Developers advertise with pristine images and promises of “luxury living”.
After signing for $1.5 million they hide the details until its too late and we were presented with a townhouse blighted by 15 wall drenching fire sprinklers.
There appears no legal remedy.
Seems like false advertising. The final product is of lesser value than the one we supposedly purchased.
3 Likes
Welcome to the Community @Dave33
Hampton Property Group appears to be Victoria centric.
Are the sprinklers mandated by state or council requirements? From your photo they appear to be less than a basic workmanlike installation and more like the new apprentice on their first day - roughed in roughly. Where are the other 13?
The Community is unable to give personal legal or financial advice but your experience could help others; could you advise of what legal avenues you have pursued and been knocked back on?
1 Like
Yes. There needs to be wall/window drenchers if the property is within 10m of a fire hydrant.
The developer would have known that at signing. The contract allows variations to meet regulations. To my mind that’s hardly a variation if they already knew.
Also, the drenchers can be external, but that would alter the development “look”, or the hydrant could have been resituated.
2 in bathroom, 6 in one bedroom, 3 in another bedroom and 5 in the living area.
None in the top floor main bedroom!
1 Like
While fire sprinklers are mandatory in multistorey/dwelling buildings, generally they are installed so the they are less intrusive. Thus being the sprinkler head sitting flush with the ceiling like these ones.
I haven’t seen fire sprinklers on a pipe below the ceiling before in a well finished dwelling before. Such arrangements are more common in some commercial and industrial buildings were aesthetics aren’t as important (as functionality is).
Having them hanging below the ceiling may also increase risk of damage/going off due to accidental bumps and knocks.
The fire sprinkler pipe and ceiling isn’t sealed which might allow fire to enter the ceiling cavity above the sprinklers, allowing fire to readily spread through a unit with the sprinklers having little effect.
I would possibly contact a specialists in building fire system installations to get their advice. Hopefully they can provide information on why the current installation is unacceptable, which you can use to raise a dispute with the builder.
2 Likes
Thanks for the input.
I’m contacting the local fire guys today.
The other point of interest is that not ALL the dwellings within 10m of a hydrant have these sprinklers.
I am trying to find out why there are exceptions.
These two townhouses do not have sprinklers installed.
1 Like
I presume you have kept formal records in writing? It might also be useful to keep a copy of all their advertising claims as well as their entire web site because it might, not necessarily will, be useful should you find an avenue for legal recourse.
How many do versus how many do not? We look forward to learning about the ‘exceptions’ clause that differentiates them.
2 Likes
Why? I am not doubting your word but I can’t see why the distance from the hydrant matters, simplistically either the walls need to be protected or not and the ones far from the hydrant just as much as others.
In the event of a fire in the unit/s adjacent to the hydrant the decision/regulation may be due to a risk the hydrant would not be safe to access. The explanation offered may simply be what the developer and other parties agreed to be most expedient and lowest cost at the time when assessing the final stages of the development and fire protection needs. There may be other remedies, but without knowledge of who, how and the contributing discussions to the assessment we would be speculating. How the decision to locate the hydrant where it is came about might be equally revealing.
The fire protection sprinkler system install looks like an after thought, and arguably detracts from the quality of the finish. Up to the OP to consult a reliable fire protection professional and professional legal advice, as already respectively suggested by @phb and @PhilT.
2 Likes
I have had a call from the project manager. He claims a change of fire regs in 2022. He claims there was no other option.
I spoke directly to a member of the local fire station who said he had never seen those sprinklers in a domestic build. He did state that compliance was a specialist area and put me in contact with Building Safety Reg Unit.
However he did say that moving the Hydrant should have been considered.
Here is another photo.
2 Likes
The last photo, the glass bulb in the sprinkler has been broken/doesn’t exist. This means if they turn on the water supply, the sprinkler will flood the unit.
The installation doesn’t seem right to me and will be interesting to hear what the Building Safety Reg Unit says.
1 Like
Utterly shoddy work. Needs rectification asap.
It looks like a red coloured bulb in there to me, it just isn’t one that sits on the bottom plate and is quite a narrow bulb. I could be wrong of course, the entire workmanship of the install looks less than professional and the finish of the install is very deficient.
Other photos provided of the other units, in my opinion show a very poor standard of finish to exterior items. Was this a job just to get money from buyers, built to produce an income not a quality product. Hopefully the exterior finish is still a work in progress.
2 Likes
You might be right… I was comparing it to the yellow bulbs in the earlier photo and couldn’t see a yellow bulb. Looking again there seems to be a red bulb protruding from the outlet.
The exterior block wall doesn’t look the best. A bit of a bodge job.
I wonder if the units are still under construction or at practical completion.
1 Like
