Fake headline! It is not sinking, it is ‘moving in a downward motion’. 
4 Likes
I wonder if that is a definition for collapsing, albeit slowly?
3 Likes
Another article regarding building failures including photos of collapsing walls in a Qld building still under construction.
More fuel to the fire, or is it the chirping of the crickets about to be replaced by the sounds of cracking and grinding as reinforced concrete gives way. Hopefully only in a metaphorical sense.
From the ABC report two contrasting opinions. One is based on research?
Nicole Johnston from Deakin University has just released a report into building safety. She says that would-be owners often have no way of knowing if there are structural problems with their apartments.
“Sometimes it doesn’t matter how much due diligence you do, you won’t know that these defects are coming,” she said.
Her report found poor waterproofing, unsafe cladding and fire risks were the most common problems.
“The costs involved in going through those rectification works is so much more than it would have been if the job was done right in the first place,” Dr Johnston said.
“So the costs in relation to rectify the fix is exorbitant, and it’s grossly unfair for the people having to pay.”
And for those of us wondering if there is an alternate opinion informed or otherwise. The ABC obtained this response from the industry.
The Property Council of Australia’s chief executive, Ken Morrison, argued that Australia had some of the best building standards in the world.
“Purchasers should take heart from the fact that most issues are relatively minor,” he said.
“The sorts of incidents we’ve seen in the media in recent months are quite rare.”
He said while regulations in the various states and territories differ, there was recourse when owners found their apartment had faults.
“If there are defects, then by law builders have to come back and fix those defects at their costs, and that system has been working well,” he said.
It appears there may be exceptions the Property Council 
is unaware of?
Edit - added link to Deakin Uni Media release on the report.
3 Likes
Did anyone ask him to enumerate those recourses and the limitations thereof and how many builders rectified anything without legal proceedings after acceptance? It apparently would have been a short response if made from the consumer side, and very long and detailed one from the builder/developer perspective, based on many, many reports in the media over years.
Statistics be damned, if you paid $1 million for a flat and it was falling apart I doubt you would care about any ‘quality’ claims such as
4 Likes
This should be enlightening for NSW readers to reveal how non-existent standards really are. The most telling line is anyone can call themselves an engineer in NSW and so far mostly crickets. As for the rest, government haste and worry about consumer protections for buildings might become an election issue, but so far appears dodging and weaving and go slow is status quo.
Vic and Qld have belatedly (by decades) moved on (might be paywalled).
1 Like
As an aside the changes in Queensland and Victoria related by The Guardian is ‘One small step’?
The more significant challenge is the need for a more unified national approach to registration that requires an Engineer or other professionals as appropriate to be registered only once.
There are many vested and self interests as well as politics and corporate concerns at play. The medical profession still insists on independent state registration, and has a plethora of self regulating specialists. Although strategically these smaller groups operate typically on a national level.
While most medical professionals do not practice across boarders, it is very common within professions such as Engineering to do so on a regular, and often daily basis.
The same comparisons can be made with key trades as well since licensing is also state based.
Interestingly, the government’s in several states have in place legislation for the mining industry that prescribes appointments. NSW has had a system of statutory qualification of key staff including Engineers.
Within that industry the degree of interest politically and acceptance by employers (corporate) of such systems varies. It is possible to suggest why a similar approach in the building and construction industry has not been adopted?
Hopefully like the first moon landing the latest one small step is not the only one in the next 50 years.
2 Likes
Another building aftermath nightmare for an unfortunate home owner.
1 Like
Another possible win for the lawyers if not resolved to the satisfaction of the affected neighbour? 
As there is no mention of the NSW statutory builders insurance cover, it appears it does not extend to damage or effects on neighbouring properties arising from the insured works.
The original developer who supposedly created the problem is long gone legally and it appears the current developer who was permitted to take over the site and development approval may not be bound either.
Would this situation have so easily arisen when the local govt had a room full of building and construction works inspectors with the authority to make binding directions? What has dropping this service from LG achieved for the community?
P.S.
I’m aware of a similar style development in another Capital city which deep excavated in the boundary of an existing private residence. Despite the local community objections causing the original development application to fail, the system permits repeat attempts to get the rubber stamp. For the developer and resident the construction period was very stressful. More so for the developer, however as it required all the determination and knowledge of the resident to head of several major problems with the adjoining works. Of course not all residents are experienced and senior Civil Construction Engineers! 
Something the vast majority of us are not, nor can we afford to pay for this level of expertise. It might also help to have access to some legal expertise too! Councils are all too reluctant and slow to act to enforce remedial undertakings has been another observation.
Lessons learnt.
If there is a development proposed adjoining your property, take nothing as stated and trust least of all the developer or their representatives. It can only get worse as LG is likely just as unreliable?
I’ve noted one local development recently fail after several attempts, although the developer had nearly the whole township against the proposal. It takes a lot to change ‘city hall’!
2 Likes
Here is another wrinkle where those supposedly responsible for verification as seller as well as buyer apparently did a pure tick the box and take our fees exercise. I wonder who is ultimately going to pay the price (not really)?
2 Likes
Around 50 years ago when I worked at the generating authority in Townsville, one of the technicians received a very urgent phone call whilst everyone was at the weekly training session, and he left.
The call was from his builder regarding his new house that was almost completed, and when he returned some time later, he was ashen faced.
The builder had just found out that he had built the house on the adjoining block of land.
You just can’t help stupod.
There’s a shedload of highrise apartment blocks going up around the Newcastle Foreshore and near environs… I cant help wondering how many of those will eventually be in the same state as Opal Towers and the Mascot thing. Developer/Speculators just give me the screaming s**ts. You buy off the plan these days, you give the money to a developer who has no building up, just a website with a 3D generated plan. If you’re lucky, they will build it well. But clearly shortcuts are all the rage and I wouldnt trust any of them.
3 Likes
Firstly the bad news.
Another Sydney apartment block is empty following the discovery of severe water damage last year.
Now for the “good news”.
“The minister responsible for building regulation Kevin Anderson is believed to be considering reforms on the industry.”
Whoever said that the Government is not doing anything?
2 Likes
Yes, great views if you buy for position. And a great point for would be owners to consider.
Most of Newcastle has an endless network of old mine workings below. State and stability undefined! The majority of the old foreshore area was reclaimed mangroves. Structural failure is not covered by insurance. Mine subsidence cover may also not apply.
Hopefully the foundation designs are reliable and construction is compliant.
Those in the know observed the aftermath of the small earth quake that brought down the Workers Club. Not a Sodom and Gomorrah moment, although I typically did not look back each time I made an exit onto Union Street late at night. Just poor construction!
3 Likes
I’m not even going to think about the possibilities. These buildings at the moment are built all along the waterfront, and carparks servicing them are dug down well below the water table. I shudder when I think about it for too long.
2 Likes
Good design and construction to specification can minimise the risks.
How that assurance can be provided after the work has been completed and where there may be doubts is certainly challenging. As a minimum owners could reasonably ask for lifetime insurance cover. Perhaps it is something the government needs to bare?
A refusal would suggest the government has doubts. An acceptance of the risk by government, that there will be no failures?
2 Likes
An article regarding the discovery of defects in Mascot Towres back in 2017.
It does not mention if the dilapation report that the builders of Peak Towers commissioned was conveyed to any parties associated with Mascot Towers.
1 Like
The expected norm, although not assured for the Mascot Towers example? This is based on a strata title we are associated with, and recent request from our Council’s contractor for access.
The owner or in this instance the Body Corporate, Owners Corporation would need to give permission for the third party to access the property and carry out an assessment. A copy of the results/report would usually be offered to the owners/representative of the owners. If not a responsible owners representative would insist on a copy as a condition of granting permission for access for the dilapidation survey.
The questions that arise concern how permission was obtained for the survey, was a copy of the survey report provided, to whom and If received were the unit owners fully informed as a consequence?
3 Likes
Some good news for Victorian apartment owners affected by flammable cladding.
1 Like
- Half of the $600 million plan will be funded directly from state coffers
- The other half will come from a hike in building permit levies, if the Commonwealth does not contribute funding
- The Government says it will also try to recover costs from dodgy businesses
and bad news for Victoria taxpayers. The perpetrators will get identified and might be prosecuted and might need to contribute to righting their wrongs. But Vic seems to be stepping up to the problem, finally.
Mr Andrews said the state was also examining ways to recover some of the costs from people and business “who had done the wrong thing”.
That could include laws to punish dodgy providers and so-called “phoenix companies” that set up for only one project, then shut down and made it hard for people to sue them.
The Government also flagged a plan that would see it assume the right to sue industry on behalf of residents because class action had failed.
It still seems comparatively light handed though. I though the Diamond Club was an LNP exclusive?
3 Likes
