Water-proofing expert quits over new law

Here is a problem.

I have project managed fire upgrades and have no issue with anything regulation wise re this.

Re waterproofing we are transferring a scheme suitable for large multi storey buildings onto small low rise buildings including older (up to 100 years old) buildings.

It is not a simple “sign off”. I have to find a registered architect or engineer in the first place. Then they must produce a set of documents and lodge them on the portal.

In my case I have had no defects / claims in 25 years. I have recently had to re do repairs on a smaller building detailed and supervised by one of the biggest remedial engineering companies in Sydney. I have also had to convince another body corporate that the repairs specified by an engineer where not required. They were attempting to fix a problem that didn’t exist rather than one that did. I could have easily done the work and collected the money but that is wrong. So often the so called experts in remedial works do not understand these small blocks.

I’ll give an example of a issue on a building right now as in January 2023. We have a rising damp issue in a unit in a building that is about 15 years old. There are also a few other issues to fix. This if for $40K’s worth of work. Now the waterproofing component is about 10% of that. We will now have to engage the engineer or architect to draw up the area and lodge the plans on the portal. They will also need to sign off on my scope of works. My colleague who is about the best in Sydney has done this sort of project between 500 and 1000 times. So suddenly we need to involve someone with little experience in this and in the process add 10-15K to the bill. This is if we can find anyone.

I have another one to do on another building. The cost is only $15K total. Exactly the same process is required for this unit. The cost just went up by 50%.

I have exacty the same issue on another building.

The owners are hard pressed enough on these projects without the additional costs of this red tape.

From my point of view my business model of investigating these older buildings and coming up with solutions is done / finished it is now too clumsy.

A worrying thing is we are critically short of quality experienced contractors in this feild and should be doing everything to keep those (like me) we have. Fair Trading should leave these laws to the dodgy build concrete hi rises and if they insist on getting into my area at least talk to us first.

My flat is one of 16 and is a bit over 20 years old. We have had issues wuth waterproofing for years. About 7-8 years ago, we decided to bring in an engineering firm to investigate the problems, draw up a scope of works, put out to tender, select a builder, and supervise & finally sign off on the works. ~$380k project. Problem is, the work wasn’t done properly & we are back to square one, since the original builder went bust and the original engineers said it was not their problem. We have had to seek out another engineering firm and start the process all over again. More special levies. You pay extra for engineers to get involved but what is the point if they are not accountable? It’s devastating for many owners who are struggling with rising costs of living at the moment.

Sparrow73, the new Design and Building Practioners Act 2020 may provide recourse as it (unusually) has retrospective application. A duty of care is imposed upon the various building professionals, including engineers.

Thanks for the response.

From what I can gather after doing a bit of research, the contract was from 2016 (i believe the work was completed in 2017 but haven’t yet found the final certificate from the engineers saying it was completed, will keep looking) and it gave us 13 weeks after completion to notify of rectification works and an extra 13 weeks on top of that for ‘major’ rectifications.

The Dept of Fair Trading documents as part of the contract said any legal proceedings had to be commenced within 2 years – or 6 years for serious defects.

With the builders gone bust now, it’s probably a moot point anyway.

But it would be interesting to find out to what extent engineers who oversee work and sign off on it are responsible. As someone not employed in the construction industry, I naiively believed that getting engineers involved cost more but was an added protection (looking back, I’m not sure why…).

We just finished paying the 4th special levy i’ve had in my 11 years here and have an upcoming EGM to approve a 5th. I just hope no owners are forced out because of these spiralling costs, esp in today’s high interest rate/high inflation environment….