Is a building inspector worth it during construction?

Did you build in Sydney as well. Do I need to choose one of their certified inspectors or can I choose anyone
Please share details of your inspector if you can.

I just used one for our PC final inspection. Pretty much everything he found we did know about, but I found his value was in backing up our argument that defects were in fact defects. Its almost like having a 3rd party opinion (assuming the builder accepts this opinion which ours did) rather than client vs builder debate.

Would I use one next time...? Probably depends on how many marginal defects I've found and I'm expecting to have to argue. If you aren't closely monitoring the entire build yourself then I'd recommend an inspector.

I'd suggest a typical approx. $400 pre-linings inspection report is critical. A professional should identify and document any significant defects before they are covered up with plaster and hidden. Accompany the inspector to ensure everything is checked and you understand the issues, how they are fixed, and relative importance. You can visit with the SS later to confirm the defects have been rectified before plastering starts. If you don't check yourself you can assume they have not been rectified. Your SS won't check: "It's all good!"

The value of the other stage inspections' in the circa $2,000 'package' deal is questionable and very limited. The remaining $1,600 here is better spent elsewhere, particularly when you can easily see and check exposed surfaces carefully and slowly yourself. Private building consultants have no authority over the builder. Many builders have very little interest in, or respect for building consultants' reports, and these are not formatted for building tribunal cases therefore you might as well just do the other basic inspections yourself. If you want a report that has any legal credibility you will need to pay $1,000's for an expert witness report.

Better to learn a bit about the relevant standards yourself, use a checklist, spend about $500 on some basic tools and protective gear at Bunnings that you can use to inspect yourself on your weekly 2 hour site visits, with the permission and / or assistance of your site supervisor. Take photos and document everything in the professional formats used in inspectors sample reports found online. The are some good examples of professional defect report formatting to be found here: https://www.darbecca.com.au/sample-reports.html

Small_Minds

As a knowledgeable member and great advocate for the value of building consultants' defect inspection reports, can you please explain why some consultants cost about $250 per hour compared with an experienced craftsman carpenter with trade qualifications, detail skills, and the same knowledge of most referenced building standards and codes, who costs about $60 per hour? What are the key differences supporting such a disparity in cost?

Some consultants are quoting a full suite of basic services including contract review, stage inspections defect reports, 1 x re-inspection and a final inspection at about $6,500. Additional costs are quoted for formatting reports for tribunals as well.

In Victoria the unregistered (per the Building Act) building consultant has no authority over the builder or trades, and only provides defect reports (albeit comprehensive), usually leaving the home owners to address the defects identified directly with the builder or possibly later in actions at VCAT, NCAT, QBA etc. Dealing with builders alone on such issues when they dig their heels in is a daunting and potentially expensive proposition for most new home buyers, I think.

I can certainly see the benefits of consultants defect reports for some stages, and I understand the HIA contract and relevant legislation. Its just the actual effectiveness and costs versus benefits of this $6,500 service that myself, and other members are questioning.

I am interested in your thoughts about the $250 per hour rate of these consultants. Particularly in terms of the knowledge required, experience, equipment required, professional accreditation, licensing, registration, hours worked, administration, professional insurances etc. to produce these reports which contain a combination of original content as well as significant 'cut and paste' references and other standard content.

Most of the more detailed members' comments I see about and by building consultants seems to echo emotive 'marketing speak' that seeks to leverage new home buyers' naivety and anxiety about building, and fear of defects.

Some consultants appear to position themselves as the home buyers' champion 'going into battle' to provide them with 'insurance' against defects, which is potentially misleading. As well as being quite adversarial. Defect reports and home buyers' awareness can certainly help, but they don't in themselves assure building quality.

Can you or other knowledgable members please offer your insights into the objective costs and benefits of building consultants' defect reports.

building-expert

Thanks for your engagement here. I appreciate your experience and expertise. I have read some of your blogs with great interest.

I have no relevant building education or experience beyond just being a volume builder customer some years ago. I’m not an expert, just an active member of this consumer forum sharing information and helping where I can.

I see the value in building consultants’ services and am certainly not advocating a full DIY approach.

In Victoria the VBA requires mandatory building inspections by a registerred independent building surveyor as follows covering major structural and regulatory requirements:

1. Footings inspection – an inspection of the excavation, reinforcing and form work etc. in preparation for your house’s footings.

2. Slab inspection / base stage inspection – an inspection of your home’s concrete slab

3. Framing inspection – inspection of all the framing work for your home.

4. Final inspection – a thorough top-to-bottom inspection of the completed house for compliance with regulatory issues prior to the issuing of an “occupancy permit” or “certificate of final inspection”.

At each mandatory inspection stage, a building surveyor must approve the work that has been done by the builder and issue an approval letter before work can continue. If any of the inspected works does not comply, by law it will need to be rectified to the satisfaction of the building surveyor or before approval is issued. This independent building surveyor can be appointed by the builder or directly by the homeowner. The cost of this service is included in the builder's contract price.

I think a private unregisterred building consultant is useful as a ’second set of eyes’ for these inspections, however consumers should weigh up the costs and benefits here. Particularly if they have appointed the independent surveyor themselves, which is permitted in the Building Act. Spending up to $3,000 (est $250/hr) extra to double up on this set of key inspections seems a lot to me, personally.

I do strongly suggest a typical approx. $400-$600 (est $250/hr) pre-linings defect inspection report is critical, engaging an experienced building consultant for this. This inspection is not covered by the registerred surveyor. A professional should identify and document any significant defects before they are covered up with plaster and hidden. The home buyer should accompany the inspector to ensure everything is checked and you understand the issues, how they are fixed, and relative importance. You can inspect later to confirm the defects have been rectified before plastering starts, avoiding the approx. $600 (est. $300/hr) re-inspection costs. If you don't check yourself you can assume they have not been rectified. This is where your ’elephants’ are usually identified.

Once the walls and ceilings are plastered and brickworks completed an average person can walk through and easily check surfaces and other things with a few basic tools and the guide to standards and tolerances published by the VBA as a reference. Or employ a craftsman carpenter for a few hours at around $60 per hour. Documenting defects as you go.

As its ’your’ new home you would probably be quite fastidious and certainly have more time to spend on details. On this basis I would question the value of the approx. total $2,500 (est. $300/hr) some building consultants charge for fixing, waterproofing and final inspections. These reports usually just identify the ’fleas’ you could easily pick up yourself anyway.

I also question the value of a $440 (est $400/hr) contract review by a building consultant. The HIA contract is based on a standard template definitely favouring builders. It is correct some builders will ’slip in’ special clauses to minimise their risk that are unfavourable to the home owner. My suggestion is that everyone takes the time and reads their contract carefully before signing, making sure they understand every word, and the financial implications to them. Its quite well written and straightforward actually. Carefully check every line and price in price schedule, and the detail in your contract plans yourself. Again, understand everything yourself before signing. If after trying this you don't understand then ask a lawyer for help.

If consumers want to propose significant variations to the contract I suggest its better to engage a qualified lawyer for this.

I suggest the indication that having an building consultant means you will get a better site supervisor is unsubstantiated 'marketing speak'. After travel, meetings and admin time etc most site supervisors would be lucky to spend 30 minutes per week at each of their 15-20 sites. Their focus is basically whether the job has been done, not the workmanship. Its correct that if they know someone is checking they are more likely to check things themselves, however I doubt the builder would assign site supervisors based on the home buyer telling them they have engaged an inspector!

Site supervisors are interchangeable, geographically deployed, and most builds will have multiple SS changes over the build time frame. Do you suggest better suppliers, sub contractors and tradespeople are employed also? I suggest most home buyers would employ an building consultant anyway? Certainly most members here seem to.

Appearances at VCAT are another matter. These are often time consuming, expensive and risky for the homebuyer. I definitely agree an expert witness is valuable here and money well spent if it gets to this and the homeowner has the guts and finances to proceed. However VCAT actions are an additional set of services and consultant expertise to the basic stage inspections I am focussing on here.

As you suggest, its best for home buyers to separate the building consultants' marketing messages and sales spiels from the facts to understand and consider the true value proposition in their individual circumstances, I think.

Building-expert I am not sure your property developer example is relevant, or really representative of most registered VIC building surveyors' diligence conducting volume builder home inspections. I hope its not. Nor do your comments denigrating other building professionals project credibility and confidence in yourself. Can you provide some more relevant insights about building consultants' defect inspections to contribute to our discussion here?

I am in Victoria.
If you know all the standards and can read all the plans and understand all the terminology at the start of a build then might not be necessary.

I would think this may be only a small % of clients who use a project builder.

If you are meant to have flexible couplings to all service pipes penetrating the slab/below slab would you know what to look for?
if you are having a rain water tank installed do you know what correct installation looks like?

What my inspection reports provided me was additional knowledge I could use with builder to end up with a house that would meet standards.

PCI inspection is probably the one I could have done alone as it is much more about quality of finishes that with enough time you will notice many of these yourself.
It is at the earlier inspections that the work of making sure frame was within tolerance and met standard, and house was sound that were more technical.

For instance in my frame report, consultant identified H2 hazard rated timber installed where H3 was required, frame overhang,
Some rust on welded parts of structural steel, incorrect blocking, maximum frame bracing length, where double studs were required and missing..... so many things I did not know to look for and I was excited the house was moving along.
Some of these defects had not been identified by the registered building surveyor and would not have been visible by PCI.

I did say to my private consultant at the inspections - I am happy if you find nothing, The inspections were for peace of mind. He found many defects.

Your site supervisor with a volume builder may not check much of the work of trades and will likely not be a registered builder and stated above may not visit your site more than a few times per week and if they do it will likely be a quick stop in to give directions.
Find a consultant that has been a registered builder and has qualifications and experience.

Any cost up front during build may reduce repairs at cost to owner in life span of house.

My neighbor was building at the same time as me with another volume builder. Her son who had some knowledge and had had a house built before was keeping an eye on the build for her and he felt confident. I had PCI before she did. After a conversation she decided to use my inspector for PCI only and he identified roof defects and a missing retaining wall in the garage among other things with a well known builder.

When you are purchasing such a large asset/service and don’t have all the knowledge to assess the work can you afford not to engage a consultant.

Would it be fair to say that the need for and the value you get out of building inspector depends on the kind of builder one is going with?

Yep. The step ladders on Metricon's site supervisors' utes are firmly bolted to the roof racks, they are never used onsite - just displayed as advertising props on the ute.