Building Oversight Failures

Home Improvement
161

Alternately have we reached the end of non-government private and independent certifiers and building inspection.

Would we ever contemplate outsourcing Policing to private enterprise? The community has seen poor outcomes in outsourcing prison services. The consumer has seen the debacle of deregulated and self managing financial services industry. All followed up with weak oversight. Similar failures to independently audit and rectify failures in privatised and public aged care abound.

Suggesting it is only about the insurance costs is perhaps avoiding the root cause. Government has failed in spectacular style to manage effectively developers, builders/construction, and the certifiers they keep in a job.

True, for those less than adequate structures erected over the preceding decades, insurance is a real dilemma.

  • Is the cost burden to be transferred to the community at large through higher insurance costs, despite most insured not being at risk?
  • Does the government step up and use tax payer revenues to underwrite the exposure of the insurance industry to structures/buildings that are now at risk due to the failings of government?
  • Or will government burden the developers, builders and certifiers with increased insurance costs and public liability on all future works to cover those of their mob who have not done their best in recent years? Certainly a cost that all new owners will pay, and one more pressure to push all property prices even higher.

None of it seems all that fair. One time I might be happy for some serious retrospective legislation and goal time for the key developers directors or owners. Ignorance is no excuse they say?

P.S.
It has been a long time issue that seems to span local, state and federal governments of every political allegiance.

2 Likes
162

As I’ve said elsewhere, criminal in character if not in law.

2 Likes
163

Another article regarding the disgraceful combustible cladding fiasco.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-26/flammable-combustible-cladding-homeowners-cant-get-compensation/11825288.

Dodgy materials, dodgy contractors, dodgy Governments.

It may be the Australian way of doing business in some quarters, but it is certainly not the Australian way of a fair go.

1 Like
164

Worse that in the Victorian State Govt example the majority of the expense will be paid by existing owners.

"Despite the fact the councils are telling them the building they live in is a danger to life, CSV and the Andrews Government say it’s not dangerous enough and you have to pay.

Mr Smith said $600 million was not enough funding and the real cost of removing cladding from buildings in Victoria was more like $2.2 billion.”

Perhaps each State and Local Govts should fund all the remediation they required. Yes it will ultimately hit the public purse. The Vic Govt proposal to levy the industry going forward to pay for the work will punish the good as well as the bad. Although many of the bad will have long gone, profits in hand?

It’s within the power of the state to legislate to seek out the past businesses who used products that were not safe at the time. Perhaps like the “proceeds of crime” legislation similar might seek to seize the assets of those who should be accountable for the current mess. It might not cover all the costs? As a deterrent for future errors, it might be a far more effective tool than simply loading future construction with added costs for insurance or levies.

Is it fair that a failure of the state to ensure compliance should burden a minority? If only to save the added expense on the whole of the community the state supposedly acts in the best interests of?

The cladding mistakes span all states and governments of both political flavours. Rectification should be above politics.

2 Likes
165

Building oversights? What building oversights?

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/certifier-accused-of-letting-people-live-in-tower-while-still-a-building-site/ar-BBYSnJh?ocid=spartandhp

Perhaps India has the right solution.

1 Like
166

When we lived in China we were amazed that building occupation followed soon after each floor of a building was completed. We quite often saw shops moving in at ground level when the 3,4,5 floor concrete was still being poured. When the upper floors were being poured, the lower floors became apartments and inhabited.

Maybe there was pressure to fill the finished floors as soon as possible to either gain rent or to ensure one has possession of the unit/apartment one has bought (so that it couldn’t be occupied by others if left vacant until the whole of the building was finished


1 Like
167

An interesting article regarding recycling old high rise buildings and planning for their effective future demise.

We will need some better designers and builders to do this in Australia.

1 Like
168

Mascot Towers. The saga continues.

169

Nothing is forever.

Perhaps Australia should adopt a “low rise” future?
Nothing over three stories. No lifts required, and all those fit residents or office workers on the top two floors!

170

Everyone in the NT might be surprised about how lax the basics are there.

Mr Sunners was also critical of the fact that building licences were not necessary for builders or developers when constructing buildings taller than three storeys. “I believe there should be qualifications for that type of thing . . . any one of us in the room could go and build a high rise but you’ve got to be registered to be under three storeys, that’s just wrong in and of itself,” he told the conference.

4 Likes
171

Absolutely incredible.

1 Like
172

The Mascot Towers nightmare continues for the apartment owners.

3 Likes
173

The big question here is what is the NSW Government doing in response?

In July last year it made a bold decision to inquire into how the industry is regulated.

https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/committees/inquiries/Pages/inquiry-details.aspx?pk=2540

(Cynics hat on head.)
Which may come as a surprise to many that it needed to do so! Most would assume the government is aware of how the legislation and regulations of the state function. The expert panel running the inquiry are accordingly experts in such matters. IE A select number from the NSW State upper house.

Plenty of scope here for Yes Minister and Sir Humphrey wit to lighten a far more serious topic.

The less cynical might ask why not a Royal Commission? If nothing else ensure the names of the individuals who have touched some of these disastrous projects are in the full public gaze? For now it would appear that as no crime has need committed and corporate accountability extinguished, many can continue to make profit unchallenged.

P.S.
An RC is not an original thought!

Made prior to the NSW Inquiry being announced.

1 Like
174

There is no consumer protection when you purchase a new home. There are systematic failures in the building industry and it is the consumers who are the ones that suffer, end up homeless, as their house can no longer be lived in due to being structurally unsafe and the insurance companies will not pay for the full works recommended by their expert Engineers, offer a minimal cash settlement and use delay tactics.

In 2012, I purchased a new home built by a registered builder. Since then I have had nothing but ongoing issues because of an incorrect soil classification, poor engineering design, poor workmanship and the list goes on. The financial and emotional stress has taken its toll just to fight for justice against a system designed to protect enterprise. You cannot put a price on the stress this has caused.

I should be protected rather than having to spend $100,000’s to pursue this matter at VCAT. The regulators are not regulating and self-certification is not working. Four plumbers involved in the plumbing works at my property all had non-compliant work! I am the one that is left with over a $400,000 damage bill due to the plumbers and builders negligence, exposing significant financial losses due to the continued failures of the regulatory schemes.

General Insurance - In early 2019 a report was released from the Royal Commission into financial services. This report highlighted the failings of organisational conduct, governance and misconduct.

The original builder’s insurance company contracted a Structural Engineer to investigate and he submitted a misleading and deceptive report. This deceitful conduct was intended to influence the mind of the insurers, thus denying liability against the builder. Misconduct still exists and once again the consumer has to bear the financial and emotional costs of this.

It is over 7 months since I submitted a claim to my home insurer after paying thousands to investigate further and finding defective and broken underground pipes. They have offered a cash payment of less than half what it would take to fix my home, which is knockdown and rebuild. The slab is 154 mm out of level and the footing system has failed causing significant structural damage.

I have lost faith in the building industry and the relevant Government Agencies who regulate the building and construction industry where there is no protection for the homeowner. I have better protection purchasing whitegoods than I do with the biggest investment that I will ever make in my lifetime. Where is the justice and fairness in this?

All involved in the building of my home, hide behind their lawyers and insurance companies. Integrity is lost over greed. It’s a national disgrace.

1 Like
175

Hello @Summergal, Ouch! Firstly, welcome to the community. What an incredible and unsettling account. Thank you for sharing it with us.

It might take some of us a little time to take it all in.

Are you looking for some feedback specific to your circumstances?
or
Have you posted mainly to share your experience? Perhaps with some future hope you might encourage support to reform what isn’t working.

All good reasons to speak up.

P.S.
We’ve purchased brand new four times including building to our own design on our own land once. The issues you raise are not unique, however for all to fall on one property? I’m still lost for words.

3 Likes
176

Hi @Summergal, welcome to tne community and sharing your harrowing experience,

The other problem is the ‘mates’ club. Currently builders can chose what certifiers they use and the saying, ‘one burnt, twice shy’ applies even if the burning is justified and ensures building standards are met. Many builders select certifiers which are ‘mates’ and make their job easy. This creates an environment where certifiers are reluctant to highlight major or minor issuee as it may affect their relationship with the builder and likelihood for repeat work.

Self regulation could work, if certifiers were independent of the builder and selected by an independent body. Certifier work should be audited and if found defective, notice given to why they shouldn’t lose their licence. If overriding grounds to keep licencevis not provided, then they should be booted out of the system. This would create sn environment where certifiers are independent and ensure all work complies, irrespective of who the builder is.

The current system is broken with the builder-certifier relationships and could easy be fixed with miniminal disruption to the building industry, as outlined above and in other posts.

4 Likes
177

Hello @mark_m,

I share my experience to raise awareness through my experience. In recent times we hear through the media of the apartment buildings and their defective construction works including flammable cladding putting lives at risk. Homeowners are being displaced and the financial costs are huge let alone the emotional stress. I am one of the little ‘players’ in all of this. An innocent homeowner who purchased a ‘lemon’ home (not knowing at the time of course). I’m sure there a many homeowners going through exactly what I am.

I live in hope that one day reforms are made. The cause is the inadequacy of the system to protect new home buyers rights and the lack of political will to rectify the disgrace that has too long been allowed to continue.

It will be interesting to hear the outcome of the Building Commission is NSW, as David Chandler fleshes out plans for a major overhaul of the state’s building industry. I’m in Victoria, so lets hope we get the same.

Hi @phb, I need to work out how to block quote.

Yes, definitely ‘mates’ club. I recently found a later version of structural plans for my home that I was not aware of. Even though these are signed off from the Building Surveyor, some changes were not made, including a retaining wall. So was my property visually inspected or taking the builder’s word they completed the build according to the new plans?

If plumbers or any other tradesperson are found to have performed blatant non compliant, sub standard work, they should be brought before a tribunal, fined, suspended and made to undergo reassessment and pass before being allowed to return to work under a monitored one year probationary license. If that happened as it should, the workmanship and adherence to compliance would improve dramatically, I am absolutely sure about that!

There should also be a thorough audit of all work they have done over the previous year and rectification offered to all previously affected home owners. Blatant non compliance/bad workmanship is rarely a one off situation.

Builder’s Warranty Insurance is another concern. It needs to be decent insurance, not the current ‘junk’ insurance in place.

The Blame Game - gee have I got a story to tell. You may think what ‘my story’ is appalling and a concern but what I have written about originally is only a fraction what I have been going through. I have been seeking an answer for slab failure and structural damage for 7 years and I feel I still have a long battle ahead of me.
I’ve been on a merry-go-round with the builder, engineers, government agencies and lawyers. Insurance companies hiring an ‘expert’ to discredit another ‘expert’, each defining what a ‘defect’ is.

The domestic building industry has and is still a long standing issue and as a homeowner going through the battle against insurance companies who only have one goal and that is to wipe their hands hoping you will disappear. As stated in my previous post, now my own home insurer is playing along in this blame game :rage:

Until huge reforms are made, the topic never goes away because there are so many others who continue to suffer from numerous common issues only made possible by a well recognised disgraced system. When someone gives up because it has become financially unviable to continue or because of health or other problems, numerous others are still battling and newcomers are continually joining the long queue of despair.

As I said previously, I live in hope for reform but also for justice, not just for me but for all others going though what I am.
:pleading_face:

4 Likes
178

If you highlight text in an existing post, you should see a ‘quote’ option open above it. That will give you a ‘block quote’ in your own post. Sometimes Discourse, the forum software gets finicky about how it displays quotes, but a line feed prior or after, or sometimes just adding a space makes it right.

I hope this is what you were referencing.

BTW, the basics are all in the Welcome email.

3 Likes
179

The Mascot Towers fiasco continues.

180

On the sagas go. Governments have been feverishly legislating serious crackdowns and pointed responsibility for people and businesses to do their jobs! Oh wait, just dreaming. Those developers and builders still own and operate the place, donations aside, but isn’t the hand wringing and window dressing beaut? While back in the flats


4 Likes