Browse Forums Building A New House 1 Jun 08, 2009 3:40 pm I am building a new house with a major builder, and a few friends of mine doing the same....what we have collectively gathered is that Major builders usually quote a very low price for site cost to get the business, and once you have given a deposit they try to rip you off with an Exorbitantly inflated side costs that takes back all the promotional discounts they offered you lure you. The sad part is by then the client has committed by paying atleast couple of thousands as unrefundable deposits and not in a position to challenge the integrity of costs involved. One of my friend was really mad at the site costs value and he really challenged them...then the value came down from $20000 to $10000...imagine the markup they keep on site costs...his land was a fairly flat land with a 0.9m fall...mine was quoted initially as $6000 and then they put a site cost value of $18000...from where can I get a independent genuine quote? Re: Site cost rip-offs from Major Builders 2Jun 08, 2009 3:52 pm G,
Welcome to the forum. I probably hold the title of being worst hit by footings cost here on the forum. I wished my footings variations cost ONLY $20k more than the standard S-class. I think that the eastern state builders do things a little differently than in SA. Another factor is whether you are getting a land&house package, or you already own the land. If I was building in Adelaide again (notorious of its poor building soil), I would pay to get the soil tested before I get quotes from builders. If the soil is very bad (eg the HD-class that I have), may even consider getting prelim footings designed. Chris Re: Site cost rip-offs from Major Builders 3Jun 08, 2009 3:53 pm Hi Gaja, Yes site costs can really be high at times depending on the soil report. Whats worse is the variation of site costs between different builders can be quite stark. Looking at what some of our members have esperience, Builder 1 gives a site cost of $10k, whilst another builder could quote a site cost of $25k for the very same block. When you first sign up with a builder, the quote given to you for site cost is always "pending soil report/test". The site cost would depend not only on the fall of the land (Although that is a major factor) but also the incidence of hitting rock, type of soil whether clay etc. The amount quoted for site cost would also vary on the allowance i.e. some builders quote you a higher site cost as it includes a higher allowance e.g. $10k etc. This could work out in your benefit as if you get a loan on the full amount including the allowance, you wouldn't have to keep aside personal funds to pay for the site cost if they hit rock etc which may occur during construction. In my limited experience, I would only sign up on a contract to build once I have received the results of the soil test. Sure you might be $500-$1k (depending on which builder) out of pocket, but with your soil test report, you can then get a clear indication of what your total cost would be for the build. It is also helpful to speak to your neighbours to understand the type of slab they had to use etc. Although there are instances where you might hit $20k worst of rock while your neighbour goes Scot-free with none...oh the irony! All the best with your build, Re: Site cost rip-offs from Major Builders 4Jun 08, 2009 4:16 pm This is exactly what i'm talking about...different builder give different site fall details for the same site and also site cost details for the same site...on major builder gave me a computer drawing with a site fall of .85m while another major builder gave me another drawing with a site fall of 1.31m...which is unbelievable...I think there should be an independant body overlooking the site costs details assurances...because most of the government grant is sucked by these greedy major builders from inflated site costs to coverup for their losses during the recession...poor 1st home builders grant all sucked in by the builders...this is not fair ...and there should be a government body to complain about these issues...do you know who I could complain to?
Re: Site cost rip-offs from Major Builders 5Jun 08, 2009 4:34 pm Also I would like to know about the independance of the soil tests conducted during the site survey...as I think without any doubt every major builder classifies the soil as "H" class so that they could inflate the site costs...how can we verify whether the soil in my plot of land and in the area is really "H" class (H -highly reactive)? is anyone out there got a soil test "M" "S" or "A" class from a soil test done by a major builer? Re: Site cost rip-offs from Major Builders 6Jun 08, 2009 4:45 pm Gajasinghaya Also I would like to know about the independance of the soil tests conducted during the site survey...as I think without any doubt every major builder classifies the soil as "H" class so that they could inflate the site costs...how can we verify whether the soil in my plot of land and in the area is really "H" class (H -highly reactive)? is anyone out there got a soil test "M" "S" or "A" class from a soil test done by a major builer? My soil test is a S class and I was at first quoted $30,000 for site works and then after I phoned the council and other developers and got their quotes I went back to my builder and they dropped the price to $20,000!! This was still over $5000 more than any other developer I rang. My block is completely flat and has fill already done. There are traces of clay though. Building with Homebuyers Centre El Questro! My building thread..viewtopic.php?f=31&t=19421 Brickies started 5/10 Re: Site cost rip-offs from Major Builders 8Jun 08, 2009 4:58 pm Helyn Quote: is anyone out there got a soil test "M" "S" or "A" class from a soil test done by a major builer? Yes, our soil classification is "M". We looked at 2 different builders and one gave us a M for site and M for slab, while the other gave us P for site and M for slab. Re: Site cost rip-offs from Major Builders 9Jun 08, 2009 5:18 pm G,
One thing to bear in mind is that the major builders outsource the soil and footing design to geotech / structual engineering consultants. I assume these would be NATA approved testing organisations and wouldnt deliberately provide incorrect information in order to allow your builder to charge you more. If you got two independant soil tests done on your block in the same spots, the results should be comparable. If you want independance, the only thing I can think of is have your own soil test done and to take both soil reports (one from builder also)and builders engineering drawings for the footings to a structual engineer for an opinion. My site costs are high also so understand your frustration, original est $6k but after soil test upto $16k. After 2 months have come to terms with it and realise there is nothing I can do. I want to build that house, so I just have to live with it. I dont want to get that bent out of shape over it that it ruins the entire process and jeapodises the "dream". Re: Site cost rip-offs from Major Builders 10Jun 08, 2009 5:46 pm Gajasinghaya Also I would like to know about the independance of the soil tests conducted during the site survey...as I think without any doubt every major builder classifies the soil as "H" class so that they could inflate the site costs...how can we verify whether the soil in my plot of land and in the area is really "H" class (H -highly reactive)? is anyone out there got a soil test "M" "S" or "A" class from a soil test done by a major builer? Yep, mine is an M class clab. I'm in Melbourne. I'm going to go against the grain here.... I was not surprised by my site costs with any of the three builders that have done a house siting. I was informed, prepared and knew what I would be up for. As I said, there was no surprises with us. With M3tricon, my consultant did an estimate in his office using software. That price carried through to Prelim contract and then to contract. Boutique came back a little higher than quoted initially but nothing excessive. PD were the cheapest by quite a few thousand, but the estimate from sales held true to contract and we are now about to start building. Gajasinghaya This is exactly what i'm talking about...different builder give different site fall details for the same site and also site cost details for the same site...on major builder gave me a computer drawing with a site fall of .85m while another major builder gave me another drawing with a site fall of 1.31m...which is unbelievable...I think there should be an independant body overlooking the site costs details assurances...because most of the government grant is sucked by these greedy major builders from inflated site costs to coverup for their losses during the recession...poor 1st home builders grant all sucked in by the builders...this is not fair ...and there should be a government body to complain about these issues...do you know who I could complain to? Were these fall figures for the site or for the house? There is a big difference. If the two estimates you got were for two different houses there will be discrepencies over the site fall because each house will cover a different area. Unless the two estimates are for the exact same house, they will differ, because they are two different products in effect. I leave you to fend for yourself, figure things out yourself. Terrence Malick Re: Site cost rip-offs from Major Builders 11Jun 08, 2009 5:49 pm Simple solution to this is to only sign with builders who give fixed site costs. My builder gives gives fixed site costs from the engineering plan. The only variable being rock which there is no mark up for as they give us the receipts for the cost of the removal. Moved in December 2010 Re: Site cost rip-offs from Major Builders 13Jun 08, 2009 6:10 pm Why cant you do all your own site costs, cut & fill before the builder starts?? (Footings would be different with the digging & not knowing what you will find.) Surely if you get geotech soil tests, survey, I don't see why sites can't be prepared first. Give the builder a flat area to begin with. Re: Site cost rip-offs from Major Builders 14Jun 08, 2009 6:20 pm Off the top of my head.
1. Increases risk to you (as you will discover the giant boulder and not be covered by the fixed site costs). As the soil tests are very hit and miss, 2 holes over a 500 sq metre block, you really dont know what you will find until you start digging. 2. Money needs to be found upfront rather than included in mortgage 3. Builder/engineers may not accept the work done (remembering they provide the structual warranty, I wouldnt be happy signing that away to save $10k) 4. High site costs can be caused by retaining walls, screw piles, slab upgrades due to soil conditions etc. which have to be done during construction anyway Re: Site cost rip-offs from Major Builders 16Jun 08, 2009 6:42 pm Sierra Are these Fixed site costs given before or after the soil test? Was it house & land package or your own land? On my own land but they will do it on any block of land. Moved in December 2010 Re: Site cost rip-offs from Major Builders 17Jun 08, 2009 10:32 pm i have personally had no issue with my builder misquoting on site costs in my initial informal quote the sc noted $12,500.00 for approximate site costs (based on the site costs for another house completed in my estate). After paying the initial deposit and after soil tests and a contoury survey my tender site costs came back at just over $8000.00 for an MP class slab, cut and fill to about 1m, suspended under slab services (this also includes 4 drainage grates on the block, and costs will be fixed in the contract including rock ). So there are some honest ones out there I also agree with Sierra in that there is too many potential risks involved in attempting site works yourself prior to handing the block over to the builder... 2014 - Prepping to build the Soho 4 with Plantation homes, industrial style 2009 - Built the Brampton with Coral Homes viewtopic.php?f=31&t=15399&start=280 Re: Site cost rip-offs from Major Builders 18Jun 08, 2009 11:02 pm Yep some honest ones... We had to clear... Oops... still no quota for a pic?? (Will that change?) Well the area is 45 m x 35m, and sand, had some big trees on it We salavged quite a bit of timber... Back OT The cost was $3134 I think he forgot about a few days work Where you are coming from is where you are going to... Re: Site cost rip-offs from Major Builders 19Jun 09, 2009 12:06 pm We have just over $6K in site costs for our block with our current builder. We had a quote done through another builder before signing up to this one, and they wanted over $20K! Go figure! Building a Modified Lawson Modern 29 @ Botanic Ridge, Cranbourne South, Victoria Re: Site cost rip-offs from Major Builders 20Jun 09, 2009 7:57 pm joles My site costs are just over 16k. Only $2,800 of that is cut and fill and compaction. Joles, what did the other $13k cover then? $2,800 cut & fill it must be a really flat block? We were lucky in that our old house was so small (86 square metres) compared to the new house, they were able to take enough readings around the old backyard house before… 8 37142 Thanks for the insight! My plot is a new development so hopefully I won't have too much problem during build as everyone should be roughly building together. I also… 2 3372 Approvals are covered in the cost we are paying to the pool company. The only thing stated in our home build contract for the additional cost is engineering support. … 3 7119 |