Browse Forums Building Standards; Getting It Right! Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 21Mar 27, 2014 9:59 pm No problem veseli, I welcome your comments and contribution and we don't have to agree. It's OK to disagree. We are all a product of differing experiences. You are right, many builders don't have a display home and that does not have to reflect on them but you can make up for that with a good specification, I was raising awareness of the importance of standards. Too many people are disappointed when they expect higher standard when in fact their documentation is so poor that they will get nothing more than the minimum standard if that. I have a blog on this topic: http://www.buildingexpert.net.au/blog/n ... t-quality/ Foremost Building Expert in Australia,assisting with building problems/disputes, building stage inspections,pre-contract review advice for peace of mind 200 blogs http://www.buildingexpert.net.au/blog Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 22Jul 26, 2014 3:16 pm With most display homes especially under and above and in between ,what you don't see is that your getting mostly bottom of the market standards,ask them what strength concrete there using,how far are their stud walls,they will put the lowest standard allowed with everything you don't see,then they will option everything you see to the hilt,the display will be very carefully built with their very best trades,they will use cheap products mostly where there is no visual beauty,most of the top homes won't be done by volume builders,I say learn first,then get a top project manager to owner build it for you,will take longer but the end result will be a rolls Royce everywhere ,not just visually,more people need to concentrate on the house structure Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 23Jul 27, 2014 7:22 am Joker With most display homes especially under and above and in between ,what you don't see is that your getting mostly bottom of the market standards,ask them what strength concrete there using,how far are their stud walls,they will put the lowest standard allowed with everything you don't see,then they will option everything you see to the hilt,the display will be very carefully built with their very best trades,they will use cheap products mostly where there is no visual beauty,most of the top homes won't be done by volume builders,I say learn first,then get a top project manager to owner build it for you,will take longer but the end result will be a rolls Royce everywhere ,not just visually,more people need to concentrate on the house structure I disagree with what you say. The fact is that there is not enough money to have the best of everything so you have to make intelligent choices to get the best of what is really important to you and economise with the rest. If you want to live in a Rolls Royce house, you can if you can afford it or you may have to wait to get it in your next life. In this life, volume builder's display homes are essentially "biggest bang for your buck" and generally just good enough in terms of quality. No one has yet found a way to (give you biggest bang for your buck+Rolls Royce quality) No one says you have to settle for it, instead you can choose the best custom builder if you can afford it. The fact is that overall (despite criticism) volume builders are constantly refining and economising to bring you "biggest bang for your buck" and have been great contributors to affordable housing in this country. You want big homes, big bedrooms, cinema rooms, internal external areas etc etc all at affordable prices or instead you can settle for a one room log cabin built to Rolls Royce quality and tolerances. I have four children and all are paying off their homes (this country is better than a Holywood script and we are all very lucky), none of the homes are Rolls Royce but are quite fine and presentable, thanks to volume builders. So next time you go through displays just quietly whisper to yourself (thank you Lord I am not in Albania) Foremost Building Expert in Australia,assisting with building problems/disputes, building stage inspections,pre-contract review advice for peace of mind 200 blogs http://www.buildingexpert.net.au/blog Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 24Jul 27, 2014 10:00 am I agree BE. Project home builders can knock out homes for $1,200- $1,600 per sq m whereas I tell my clients to allow for $2,500 and up for custom builds or extensions and renos. The average family would like the architect designed, custom built home but unfortunately can only afford the Project Home. Some of the project homes I've seen post-build have actually been quite good quality wise. A few small things I could see but overall not bad. Stewie Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 25Jul 27, 2014 11:50 am The point is put your money into the building structure first,you can improve kitchens and finishes later on ,you can't improve house frame,slab,etc once it's built,problems arise when people want finishes they really can't afford,most volume builders won't want to talk about their new home structures has they know their giving bottom standards,but it won't matter to most clients who can't see them, but boy watch out when problems start,also another reason why they don't want you on site too much.To sum it up,I would want my home to not be a rotten coconut when opened up Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 26Jul 27, 2014 8:04 pm Some great arguments in here lol but I have to say, I'd die if they built my house like many displays. Also I think that to view a smaller builders clients houses during construction is going to give you a great insight to their workmanship and quality, which I think is the point of this thread, because you can see behind the plaster...something your just not going to get from a display or project home builder. Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 27Jul 28, 2014 11:50 am building-expert you are already protected by law, Domesctic contracts Building Act 1995 section 6 So you get the display standard or the minimum standard(Australian Standards) whichever is higher So whats the problem here? Seems to me BE is saying that unless you specify the 1st level smicko standard of a display home, you get the 2nd level Australian Standards level of finish. Not a bad thing is it? But as we have seen so often here, many builders will not even adhere to those standards, so their crappy finish work is a 3rd lower standard possibly needing rectification through legal force. Seems to me that veseli's post makes a lot of sense too. Even though I have never engaged a builder for a new home build, as a card carrying cynic, I know most of the things he has highlighted. The issue as I see it, is a layperson's lack of expertise when signing a contract. This is an issue for most people when signing a contract of any sort, whether in the field of property, business, investment, etc, but how many people seek out proper advice from an appropriate consultant before putting pen to paper? So if you were a new home buyer, whom would you consult to help you fill out a building contract and be on top of these issues BE is alluding to? A property lawyer? Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 28Aug 01, 2014 9:12 pm Basic Min standards are set down in the National Construction Code (NCC) these are checked by building surveyors for Compliance (to NCC) and stamped If your building is non compliant then you will need an engineer who refers to the relevant Australian Standards (AS), does calculations, certifies the building,structure,material etc,etc Most Buildings are non complaint... rectifiable problems generally costs 5- 10 times the intial cost of doing it right in the first place I tell my clients choose your builder/tradesman wisely HTH Designer,Engineer (Civil,Const & Envir),Builder,Concrete & Masonry Contract.Struct Repairs Is your build the minimum standard? 29Aug 02, 2014 7:25 am SBG the biggest problem is that people will always chase the cheapest quality product so should open their eyes and expect it. I don't go to the $2 shop and buy an electrical gadget that is australian standard CE compliant and expect it to last a lifetime. People often confuse quality with Standards. They are two different things which is basically what you mention. Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 30Aug 02, 2014 7:54 am The point I was trying to make was that if there is no display home then you have no definition of standard of quality against which you can compare your house build. You can specify the standard of quality but it is not the same as being able to see it. What I said above is not to be interpreted that i have something against smaller builders that don't have a display. Quality and standard are two concepts with different attributes Low standard can be quality build if it has the consistency of tolerances and uniformity of appearance example 2 coat paint finish on walls( no one will tell you that 2 coat paint finish is high standard specification but it is used because you get something that is just good enough to get by) High standard can be poor quality if it does not have consistency and has uneven appearance. People are not stupid, they know that can't have quality build at a low price, it's that some can be greedy and dishonest about it. Just as I crunch builders for poor workmanship I will crunch owners when they try to get something for nothing. Foremost Building Expert in Australia,assisting with building problems/disputes, building stage inspections,pre-contract review advice for peace of mind 200 blogs http://www.buildingexpert.net.au/blog Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 31Aug 03, 2014 10:49 am Display homes are a bit like art...its layer upon layer... they are never always identical when copied! If you want a modern picasso...you have to pay for it or they'll leave a layer out. I personally prefer Da vinci his art could actually be built Designer,Engineer (Civil,Const & Envir),Builder,Concrete & Masonry Contract.Struct Repairs Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 32Aug 25, 2014 3:29 am Building expert has it right on this one, the Domestic Building Contracts act 1995 is one of the legislations that has some rules for quality of work on a home, but also the Consumer and Competition Act 2010 also covers the same topic in a broader scale. When you supply products in Australia, they must meet certain criteria, these are called "consumer guarantees", and are outlined in the Consumer and Competition Act 2010. When buying a product, you are automatically entitled to these consumer guarantees, they cannot be nullified or excluded by what is, or is not written on any contract or internal policy. Regardless of whether your building contract has a clause or not that the finish and quality must be the same as the display home you viewed, the law grants you this guarantee, which is one of the many guarantees you are entitled to. One of the criteria is, a Guarantee to Acceptable Quality as outlined in Schedule II - Section 54. This can be defined in many ways, one of them being "acceptable in appearance and finish" In what way a product is deemed as "acceptable in appearance and finish", is outlined in Section 57(1) : Quote: "(1) If: (a) a person supplies, in trade or commerce, goods to a consumer by reference to a sample or demonstration model" there is a guarantee that: (c) the goods correspond with the sample or demonstration model in quality, state or condition; and (d) if the goods are supplied by reference to a sample--the consumer will have a reasonable opportunity to compare the goods with the sample" Therefore if you produce or deliver a product that is significantly different in quality to a sample shown or used for advertisement such as a display home, it is deemed not of acceptable quality. Small tolerances that differ by nature where all due care is taken are acceptable, but when it is blatantly obvious that something is of poor quality from a first look, then that is not acceptable. If I went to a display home and the paint looked nice, dense and rich, then had that home built by the same builder and the paint was chalky and thin, then that is not acceptable quality Section 43 of the Domesctic contracts Building Act 1995 outlines the responsibilities builders need to take when using display homes as a sample : Quote: (a) a display home is made available for inspection by or on behalf of a builder; and (b) a building owner enters into a contract with the builder for the construction of a similar home— the builder must construct the home using the same plans and specifications and to at least the same standards of work quality and quality of materials as were used for the construction of the display home. Penalty: 50 penalty units. (4) However, subsection (3) does not apply to the extent that the contract specifically identifies how the construction of the home will differ from that of the display home. A display home is a sample of the product to a consumer and it's intended purpose is to show the customer a general idea what sort of workmanship and quality they will get, understanding must precede agreement, so any builder who has the knowledge that their display homes are deliberately built to a significantly higher quality and standard, by deliberately chosing top tier tradesman to work on display homes, and quality in construction significantly differs to that of the same homes sold to clients, and do not advise their clients this before a sale, are doing an illegal job. Unless your building a rental, I would not waste my money on any builder who cannot deliver similar quality to what is shown in the display homes, Antenna Direct Perth www.antennadirect.com.au 0423919037 Get your home NBN Ready Smart Wiring and Structured Cabling in Perth Antenna Installations | TV Wall Mounting | Data Cabling HD Security Camera Systems / CCTV Is your build the minimum standard? 33Aug 25, 2014 6:43 am BJ in principal I agree but you cannot know exactly to refute quality if a display home is a "standard" no option build or optioned up build. And I use that term loosely especially wrt your example about paint. Is it a 2 or 3 cost system?
It's a tricky one and is be interested to see if anyone has challenged a builder about quality if their home in comparison to a display home. Also by way of example a builder might make sure that the floor tiling joins have 100% no lips so as to avoid tripping lawsuits, does this mean that just because that's displayed you are entitled to that level of quality ? I think not, especially when they will argue that the allowable AS tolerance is 1-2mm. So it can be quite tricky. The two things go hand in hand and are not the same.. Quality (workmanship) is not a Standard and visa versa Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 34Aug 25, 2014 6:50 am BJ88 Building expert has it right on this one, the Domestic Building Contracts act 1995 is one of the legislations that has some rules for quality of work on a home, but also the Consumer and Competition Act 2010 also covers the same topic in a broader scale. When you supply products in Australia, they must meet certain criteria, these are called "consumer guarantees", and are outlined in the Consumer and Competition Act 2010. When buying a product, you are automatically entitled to these consumer guarantees, they cannot be nullified or excluded by what is, or is not written on any contract or internal policy. Regardless of whether your building contract has a clause or not that the finish and quality must be the same as the display home you viewed, the law grants you this guarantee, which is one of the many guarantees you are entitled to. One of the criteria is, a Guarantee to Acceptable Quality as outlined in Schedule II - Section 54. This can be defined in many ways, one of them being "acceptable in appearance and finish" In what way a product is deemed as "acceptable in appearance and finish", is outlined in Section 57(1) : Quote: "(1) If: (a) a person supplies, in trade or commerce, goods to a consumer by reference to a sample or demonstration model" there is a guarantee that: (c) the goods correspond with the sample or demonstration model in quality, state or condition; and (d) if the goods are supplied by reference to a sample--the consumer will have a reasonable opportunity to compare the goods with the sample" Therefore if you produce or deliver a product that is significantly different in quality to a sample shown or used for advertisement such as a display home, it is deemed not of acceptable quality. Small tolerances that differ by nature where all due care is taken are acceptable, but when it is blatantly obvious that something is of poor quality from a first look, then that is not acceptable. If I went to a display home and the paint looked nice, dense and rich, then had that home built by the same builder and the paint was chalky and thin, then that is not acceptable quality Section 43 of the Domesctic contracts Building Act 1995 outlines the responsibilities builders need to take when using display homes as a sample : Quote: (a) a display home is made available for inspection by or on behalf of a builder; and (b) a building owner enters into a contract with the builder for the construction of a similar home— the builder must construct the home using the same plans and specifications and to at least the same standards of work quality and quality of materials as were used for the construction of the display home. Penalty: 50 penalty units. (4) However, subsection (3) does not apply to the extent that the contract specifically identifies how the construction of the home will differ from that of the display home. A display home is a sample of the product to a consumer and it's intended purpose is to show the customer a general idea what sort of workmanship and quality they will get, understanding must precede agreement, so any builder who has the knowledge that their display homes are deliberately built to a significantly higher quality and standard, by deliberately chosing top tier tradesman to work on display homes, and quality in construction significantly differs to that of the same homes sold to clients, and do not advise their clients this before a sale, are doing an illegal job. Unless your building a rental, I would not waste my money on any builder who cannot deliver similar quality to what is shown in the display homes, Nicely articulated and to the point. Bravo! Foremost Building Expert in Australia,assisting with building problems/disputes, building stage inspections,pre-contract review advice for peace of mind 200 blogs http://www.buildingexpert.net.au/blog Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 35Aug 25, 2014 7:19 am Crazyk BJ in principal I agree but you cannot know exactly to refute quality if a display home is a "standard" no option build or optioned up build. And I use that term loosely especially wrt your example about paint. Is it a 2 or 3 cost system? It's a tricky one and is be interested to see if anyone has challenged a builder about quality if their home in comparison to a display home. Also by way of example a builder might make sure that the floor tiling joins have 100% no lips so as to avoid tripping lawsuits, does this mean that just because that's displayed you are entitled to that level of quality ? I think not, especially when they will argue that the allowable AS tolerance is 1-2mm. So it can be quite tricky. The two things go hand in hand and are not the same.. Quality (workmanship) is not a Standard and visa versa CrazyK you have hit nail on the head I am about to release article on what is a con of the decade against homeowners by builders and abetted by Building Commission By way of comparison this is the gist of it: There is a standard Commodore There is a premium Commodore-costs more After being shown premium Commodore you agreed to buy it but on delivery it is only a standard. You complain to the dealer but he tells you that you must accept it because it is built to the Australian Standards. You complain to BC but they tell you dealer is right because Guide to Standards and Tolerances says it is built to minimum standards. But standard Commodore is not the same as premium and you have paid for the premium. Feeling conned? Now , you have purchased a premium home(display) and builder has delivered a sub standard build, now he argues that he will only repair it to the minimum standard (not premium) He is abetted by BC. Feeling conned? You should be. Now you know why I am declared sworn enemy of Guide to Standards and Tolerances and it's application in assessment of building defects. Guide to Standards and Tolerances is not only useless for defect assessment but is also an instrument of deceit against homeowners. BC (VBA) and all other pretend building experts use guide in their reports, I don't. Foremost Building Expert in Australia,assisting with building problems/disputes, building stage inspections,pre-contract review advice for peace of mind 200 blogs http://www.buildingexpert.net.au/blog Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 36Aug 25, 2014 1:58 pm I don't think it's a matter so much of the options you are getting, the builder should state this in the contract and client needs to ask questions, "Will my home get all the items and options of this home", that way they don't end up falling into traps simply because of not knowing. I'd imagine with all the different options and add-ons, the first home buyer can be a bit confused to know what they are getting, so they need to be more vigilant in this regard as it was mentioned display homes often include all the extras, but my concern is not about extras or add-ons. So long as all works meet the tollerances defined in building standards, my concern is more on the level of workmanship, neatness, finish of that work. As an owner of a business where customer satisfaction, best practices, and quality work is priority, I do not stand for deception, or poor work. Antenna Direct Perth www.antennadirect.com.au 0423919037 Get your home NBN Ready Smart Wiring and Structured Cabling in Perth Antenna Installations | TV Wall Mounting | Data Cabling HD Security Camera Systems / CCTV Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 37Sep 19, 2014 1:57 pm Well done guys, I think we are 'agreed / beg to differ' on this subject as may always be the case for defining quality... can of worms. But one thing is absolute and that is the SPECIFICATION is inadequate in the standard domestic building contract. It correctly states that it shall fully describe the work to be carried out, but then it states that there must be a list of all materials to be used. Well what about the other 45% of the work... the labour... and what constitutes good workmanship... one of the implied warranties in The Contracts Guarantee Act 1995. These important clauses are left out of nearly all specifications, but were included up until about 1994 I believe. Talk about going against the home owner's interests, and talk about dumbing down the industry. You can mention implied standards all you like but if a veil of secrecy is laid over how well labour should be carried out, what hope have home owners got? Leonardo_23 Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 38Sep 19, 2014 1:59 pm I left the word definition out of the previous post - hope it was implied as are standards. Talk about leaving out 45% of what I was getting at. Leonardo_23 Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 39Sep 25, 2014 5:46 pm Hi B_E, I've noticed that in quite a few of your posts you bag 'The Guide to Standards and Tolerances' by the ex-Building Commission. And I take it that this thread is about standards, albeit display home standards. What you did not seem to say each time was that in VCAT, the Members use this document like a bible for specific tolerances and standards regarding defects argued over by the experts on both sides. I have challenged it myself on two occasions and I believe won both points when my client took the matters to the Supreme Court... but the point is that to challenge it is not easy and so it stands as a stumbling block, despite your general guide that if you can see the out-of-level, then call it a defect. I think a little less brashness and a little more-considered commentary will help the homeone members a lot more. Brashness is fine to a point , but often misleads. Also it's about time the Specifications once more contain the minimum standards you say that builders must abide by. It's so much clearer and fairer to owners if these workmanship clauses are actually contained in the specifications rather than owners having to ferret them out with no idea where to start. I think you'll have to agree that current builder specifications dumb down the industry. Which is why even display homes have quite a few defects in them... at least the four I've inspected did Cheers, Leonardo_23 Re: Is your build the minimum standard? 40Sep 25, 2014 7:12 pm Leonardo_23 I've noticed that in quite a few of your posts you bag 'The Guide to Standards and Tolerances' by the ex-Building Commission. And I take it that this thread is about standards, albeit display home standards. What you did not seem to say each time was that in VCAT, the Members use this document like a bible for specific tolerances and standards regarding defects argued over by the experts on both sides. I hope that you don't mind others also commenting on the above. The Guide to Standards and Tolerances was produced by Standards Australia in conjunction with the Building Commission and other parties. As such, many erroneously believe that it has a legal standing. It does not. The Guide is also outdated and incomplete in parts. Standards Australia have also produced other guides that have had no legal standing but which have also erroneously been used at tribunals. One such guide was SAA HB39 1997 and I have referred to it in the post below. The post also quotes from and links to records from the NSW Parliament. viewtopic.php?p=1206696#p1206696 The BCA is a performance and hierarchy based document that references various Standards as Deemed To Satisfy solutions (DTS). A Guide that has no legal standing should not be used by VCAT members and if a Guide or other document is referenced by the BCA, then the hierarchy that is written into the BCA stands. Like ⋅ Add a comment ⋅ Pin to Ideaboard ⋅ Last year, I was asked to appear at VCAT as an expert witness but at a previous sitting, wrong evidence was presented that wasn't challenged and that evidence was accepted and recommendations made. For that reason, I could not give evidence as to why the previously accepted 'evidence' was wrong. I still can't believe it and so I know how amateurish the system is. The thing is though, if there was someone present at that previous hearing who could challenge the sham 'evidence' presented, it would not have been accepted. The same should also apply when a Guide that has no legal or BCA hierarchy standing is introduced. 3in1 Supadiverta. Rainwater Harvesting Best Practice using syphonic drainage. Cleaner Neater Smarter Cheaper Supa Gutter Pumper. A low cost syphonic eaves gutter overflow solution. My land is 260m2 (10m x 26m) located in claymore NSW. Under campbelltown council. I know in general the following setbacks would apply ground floor side setback =… 0 6897 Hi, only for walking. It is a narrow 1.5m paved area next to house. 2 5404 Thanks Draftroom that definitely helps a heap. We are still at the very early stage of planning to see what kind of house would fit on our plot. While we are on a… 3 15716 |