https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-12/erika-almost-bought-a…
I found this article on ABC news today that I thought might be of interest in light of the recent posts about building inspections. Can't believe inspectors aren't regulated!
Building Inspections - News Article
sam-1966 on 12/07/2023 - 17:20
Comments
The woman in the story had this happen in 2017. Must be a slow news day.
Reporters being lazy sods. I'm surprised they couldn't find multiple owners of recent new builds that are 'fit for demolition'.
Unfortunately it is absolutely cowboy territory.
If you're buying, help yourself by getting title insurance.
title insurance
I am not sure the solution to cowboy building inspectors is junk insurance..
Its not really junk insurance…just very specific in what it covers.
So specific that it usually won't cover the things people think they can claim/are covered for.
Your use of that term, I do not think it means what you think it means.
Im aware what title insurance is. No it doesn't compensate for stupid insectors but it does compensate for stupid buyers and/or conveyancing who dont do due diligence.
Lets be honest though.
You can pay them and there's no recourse if they miss everything.yep, they are fukn useless as tits on a bull
Is water still wet? Asking for a friend.
Fun fact - a lot of building trades in NSW aren't either. Including those meant to be able to read structural plans and place structural reinforcement!
Amazing how much scrutiny and auditing happens in other industries, except for the place we spend most of our $$ & time inside of :(
The whole industry is fked. You have better consumer protection buying a $5 thingymajig from Kmart, than a half mil house and anything related to the purchase.
The whole industry is fked.
Exactly this. Everything from developers to building supervisors to site inspectors to real estate agents, you simply cannot trust ANYONE in the industry. Honestly it's getting to the point where (if you're going to build) you might as well study building codes yourself and build it yourself so you know it's up to snuff, especially when you're spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on the thing.
There are probably heaps of new developments out there that need a complete knockdown and rebuild because they aren't up to code.
It's disgusting behaviour, people save for years to buy a place and then end up with horribly built properties, all for the sake of money and greed.
I'm a sparky - general domestic work. I recently did a prepurchase inspection for one of my regular clients. The building inspector was there at the same time as me checking over a 1970s house. I was up in the ceiling of the house checking the wiring and noticed some fairly doubtful repairs to the structural framing above one of the rooms. I asked the inspector if he'd seen it, he looked a bit surprised - but said he'd check it out. He had a two step stepladder, he stood on the bottom step and held his phone with the torch on, up in the manhole and looked around. I was fairly surprised by this display of building inspection.
I gave him my 1.8m ladder so he could have a proper look, but he still just used the torch on his phone. I passed him my 3000 lumen torch so he could get a good look, the suspect area was 6-8m from the manhole. He didn't get in the ceiling, just looked at it from the ladder and said - it is what it is. I filled the buyer in on this, so he can't say, I never saw it, but really who does a building inspection with a tiny ladder and no torch. If you want to get a building inspection, I think ask a proper builder, preferably an older one experienced in renovations, and just pay him what he asks.
Thats exactly what mine did. Took 2 photos standing on a ladder at the manhole and stated in report roof structure looks fine. The first winter that passed saw one bedroom ceiling start to discolour and sag from the leaking roof above it. Judging from reading others experiences it seems that hardly any building inspectors actually get into the roof space to do an inspection.
And to state the obvious… never trust a building inspector recommended by the REA.
There are good inspectors and there are lots of bad ones.
The problem is there isnt a framework to judge them.
Any tradie could register themself as a building inspector , have a very strong wavier in their contract the absolves them of any responsibility.
Hell I could buy a themral imaging camera , learn some basic construction rules , go through the nsw guide to standards and tolerances , BCA. get some social media post up and ill be in the money.We need a set of rules for them from start to finish.
They should hold some universal form of qualification , have mandatory knowledge .Had a laugh at this:
"The Real Estate Institute of Victoria said it was important for all stakeholders to ensure the sale process was transparent and fair."
Those of us who have gone house hunting, purchased a house or dealt with real estate agents know otherwise. The industry reeks of dishonesty and unprofessional conduct.
Back to the crux of the issue… I think the only point of communication between the building inspector and REA is when the findings of the report are handed down. The REA should not be informed of who has been contracted to carry out the pre-purchase inspection. There should be no contact or communication beforehand or during the drafting of the report as this is where collusion and/or intimidation can occur.
If they were going to abide by that philosophy, they’d mandate a building inspection be part of the Section 32, and that it has to be done by a reputable (and audited) source that follows a specific list of items that must be checked.
But that’ll never happen, because people like to say “buyer beware”
This is old news. ABC did a story on this years ago.