PD trying to steer us away from Darbecca

Hello,

We are starting a new build within next few months - we had tender already. We intended to use Darbecca after some good reviews in here as well as other places and informed PD of this today. Rather than respond to the email, they asked us to call and basically gave us a spiel about how they don't have to answer to Darbecca. This clearly makes no sense since they do have to answer to us regarding the build so if we are relaying the information from Darbecca there is surely no difference? Has anyone here had a similar situation - I am sure I have seen plenty of PD builds using Darbecca and they seemed to be happy with the results.

They followed up with below email which insinuates, after way they spoke on phone, that Darbecca are not qualified enough. My concern is that they are looking out for their own interests hence trying to recommend someone else but I am not 100% sure. And does anyone have any VIC recommendations aside from Darbecca.

Have you asked Darbecca if they have any of those qualifications?

I agree it's best to have an your own inspector, and a qualified one would seem to have a better chance at getting remediation of any problems?

That's the way it is here in WA, builders generally ignore Inspectors
For Structural Non-compliant stages, Slab/Footings, Brickwork, Framework,etc
Your Building Surveyor will engage a licensed engineer.
The easiest way to check is to search the Australian Standards
AS3600 Concrete Structures
AS3700 Masonry Structures
AS4100 Steel Structures,
AS1720 Timber Structures
The giveaway is in the title
Make sure your Builder References These Australian Standards
hth

It's the same in NSW, volume builders like Metricon have no legal obligation to consider and respond to a private inspectors report therefore they usually won't. If your inspector reports defects mid-build Metricon will push on with the build regardless, requiring your continued progress payments irrespective of defects. If you want them to rectify the defects you may need to dispute their progress invoice by following the disputes procedure in the HIA contract.

There are few structural elemental, ie foundation, slab, walls, frame (wall/roof) checks after lockup stage or mid build, in fairness it's generally too late as you have past respective progress payment stages and it becomes messy.
If an engineer detects defects at structural stages, he should put the builder on notice with "Not fit for purpose" he will be required to provide Data and proof at worse in the civil courts.
OT, 1 :10:100 Ratio eg that 1 structural item fix will wind up costing 100 times the initial cost in a legal dispute that is based on my engineering qualifications, knowledge and structural repair experience
hth

On a side note: Did you employ your own registered building surveyor or did you agree to use one they ‘suggested’?

I think you’ll find PD won’t want you to use any private consultants, regardless of the company.
That is great to hear they are employing a company to complete quality inspections on all their builds....

Will PD let you speak to the BSS group or give you access to their report/notes or whatever they provide PD? I imagine this is unlikely. The reports are only as good if someone checks the work listed is completed. The PD registered builder listed on your contract is very unlikely to visit your site. The unregistered site supervisor may check.

The independent building consultant as you have stated provides reports to you which provides you information on codes and standards you are likely not aware of. You are the one that communicates with PD and requests specific defects are rectified to standard/code....and then you can check works have been completed before being covered up by plaster.
Lawyers are the other professionals PD may choose to respond to. The report is also helpful should you be in the unfortunate situation to need to seek legal advice.

https://www.consumer.vic.gov.au/housing ... ng-company

There are quite a few previous posts with suggestions of consultants. You can call and ask them for their qualifications and experience. There are some that have worked as registered builders and others that maintain registration in their new roles.

Have you signed the contract yet? If not, think carefully about why PD don’t want you to use a private inspector of your choice. This would actually help them to deliver a quality result. Consider their liquidated damages clause as well as this is directly related to their capability and intentions regarding the timeliness and quality of the build.

Dear All,

I know the owner of Darbecca personally. He has several people within his company that are registered. These are INU inspector and DBU Builders. More information to follow. However I understand that in Victoria what PD are doing may breach 132 part 2 of the Domestic Building Contracts Act and he is currently recording all of the losses. As I said, more to follow.

By the way, His company is registered in other states and NZ where it is mandated. It ironic that PD in Queensland are currently responding to every one of his reports.

It is not mandated in Victoria. Hence what PD are doing is up for challenge. Along with any losses.

You cannot impose an obligation on an owner that breaches this act. This act allows home owners to choose whom they wish.

As I said, he is a cleaver person and more to follow.

Like

What is also very interesting is the VCAT matter Goce and Joanne Avramoski V Porter Davis.

In that matter the current Building Manager for PD is quoted in the ruling as saying that took BSS recommendation "On Board" but did not necessarily follow them.

Any body building with PD should demand a copy of the BSS inspection and a note from BSS that the builder has fixed all items.

I would further note that on the next page of the same ruling it states that the QA check is based on the "Criteria" of our inspection process. In other words, there is a set allowable items that can be looked at only. This is discussed at length in the ruling.

Read section 40 and 41 of that ruling below........

Good Luck to anybody that signs with these people.

We all need to vote with our feet.

I have built with Metricon and they welcomed and still welcome Darbecca. Consumer choice will keep these types of clauses out of contracts.

here is the link to the vcat ruling

http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/vic/VCAT/2006/1216.html

It is Avramoski v Barrett Property Group Western Region, who are part of the Porter Davis Homes group.

Thanks for the link. It appears Porter Davis follows the same poor quality policies now as they did 15 years ago as documented by the court report back then. By refusing to be accountable for the quality of their builds they are clearly positioning themselves as bottom feeders targeting customers who will accept poor quality and safety risks. Ethically and legally to avoid any misrepresentation about their product they should make their positioning and policies clear in all marketing and sales representations before prospective customers waste their time and money on them.

We all need to get this feed out there for all to see..........

The best way to stop this is to vote with your feet.

Just reading the PD post below. What is going on?

viewtopic.php?p=1843184#p1843184

Not sure Metricon welcomed Darbecca. Great they rectified rather than ‘took on board’ defects for you. That is not always the case for Metricon or any builder. Much of it comes down to the skills and experience of the site supervisor in understanding the report content and giving a crap. Many don’t check work on site by trades so they accept crap work, don’t check that defects have been rectified.

Don’t trust any builder based on their name or reputation. They are as good as their job on your house.

Yes consumer choice.... with contractual clauses.

I’d also love to know the % of clients building that engage their own RBS in Victoria And not the builder’s recommended RBS.
Most homes by these volume builders in my area have the same RBS listed on their panel on fence.

That happens because the 'powers' that be in the VBA are negligent in their duty to serve and protect the public interest.

What a great example of the VBA. Maybe you should send it to them with a invoice for $1,000,000 as their new logo........ This is so fitting. Love IT!!!!!!!!!!!

On my Metricon build I obtained a rectification order from NSW Department of Fair Trading following a prescribed mediation meeting. This order was Subsequently ignored by Metricon with them breaching its completion date by over 4 Months. Clearly, as per the situation in Victoria, they have no respect for this regulator, let alone consumers rights. Department of Fair Trading simply says if Metricon breaches the order I can now go to court. (NCAT), which is an unrealistic proposition given legal costs and time required.