Jimmy, I can’t agree with you more. The Grenfell Tower tragedy (or is it a criminal act?) should be a warning to all high-rise residents here in Australia. The love-in between government, developers, councils and self-certifiers must cease.
Whilst the 2% bond may appear to be something of a solution for defects, it does not allow for the possibility of shoddy materials, such as cladding, or shoddy patch repairs to defects identified within the initial 2 year period or the problem of experts (builders, developers, self-certifiers, fire engineers) not agreeing that a defect exists (as happened with our fire dampers).
Or guess what……….. by the time everyone does agree a defect exists (4 years in our case) the builder and developer go bust! No prizes for who has to find that $1million.
And don’t get me started on roof membranes that fail after 4 years leaving a trail of destruction down 8 floors. Only to be advised by developer that the problem was related to a lack of maintenance. Beside the absurdity of that comment, who would really be removing tons of pebbles to do regular inspections. That is another $2million!
I understand that major structural defects are not restricted to a 2 year window, but then I have also been advised that fire dampers and roof membranes are not structural. So the proposed 2% bond would not have helped us at all and certainly would not identify shoddy cladding.
I must also make the point that our builder/developer were fabulous in the first two years. Only now do we realise how much we were had!
A starting solution could be independent certifiers, insurance for buildings over 3 storeys, and a proper schedule of all mechanical, electrical, fire and hydraulic assets (including serial numbers and warranties) accompanied by a realistic maintenance and capital works schedule.
It is very scary to think that residents may not know they are living with shoddy fire protection until it is too late.