are we overdue for 'another' Royal Commision into the building industry

following on from the recent event of the high rise building at Olympic Park Sydney.

Olympic Park Residential Tower Evacuation

I am a Surveyor and have worked alongside the construction industry for 35 years.

From what i see first hand is there have been some dodgy (under qualified) builders / developers pop up in the last 10-15 years with the Sydney construction boom, as well as, poor quality construction, and dubious self regulation processes.

A typical scenario is where multiple building sites are overseen by one qualified tradesman, with unqualified labourers performing work unsupervised. Builders are cutting costs, using cheaper materials, and the are jobs not getting inspected as they should, and signed off by dodgy private certifiers.

I have been (and still are) involved in too many recently built developments where the building is full of substandard construction, either structural defects (some major), cosmetic defects, or water leaks. etc etc etc, and the builder and developer is either bankrupt or vanished.

What we see now is a legacy of local governments privatising building regulators, and now relying on the honesty on a fragmented array of Builders, Sub-contractors and Private Certifiers.

The owners are left to pick up the pieces and traverse the legal minefield trying to recover costs or get things rectified.

If you are buying new OTP ? all i can stress is, Caveat emptor

 

Ironically, there have been quite a few posts on this site recommending using private surveyors as a way to ‘get a development through’ quickly and as a way to avoid too much fuss.

 

@Joynz - we're a product of our own ineptitude

 

I think BMC is a surveyor which is different from a private certifier. I found most surveyors work to a much higher standard than others associated with the building industry. Most surveyors also need a uni degree and are professional in the approach to their job.

 

Dodgy building practices have been going on since the stone age when all you needed was 3 large flat rocks to build a house.

Have a look at all those old 3 storey units and you'll see it all. Especially in the south west of Sydney. More cracks in one building than in a 12 day Can Can Festival. Then there's the sandy brick joints and extenal stairs with inadequate footings which have slowly sunk into the soil etc etc.

All this when the local council ticked off on the project.

I don't think we need another expensive Royal Commission. Just tighter regulations that are properly enforced against the individuals involved.

 

I work to "close enuf is good enuf", especially when building bridges, it'll only be short at one end

 

thanks,
correct, a Land Surveyor not to confused with the other term.
we are licensed to deal with your property boundaries (amongst many other things like set-out of construction and engineering applications)

 

funny i thought you would be the 'measure twice - cut once' type of bloke

 

How do you see Unions fitting into this?

 

Quote..
What we see now is a legacy of local governments privatising building regulators, and now relying on the honesty on a fragmented array of Builders, Sub-contractors and Private Certifiers.

A Royal Commission prior to the lead up to the election may well stuff up Labor and Shorten's plans ,once people see how the unions work and who controls labour hire -training-right down to private certifiers..

 

.
In Victoria we call the people who issue building permits (DAs in NSW terminology) Building Surveyors.

http://www.vba.vic.gov.au/consumers/appointing-a-building-surveyor

 

As opposed to @bmc who is a registered surveyor or land surveyor. Totally different disciplines. (Private Certifiers/Building Certifiers/Building Surveyors were previously called health and building surveyors - the regulatory officers who look after food safety are still controlled by council.

 

I believethat BMC was not referring to people in his/her land surveying profession as being dodgy in the OP.

I think it was a reference to building surveyors in Victorian terminology - who provide building permits (I.e. certifiers) rather than land surveyors?

 

There is too much expectations about the power that authorities have to regulate the construction market. In my opinion, it does not matter if the authority is a private certifier or local government. These authorities rely on trade/design certificates issued by other professionals and can only make quick site inspections.

The inspections will only reveal errors if they are very obvious. The certifier does not goes through the construction site measuring the strength of the concrete, checking if all the connections are fixed properly or comparing each part of the construction against the design. This is all done by other professionals who issue certificates to the certifier.

In my view, the problem is not self-regulation, but clients/developers allowing the builders to manage the design and documentation process, especially when the builder appoints the design consultants. While this saves money, it results in an inferior quality product and as we see now, even dangerous structures due to the conflict of interest that arises from this situation.

In an ideal world, the architects and engineers who prepared the design would be appointed directly by the client and would make frequent site inspections during construction to ensure that the final product achieves compliance with the regulations and is fit for purpose.

 

when in doubt, just blame the unions.

 

from my understanding the unions are quite weak in Sydney
I used to be a union worker in Melbourne and although I do agree that they are open for corruption, in the most part they prevent a lot of dodgy building materials being used and are pretty stringent on safety
Take away unions and this sort of stuff will be happening weekly , not too mention employee deaths

 

i was making a sarcastic comment

 

Posters on this forum are often so blindly anti union (with no actual facts or experience) that it’s hard to recognise a different comment!

 

Not everyone.

 

while we wait for the findings to be revealed surrounding the Opal Tower drama, will the State Govt be pressured into acting quicker on this report,

Shergold and Weir report released Feb 2018.
http://www.mbansw.asn.au/uploadedFi...d-and-Weir-Report---BMF-Expert-Assessment.pdf

The Building Confidence Report (Shergold and Weir) echoes similar views to those expressed in Michael Lambert’s review of the NSW regulatory system (Lambert Review) published in October 2015.
One of the most damning findings by Shergold and Weir is that there has been almost no effective regulatory oversight of the commercial building industry by regulators.

"Those involved in high-rise construction have been left largely to their own devices. Where there has been supervision, this has generally been by private building surveyors whom critics argue are not independent from builders and/or designers."