Why Victorias Building Reforms Miss the Whole Building Lifecycle
We’re looking at the building industry through the wrong lens.
Victoria’s building reforms have generated plenty of debate.
Most of that debate has focused on builders.
New obligations. New registration requirements. New insurance. Greater accountability.
But they also assume that the only problem with buildings occurs during construction.
That simply isn’t reality.
A building’s life begins at construction and for 10 years builders and other building professionals can be liable for defects.
However, buildings exist for far longer than 10 years and defects are not the only issues that arise with buildings.
I know this, because I deal with property damage every day, yes we see defects, but there are also maintenance issues particularly in strata buildings, there are also storm, burst pipes and other events and things that go wrong. There are also homeowners doing their own works poorly.
Over the next 50 years buildings in Victoria will require maintenance, repairs, alterations and countless decisions by owners, owners corporations and professionals.
Plus, those buildings will be sold to new purchasers.
When things go wrong, it isn’t just builders who are involved!
That’s why when we run claims, they’re not just against builders, they’re against plumbers, neighbours, insurers, owners corporation and a whole variety of claims.
Yes, we’ve had a really bad issue with building defects in Victoria and major problems with our regulator.
But the real problem is wider than the current solution.
Many of the disputes I see arise years after a project has been completed. Water damage, movement, ageing infrastructure, poor maintenance, neighbour disputes, disclosure issues and insurance claims often have little to do with who built the property in the first place.
Yet our legal framework continues to deal with these problems separately.
Building legislation focuses on construction.
Insurance is dealt with under different regimes.
Neighbour disputes rely on a patchwork of statutory rights and common law principles.
Owners corporations operate under another legislative framework.
VCAT has some jurisdiction but not others. BPC wants to deal with dispute resolution but it can’t deal with water claims, and other insurance claims.
Disputes are then spread across different courts, tribunals and jurisdictions, often taking years to resolve.
That isn’t an integrated system.
If Victoria is serious about improving confidence in the built environment, we need to think beyond construction.
We should be looking at the entire lifecycle of a building from design and construction through to maintenance, insurance, neighbour relationships and efficient dispute resolution.
Property owners don’t experience these issues as separate legal issues. They experience them as one problem.
My firm position is that dispute resolution needs to be in one place and we need solutions that are not just focused on construction.
This article is a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
Recent articles
-
A Satirical Look at How Professional Indemnity Claims Really Get Handled
Introducing Continuity Perpetuity, a fictional insurer whose proprietary claims methodology ensures every claim is perpetually considered and then vigorously defended.
-
Royal Commissions Spectacle or Genuine Reform
With Victoria's Royal Commission into major construction projects underway, the real question is not who gets called or charged. It is what actually comes out the other end.
-
Does Victorian Building Warranty Insurance Really Protect Subsequent Owners
A significant concern is emerging about the practical protection warranty insurance gives to people who buy a home after the building works are finished. Fall-Armytage brings it into focus.
-
How Domestic Insurers Use Cash Settlements to Underquote Repairs
Insurers increasingly offer cash settlements from preferred repairers that will not cover the cost of the actual repairs, and the scope of works proposed is often not enough.