Exposed Cavity in double masonry external wall?

Yep all those concerns bottled up. Dodgy renos by an apparent 'builder' owner

 

Thanks Perth Guy

For me he has failed at least 2 aspects there and thus would require approval and a permit?

for me Failed:
(a) will not affect the structural soundness of the building; and
(iv) removal of any building element that is contributing to the support of other structural elements; and

......... i know you were discussing something else. But surely what has been done here without permit and shire approval hasnt meet these requirements

 

Bloody perth and its policies allowing us to not only be the meth city of Australia but also cowboys

 

Yes id feel more confident with the above on that one window which doesnt sit centre of cavity

However im concerned about other dodgy work and what else has been done under the other window openings

 

Run away.....fast.

 

You really need someone qualified to make that assessment. Unqualified people speculating on whether a permit is required or not is just guesswork.

 

A wall is structural. I would be running from this gypsy build

 

A major concern is what you can see. A bigger concern is what you can't see.

If you were serious about this property you would enage a fantastic building inspector to undertake a very detailed inspection. Once you have the report then get quotes from a licenced builder to have the faults rectified.

You would need to consult with council to establish if any unpermitted work has been undertaken and the process to have it certified if required.

All of this is possible but could be expensive. The risk is your inspector misses something and you are stuck with a structural fault down the track. Risky!

 

Thanks @Perthguy

Just on that last point if a building inspector was to miss something and something happened to the property after we bought due to the miss who would be liable?

Id assume it could get quite messy and im sure inspectors cover their backsides somehow

How much ongoing responsability does the inspector have ongoing?

 

The property inspectors have a lot of disclaimers in their report. I doubt you would be able to hold them liable for missing something unless you could prove they did their work negligently.

 

So if they were to miss something but not due to negligence then what is the point of a building inspection property report?

@Westminster @Perthguy

Could you be buying something with a fault that has been missed and could be critical down the track

 

It would depend upon the nature of the fault - if the inspector has to do damage to the cladding etc to access the fault because it is hidden, it would be excluded from their report: for example - the inspector can't take off plasterboard to inspect the lintel over a window. If the wall was to fail due to the incorrect placement of the lintel, there would be no impact on the inspector as the fault is hidden.

 

I had a building inspection done because I suspected that work had been completed not to code. I was right, the building inspector found the faults and they were rectified.

IMO the point of an inspection is not to find every possible fault but to identify and fix what you can.

What if you had no inspection done then found major faults down the track? What's worse, finding some faults and fixing them or finding no faults and fixing nothing? That's how I look at it.

 

I use inspectors because they know 3758357839457834957489% more than me. There will always be times when they can't inspect 100% of a dwelling or even miss something due to human error. However I am happy with that risk as it is still a lot less riskier than my own knowledge and experience.