breach of state legislation.
Some of the advertised jobs were for major state government projects including NorthConnex and Westconnex, Mr Page said.
What would such an advertisement look like? Seeking unqualified electricians???? Seeking overseas qualified electricians?
The plumbing union also had their say:
Plumbing Trades Employees Union NSW assistant secretary Chris Seet called for all fire protection and plumbing work to be carried out by licenced professionals.
While plumbing, drainage and gas fitting requires a licence in the state, mechanical services work does not, he said.
"This work is highly specialised and technical. Failure of these systems can lead to things like Legionella outbreak, major flooding and flammable explosions."
While I have no quarrel with the above in principle, I know for a fact that our plumbing work was carried out by licenced plumbers and it was woeful and had to be ripped out and done again. There is no point calling for licenced professionals to do a job if they can self-certify.
https://www.9news.com.au/national/opal- ... b247f5ffaf
The story includes some very strange allegations. For example:
Electrical Trades Union NSW branch secretary Justin Page said there were 30,000 licenced electrical contractors in the state but in the past 12 months only 8000 lodged the safety and compliance certification required by the Department of Fair Trading for each installation.
Is there a plausible explanation for this?
Also:
In the past fortnight, the union found 28 advertisements seeking electricians who were unlicensed or qualified overseas, or for trade assistants to do electrical work. That's in breach of state legislation.
Some of the advertised jobs were for major state government projects including NorthConnex and Westconnex, Mr Page said.
What would such an advertisement look like? Seeking unqualified electricians???? Seeking overseas qualified electricians?
The plumbing union also had their say:
Plumbing Trades Employees Union NSW assistant secretary Chris Seet called for all fire protection and plumbing work to be carried out by licenced professionals.
While plumbing, drainage and gas fitting requires a licence in the state, mechanical services work does not, he said.
"This work is highly specialised and technical. Failure of these systems can lead to things like Legionella outbreak, major flooding and flammable explosions."
While I have no quarrel with the above in principle, I know for a fact that our plumbing work was carried out by licenced plumbers and it was woeful and had to be ripped out and done again. There is no point calling for licenced professionals to do a job if they can self-certify.
The plasterer’s team working on my Metricon home last year were working here on holiday visas and spoke no English. Parts of the job had to be redone, some a few times, as they were neither straight or square. Don’t know about the other trades but assume this type of labour arrangement is common in the volume builder home industry?
That's interesting. And a shame for you but at least bad plastering can't kill you. I don't understand how they would be allowed to get away with hiring unqualified electricians and how they are allowed to advertise for such? If the union wasn't keeping tabs on this who would?
Not the pollies...that's for sure.
Well now it appears there is a second petition asking for a Royal Commission into the building industry.
This one has been started by the owners of a unit in the strata apartment Mascot Towers Sydney.
https://www.change.org/p/gladys-berejik ... tm_term=cs
This one has been started by the owners of a unit in the strata apartment Mascot Towers Sydney.
https://www.change.org/p/gladys-berejik ... tm_term=cs
I think the recent publicity will force apartment developers and builders to clean up their act. Hopefully also the volume builders. Surely now the market has cooled by at least 30% no rational buyer would purchase an apartment without an independent consultants report that confirms the compliance, integrity and quality of the building. It’s clear that government regulation is not effective and can not be relied upon by savvy local or overseas buyers. Apartment sellers will be forced to fund such reports or alternatively heavily discount their product in consideration of the high purchase risk that buyers and their financiers are taking.
An interesting take on the current construction crisis by Catherine Williams, a licenced builder (though she does also have degrees in civil engineering and law which can't hurt), appeared on the ABC today:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-21/ ... m/11431732
Basically she is taking aim at property developers who are swallowing the bulk of the profits from apartment building without having to be accountable in any way.
(D)evelopers have made large profits through a combination of the housing bubble and a quirk in the regulatory system that treats high-rise and low rise developments differently....
Publicly available documents put the cost of (the Opal tower) development at around $215 million. Extrapolating the sale price where its 392 apartments were sold at between $800,000 and $2.5 million each, the developers have made a tidy profit on this project of around $165 million dollars, or a 77 per cent return on their investment.
Or take the Prima Pearl skyscraper in Melbourne.
The builder was paid $230 million, to build 680 "designer" apartments. Labour and materials worth $338,000 was used per home and each sold for an average cost of $1,000,000.
Quite the tidy profit for its developer. Shame about the creaking.
I'm not completely in agreement however with her assertion that when you buy a single-dwelling house and land package you will be dealing with a better-regulated builder - I would have qualified that adjective with the adverb "marginally".
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-21/ ... m/11431732
Basically she is taking aim at property developers who are swallowing the bulk of the profits from apartment building without having to be accountable in any way.
(D)evelopers have made large profits through a combination of the housing bubble and a quirk in the regulatory system that treats high-rise and low rise developments differently....
Publicly available documents put the cost of (the Opal tower) development at around $215 million. Extrapolating the sale price where its 392 apartments were sold at between $800,000 and $2.5 million each, the developers have made a tidy profit on this project of around $165 million dollars, or a 77 per cent return on their investment.
Or take the Prima Pearl skyscraper in Melbourne.
The builder was paid $230 million, to build 680 "designer" apartments. Labour and materials worth $338,000 was used per home and each sold for an average cost of $1,000,000.
Quite the tidy profit for its developer. Shame about the creaking.
I'm not completely in agreement however with her assertion that when you buy a single-dwelling house and land package you will be dealing with a better-regulated builder - I would have qualified that adjective with the adverb "marginally".
The petition started by Andrew Burrell seems to be gaining enormous support - 19000 signatures so far.
In the latest update he says the following:
In the process of contacting various people with regard to my petition there have been comments that we do not need a Royal Commission (RC). Further that if the recommendations of the Shergold Weir Review (now 1.5 years old) were implemented in full then it would alleviate the need for the RC I am asking for. Food for thought ...... however ...
My comment to this is that a Royal Commission could have many more powers to investigate and to legally compel people to testify, give evidence under oath etc, and also be made legally accountable.
I am the first to say I am not an expert however it seems to me that there is at least one glaring omission in all of this: i.e.
The role of the 'limited liability company' mechanism used in our corporations law to protect people from personally being accountable for their actions. I have been told that this concept is a pillar of our free market way of life. Question: When does a pillar become so damaging that we need to evaluate other approaches that put people before profit? This to me seems to one of the major causes of the situation we are in today. Consequently, I am undeterred in my quest for a RC, and it should be one of the major things to be explored in any terms of reference given to such a Royal Commission.
See:
https://www.change.org/p/gladys-berejik ... tm_term=cs
In the latest update he says the following:
In the process of contacting various people with regard to my petition there have been comments that we do not need a Royal Commission (RC). Further that if the recommendations of the Shergold Weir Review (now 1.5 years old) were implemented in full then it would alleviate the need for the RC I am asking for. Food for thought ...... however ...
My comment to this is that a Royal Commission could have many more powers to investigate and to legally compel people to testify, give evidence under oath etc, and also be made legally accountable.
I am the first to say I am not an expert however it seems to me that there is at least one glaring omission in all of this: i.e.
The role of the 'limited liability company' mechanism used in our corporations law to protect people from personally being accountable for their actions. I have been told that this concept is a pillar of our free market way of life. Question: When does a pillar become so damaging that we need to evaluate other approaches that put people before profit? This to me seems to one of the major causes of the situation we are in today. Consequently, I am undeterred in my quest for a RC, and it should be one of the major things to be explored in any terms of reference given to such a Royal Commission.
See:
https://www.change.org/p/gladys-berejik ... tm_term=cs
The petition started by Andrew Burrell seems to be gaining enormous support - 19000 signatures so far.
In the latest update he says the following:
In the process of contacting various people with regard to my petition there have been comments that we do not need a Royal Commission (RC).
In the latest update he says the following:
In the process of contacting various people with regard to my petition there have been comments that we do not need a Royal Commission (RC).
A lot of 'notable' (not able) pollies also fought tooth and nail against having a Banking Royal Commission.
Perhaps those "various people" Andrew Burrell spoke to could recommend something else lol.
The broken industry is a product of the failure of effective regulation and self regulation.
"Various people" also promote that greater regulatory controls would increase costs. Many would beg to differ.
Related
10/05/2023
8
Look at your bill from the electricity company. It should detail the charges. You will need to do some estimating and some calculations. Then charge the…
15/06/2023
2
Site works are just about to start on our build with Blueprint in Midvale. viewtopic.php?f=31&t=106894
8/06/2023
0
Hi all, We are looking to build a new two storey house in western Sydney. Can anyone recommend a smallish builder to go with? We are trying to stay away from the big…