I do not think I am ‘confusing’ anything. If one is restrained from knowing what one is buying it puts one at a disadvantage.
Which is a practical matter, not a philosophical one whereby consumers should not be artificially barred from obtaining information through pricing it out of reach.
Reminding myself what this topic was (is?) about
I think we have all made our respective points. Time to close it?
No a consumer does need to comply. Very much so.
While getting a rain water tank installed, the local council and I discovered that the final inspection from when house had been built years before had never been finalised. The paperwork held by council said that a number of things had been found that did not meet some AS relating to plumbing. The rectifications had been when the report was received, but a re-inspection had never been done by council to finalise things.
So was the house builder the one who had to prove to council that these things had been fixed? No he was not.
Was the plumber who had subcontracted to the builder, the one who had to prove to council that these things had been fixed? No he was not.
No it was me the home owner who had the ultimate responsibility to do this.
Was it your builder and plumber or the previous owner?
Isn’t this a procedural failure, (by council) assuming I have read correctly and the rectification was done at the time the report was issued. I’m assuming an occupancy or completion certificate/approval was also issued.
The responsibility for remedy (with the passing of time) like many other examples through the Community topics unfairly lands with the current owner.
Yes it would have been as the non-compliance lies with the homeowner to organise its rectification or certification by a licensed plumber who will have knowledge of current council/statutory requirements.
Throughout Australia, a homeowner (unless they are a licensed plumber), would have had to commission a licensed plumber to carry out rectification plumbing works that meets requirements as it is illegal for an unlicensed person in Australia to work on reticulated water supply, with exception of replacing a tap washer/cartridge. An unlicensed person also can’t certify plumbing work installed.
The licensed plumber would have filled in the relevant form for Council indicating that the work (new or rectification works) meets current statutory requirements. This form would be submitted to Council by either the owner or plumber to address the non-compliance and to get any order, defect notice or such like removed from property. A property owner can’t legally fill in such forms unless they are a licensed plumber.
As the house owner can’t legally certify plumbing works or carry out work on reticulated supply, the house owner does not need to to access AS or have knowledge of local plumbing requirements. It is the licensed plumber who has such obligations and as part of their licensing for that particular trade, to have currency with such requirements. If the owner isvalso a plumber, the owner would already have knowledge of plumbing requirements and would not need to specifically access AS for work on their own property.
As indicated in an earlier post, allowing anyone free access to AS increases the risk that unlicensed individuals will carry out DIY work on their own homes trying to save money and attempt to meet current electrical, plumbing, gas etc requirements. Such unlicensed work is unlawful in Australia and has been covered by Choice for DIY home renovations/building work.
The change in status referenced in the opening post per the SMH report dates from June 2016, nearly 4 years in the past. We seem a little slow to catch on.
As I suggested previously, I suspect that if everyone had free access other than for commercial use, little would change. It’s partly because the standards are but one part of a larger framework of legislation. It’s the legislation that gives a standard a legal intent, and not the standard on it’s own.
That’s not intended as an argument against public access. It’s an observation that standards need to be understood, just not read, and taken in context (interpretation). They are far less a set of traffic laws, and more like an incomplete guide book.
The other thing to note is AS haven’t been free for individuals to access since at least the 1990s. This was when I first started accessing AS for work. We used to access AS one offs at the local library (which maybe looking back wasn’t appropriate as we did it to save money), but purchased ones used regularly. At the same time legislation was not available online and we also had to purchase this from the government printer and subscribe to amendments (the legislation became messy when amendments were manually cut and pasted/glued into the hardcopy).
As also note, I understand that AS is available at some university libraries if one has an interest in looking at one. Whether one needs to prove one is an employee or student is not known. One can call a university library before visiting to determine availability.
So someone bent on doing the wrong thing will never buy a copy? I think not although they might be more economically minded being DIYers. But is that is a legitimate litmus test for denying free or low (reasonable - eg maybe $10 not $200) cost consumer access per AS?
As I posted already. There seem to be lots of reasons for making things opaque put forth, but why hide them, unless?
edit: An argument has been routinely made that properly trained, licensed tradies are the [implied] only ones who can understand and do so why does the consumer need access to AS, but there is evidence throughout the forum of ‘properly trained, licensed’ tradies doing crap non-conforming work, as example. As posted, who bears the ultimate costs? Is the next argument since paying $200 for a single AS is a pittance compared to a $20 million rectification there should be no worries?
I have had a lot to do with tradesmen (no women round here) and I doubt any of them have dipped into Standards since the last time they were forced to by some external authority. My guess if this happened it was during their apprenticeship if at all. Some have a passing acquaintanceship with the Building Code of Australia. Most rely on the habits they learned from their boss during training and picked up since. Most are conservative even insular being quite certain they know all that is required. When declaring ‘no man is an island’ Donne had clearly never met an Aussie plumber.
Now I am all for skills honed by real world requirements but the attitude that they have nothing to learn is too strong. Technology has changed trades - take plumbing. Since my grandpa showed me how to wipe a joint and thread gal pipes using stocks and dies we have seen capillary fittings on copper tube, crimped fittings and plastic pipe. Those who trained since plastic came in may know the correct way to use it but what about those who finished training before? I don’t know if AS includes such level of detail but whether it does or not I bet none of the local plumbers looked there to find out. They might have read a manufacturers brochure or watched a mate. However they got the idea of how to do it you can bet their work is never checked against AS.
Substandard work is often due to cutting corners and dollar chasing but when your attitude is that all that needs to be learned is on the job and book learning is for ■■■■■■■ you wouldn’t know if you were cutting corners or not.
Regarding access to Standards Australia (SA), exclusive distribution via SAI Global mentioned above has since ceased and SA has since engaged new partners and continues to do so in early 2020. In its policy distribution framework released in November 2019, SA states their aim to:
Maximise the availability of library reading room access such that Australian Standards® can be accessed by the general public in physical public library reading rooms for personal, domestic and household use;
I’d encourage anyone interest in access to SA material to keep an eye on the news portion of their website, or if you have a particular need as a consumer to a particular document to get in touch with SA.
At the moment, no business (DIY to corporation) is legally required to ensure the products or services they sell are safe. It’s only after a problem occurs (sometimes tragically) that action is taken. CHOICE has also found that, in the limited cases where a Mandatory Standard applies, they are often outdated. Voluntary Standards are often not being met.
No it was me the owner (the first and only owner)
Up until a few years back I went to the CBD Library to view Australian Standards on their computers. The Library advised me that free access is no longer available due to copyright issues. Yes, SAI Global can sell you an edition but their prices are beyond reach for many. I wish they would introduce an option to allow you to purchase particular sections of any AS document. I’ve been lucky finding many AS documents online when googling.
