http://www.somersoft.com/forums/show...253#post340253
Talk about protecting jobs for the boys! It's great how we need protection from ourselves!!!
Pulse
Printable View
http://www.somersoft.com/forums/show...253#post340253
Talk about protecting jobs for the boys! It's great how we need protection from ourselves!!!
Pulse
What complete and utter BS. How many thousands of people have done major renovations on houses and not had OB licences. Sounds like another revenue raiser from the government.
That is as much of a rort as the long service leave levy that you have to pay even if you are an OB.
The role of council should be to ensure that the building is built to the code, but they don't even give consistant info about their own requirements. God help you if you want to build something that is a little left of centre.
No wonder so many projects are done without all the permissions.
That's odd. When I was watching Better Homes and Gardens on Friday night, as they were saying how easy it is to rip out your old kitchen and relplace it with new cabinets and appliances from Bunnings, there was no mention of permits and such. I'm sure a full kitchen replacement would be over the required dollar value...
I would have thought that someone who is replacing a kitchen,Painting,landscaping etc
Is a home renovator not a owner builder?
I have heard to build a house as an owner builder in some states you have to do a course to become a OB (not the case here in Vic).
I guess the question I would be asking is WHAT IS AN OWNER BUILDER?
IMO An owner builder is someone who is physically out there with a hammer and nail (where law allows).
Some one who employs contractors would Be a site supervisor!.
That would be a builder (or owner/builder), who's not necessarily a hands on guy himself. The site supervisor may designate, but he's not the actual employer.Quote:
Originally Posted by nev25
I think you'll find that is one of the reasons we now have the system that is in place. I have seen some incredibly shonky things done in investment properties, having lived in plenty of them over the years. The whole point of the Owner Builder permit and the regulations covering contractors is to have some accountability. Whether it's job protectionism or revenue raising as well I'm not getting into. Something needed to be done about it though. All these clowns buying investment properties and doing their own renovation rescue then flogging them off is what brought the current state of affairs about in my opinion.Quote:
How many thousands of people have done major renovations on houses and not had OB licences.
I agree that what you do in your own house should be your business (up to a point) but if you are 'doing up' a house or unit to rent or sell, I think it should be done properly and by the book. As a government, if you had no control over what people were doing, how could you protect unsuspecting tenants or buyers walking into a death trap?
I am positive that you have to do an OB course in Victoria as well. The one I did the year before last was run from Victoria.Quote:
I have heard to build a house as an owner builder in some states you have to do a course to become a OB (not the case here in Vic).
What is the alternative? You want people to be able to just do what they want, when they want and how they want? I hope you never buy a house that has been renovated by someone like this old Greek guy I rented from in Sydney.
I wanted to put a relocatable house on my property soI spoke to Builders Registration Board of WA and was told that I dont need a OB licence as long as the hookup value( electrical,plumbing) was under $10k. My Uncle was a shire building inspector in WA so I talked to him and he said that you dont need a OB licence until I start modifying the structure. I put a application into my shire and was told to get a OB licence because they include the cost of transportation in the total cost:o. When I went back to BRB they told me the Shire can override anything that they say so bad luck.
A couple of years ago I did some work for Department of Housing and Works renevating bathrooms, kitchens and external works that were well over the $10k value but I was able to because it didnt include any structural work.
1) Department of Housing make their own rules
2) Legally there's no way you'd be allowed to do work like that in NSW without some sort of contractor license. For residential building work over $1000 you'd have to provide a written contract and for work over $12,000 home owner's warranty insurance.
The above notwithstanding, people fly under the radar all the time. I think the post referred to above is an example of a very unlucky person who was caught out.
If the govt. had their way, then there probably wouldn't be any owner builders at all, but then there'd be too many people screaming about their right to work on their own house.
A lot of people are doing it just to make a profit, and turn over a property, which is sort of abusing a system that tries to only let people who are experienced supervise building work.
What's that old rule that a wise king put in place thousands of years ago now?
It went something like " If a builder builds a house, and it falls down, then the builder shall replace it from his own material. If a builder builds a house, and it falls down and kills the owner, then the builder shall be slain".
It's the first 'building code' and a part of a long list of laws that are quite famous now. Perhaps I'll do a Google later if someone doesn't find it first. :wink:
Thats my point an owner builder should be someone who has does the hands on work (hammer in Hand)Quote:
Originally Posted by pawnhead
After all SWMBO sits in the passenger seat of the car and issues instructions But she is not called the driver or doenst need a licence to do so.
I inquired some time ago about the relevents of Owner Builders courses in Vic
and was told the following from www.buildsafe.com.au
To answer your question about the course and if it's relevant in
Victoria. It isn't relevant for Victoria to get your owner builder
permit, you do have to go through the building commission to get your
certificate of consent. You can do a course for owner builders in
Victoria most tafe's have them, but it's not required for Victoria.
I honestly believe that the OB scheme was introduced purely to have some accountability. It allows you to do your own building work but puts the onus on you to make sure it's done properly and to make good any problems that arise down the track. We still have the sword of Damocles hanging over our heads from a renovation we did in Sydney. I think it lapses later this year.
At the time we completed it, we were required to provide 5 years warranty insurance to the new owner. Soon after they increased it to 7. This insurance covers the new owner in the event that something needs to be repaired under warranty and I have passed away, disappeared or become insolvent. If any of these three events have not come to pass, I am personally responsible for making it good.
Our mate in the post above is doing his own renovations to an investment property with no permit, no responsibility, no comeback. If someone buys the place off him and it falls apart, I don't think the new owner has a leg to stand on.
Not at all. My Dad was the owner builder on our house, because his name is on the land title and mine is not. But apart from the plumbing, which he did as a licensed tradesman, he had little else to do with the building of the house. I did most of the work that a builder would do, but the majority of the physical work was carried out by the two chippies I hired.Quote:
Thats my point an owner builder should be someone who has does the hands on work (hammer in Hand)
Thats the point I'm trying to make it shouldn't beQuote:
Originally Posted by silentC
Read my above post
I've read both of your posts above and I disagree with you.
You appear to be arguing that an owner builder should be physically working on the job, otherwise, they cannot call themselves an owner builder. I think that's a bit of an odd point of view. I actually know a couple of builders who never do any physical work. Here's what they do:
1. Order materials
2. Co-ordinate deliveries
3. Organise trades
4. Arrange building inspections
5. Do paperwork
6. Pay bills
7. Take responsibility for the job and see to it that contracts are in place for parts of the job that are the responsibility of others
9. Pay workers comp, make sure OH&S requirements are met, building insurance etc etc.
I'm sure there is plenty more. An owner builder also has to do all of this and in many cases, including mine, hold down an 8 to 5 job as well. So why do you believe an owner builder MUST work on site?
Owner builder is a legal concept that allows a person to take responsibility for building their own house. It has nothing to do with whether or not they physically build the house. Anyone can be an owner builder.
Totally agree with what Silent said:2tsup:
When I started in the game, you could get your full builders license from a Corn Flakes box. You just had to fill out a form, pay the fee, and they sent you your license. I worked for a builder who did just that, and he didn't know much about building, suggesting some pretty dodgy cost cutting schemes.
But he did very well for himself because he hired the right people to advise him. My father, as a foreman/carpenter was one of them, and he taught me the trade. There were a lot of dodgy builders back in those days though.
I got my chippies license without doing any courses, but I did do a builder's course at tech some years after. It saved a lot of time not doing a trade course, and you can still bypass it today if you want a full builders license.
BTW, that 'earliest building code' that I mentioned earlier is the Code of Hammurabi. Although there are a lot of people getting slain, there are some very wise laws which you can read here.
Does anyone else think the focus should be on what you're doing, not how much it costs? I mean if I'm updating my laundry, pull the old cupboard out and replace it with a new cupboard in a different location I can't see how this should need any kind of license or control. I'm not messing with anything structural, electrical or plumbical (?). I know this won't cost $12k but if I extend the idea to the kitchen and start replacing cupboards I could quickly go over that amount - and I'm still basically removing and replacing something that is non-structural (might need to get a sparkie and plumber if I mess with their areas).Quote:
Originally Posted by silentC
Again, if I want to close off a door that I no longer want, remove the architrave and jamb, add some extra studs cover it with gyprock and do a bit of expert stopping what's the big deal? However, if I put a new door in a wall that requires me to cut some studs out, then it's structural - I should at least get some professional whatever (help/advice/inspections/certifications - you pick).
I'm not sure how this could translate to regulations - maybe that's why there's this silly focus on cost. I mean, I could install some really flash bookshelves in my library - if it's big enough and I use very expensive timber and fittings I could go over $12k - does this mean I need govt approval/certification/etc -- sound ridiculous to me.
Then again, I guess all definitive regs are silly because there have to be definitive: I can build a freestanding pergola below 3m without interference because the ACT regs say I need planning approval/inspections if it is 3m or higher. So I can build it 2.9m high, but if the roof is a bit higher I'm caught.
Ok, off my soap box.
Cheers,
Adam
The cost thresholds are just a means of gauging the size of the job, and therefore the liability that exists if it is done poorly and needs to be repaired or replaced. I suppose they needed a way of doing this that didn't require individual analysis of each and every job. It's relatively easy for a council officer on the front desk to work out based on total cost. If they had to try and assess the nature of the job as well and then apply some kind of rating to it, it all becomes very complicated.
The figures of $1000 and $12,000 are very arbitrary anyway. I'd imagine the cost of a job would also have a lot to do with where it is being done too - people in Mosman probably can't replace a doorknob without council involvement.
which we weren't, but....
one of the bosses here is into brewing his own. We were having a chat about a new micro-brewery which has opened up, and he explained that legally, and for tax purposes, the "brewer" is the actual person who tips in the yeast.
So, the micro-brewery does all the work before and after the yeast-adding step, but that doesn't make them the "brewers". I can walk in, toss in a teaspoon of yeast, and that 1 second action entitles me to call myself a brewer.
:?
Well, it seemed like a parallel situation to the builder-who-doesn't-actually-build discussion.
Back in my box now.
Cheers,
Andrew
Well thanks for that, Andrew.
But yes, I believe it is a similar situation. The builder or owner builder is the legal entity responsible for the job, they hold the license to do the work and the onus is on them to have it done properly. But they don't have to actually do it.
Hi
I have done two MAJOR extensions as an owner builder.
The simple solution to this kind of problem is to do the work, as I did, under the registration number of a licensed builder.
This solves the problem of the builder / OB registration, as the council has a comeback on the REAL builder, under whose license the work was performed.
Of course the OB has to do the right thing (hopefully) as the real builder will be on him "like a ton of bricks" if things are NOT done to standard.
The real builder is supposed to check on the construction/work being done during the course of the building process.
In my OB jobs, the first was on my own home so I did not need to take out any indemnity insurance. The second instance was an IP so if the work exceeded $12,000 I needed to take out indemnity insurance.
This indemnity insurance in turn required an engineers certificate based on a physical inspection of the work carried out. I obtained the certificate without difficulty but as I did the job for less than the $12k I did not need the indemnity insurance.
So all you need is a "friendly" builder that trusts you AND your work.
The first OB job I did was a MAJOR second storey extension, I did by asking around and I discovered that someone with whom I (then) worked had a brother that was a builder.
For my IP reno, fortunately I was able to use my brothers building license :)
In that case, you are not an owner builder (in the eyes of the law) you are working for the licensed builder and he is responsible for what you do. "Owner builder" is a legal status that implies you are the responsible person.Quote:
The simple solution to this kind of problem is to do the work, as I did, under the registration number of a licensed builder.
I'm not sure how long ago you did those jobs, but it will become increasingly harder to convince a builder to allow you to use his licence in this way, because he has to warrant not only your work, but the work of anyone you bring on site, for 10 years - by which time you might have sold the house, passed on or left the country. He would have to be a trusting individual. I certainly wouldn't do it, unless I knew the person very well. Even then...
Also, at least in NSW, you must either live, or intend to live in the dwelling in order to get an Owner Builder permit, so you can't work on an investment property under one. What a lot of people do is buy a house, move in, renovate under an Owner Builder permit and then sell it. But you can only do this once every 5 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by silentC
If your a licensed builder why the hell would you let someone do work under your licence No.?
"a brother of a mate I was working with"........ you must be very persuasive.:D or is it WA builders?
When it first came into Victoria there was the addition that the owner builder had to live in the house for seven years before he could sell it as the OB did not have the 7 years independant guarantee on new house buildings.Quote:
Originally Posted by silentC
Peter.
You can sell, you just need inspection report and insurance for 6.5 years after the final certificate is issued., insurance cost around 2k
I think Peter was saying that when it first came in, that was the case. Obviously it is different now. In NSW it is 7 years.
What a lot of people don't realise though is that the insurance covers the new owner, not the Owner Builder. If repairs are required within the 7 year warranty period, the insurance company will expect the Owner Builder to pay for them. If the Owner Builder cannot be found, or is insolvent, the insurance covers it.
I've been reading this with a fair degree of trepidation... just in the middle of planning a kitchen overhaul. Does anyone know what the laws are in WA?
I'm looking at getting some structural work done by a builder (removal of a wall and re-strutting the roof), but intend to do the gutting and replacing of the cabinets myself. Is there any way this could need an OB license? seems ludicrous if it does.
I think a lot of this is just hot air. Councils only act if there is a complaint, for the 70% of the population who don't live in a capital city, I think your pretty safe. How could any one tell if you changed a few things in your house anyway after a period of time. Along as the neighbours don;t complain, then the council doesn't give a toss. Who wants to pick a fight. This is more about seeing to be doing something, and I guess the HIA and others would be behind it. Buyer beware is still the law with a lot of this stuff. If a qualified experienced building surveyor who should have been employed by a potential buyer can't pick out dodgy work and report it, then it doesn't matter. This is more about protecting stupid people who can't spot a front door hung opening outwards.
Has anyone here ever tried to make a warrenty claim within the 7 years inNSW ?
From my experience it is a waste of time even trying to get any action.
I bought a unit new and a few problems arose in the seven years after completion. Not in my unit but in others, The body corporate and the owners went to court several times and got a judgement against the builder each time. He was fined, he has never payed, he has not attempted to do any of the work. He still has a licence and is building other projects.
He has just ignored them and now the 7 years are up there is no comeback, so much for the great protection warrenty is supposed to provide.
So I think you can safely say its a good theory to try and protect the innocent home buyer but isn't one of the reasons you get a building inspection done is to suss out any problems.
In the end the truth is the govt is revenue raising and they arn't that interested in looking after those affected if they were this builder would be missing a licence not merrily building.
You only have to watch one of the current affairs programs to see the same old building warrenty shoddy workmanship stories that appear time and time again to realise what a farse a builders licence is.
My turn on the soap box then..Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumley
So you put up your kitchen cupboards, sell your house to a young family, but when the cupboards fall down and lands on a small child, what's the story then?
My point is that structural isn't necessarily the biggest problem. What about breaching termite protection? It only takes one long stud to let the little beasties in...
The point, I think is to lift the level of professionalism of the building trade generally, including those of us ( me included) who work "on the side" without any protection for ourselves or our customers. The contract rules are one of those.
Having said all that, IMO there is a need for better education of builders, but particularly the general public to get them to think about what they do and what they should use a qualified, licenced and insured tradie for.
Course I'd be out of a job if everyone wanted to see my licence...
I have done renovations on our house. Quite a number of them and all in small lots under $1000. I have every intention to live here for 30 years, so I have put extra care into everything I have done.
How do the council know where 1 renovation starts and the other finishes? If I take 2 years to renovate a 5 bed 4 bath house (inc kitchen), but I'm doing it 1 room at a time did I just do 10 small renovations? (each say under $5k on average) or did I do 1 big renovation for $50k? I'm doing them one at a time, so I'd argue I'm doing 10 small renovations.
Hi JehuAB,Quote:
Originally Posted by JehuAB
W.A has not long ago changed the rule to $20k for OB licence so you should be safe. Mind you when you come to kitchens $20k doesn't go far.
Say you can do it for $15k because you are doing the work yourself and saving yourself $6k on labour cost too bad you have to get a OB licence as they go on total value of the renovation.
In vic non-strucural alterations dont need building permits in most cases, so theoretically you could gut your house back to the frame and rebuild all bathrooms kitchens etc. If you dont need a building permit you dont need a certificate of consent for owner building. I have seen blocks of units bought by people, then gutted then sold of as completely refurbished with no warranty.
Another reason that the council requires a price on the works, is to calculate the long service levy. If you're doing a lot of the hands on work as an owner builder, then you may be able to get a partial exemption, but if it's all subbied out then you have to pay the full amount.
I think that the original topic of this thread should prove to you that this is not the case. That guy was happily working away when a council inspector came past and saw the skip out front and decided to have a snoop.Quote:
Councils only act if there is a complaint.
As I said, plenty of people fly under the radar. I think I can safely say that the majority of people on this forum have done some modification to their home that technically should have been approved. It's like a lot of the debates we have. Everyone knows that it is against the law. The question is whether you think the risk of getting caught is acceptable.
As for whether it's just revenue raising, well of course local councils make money out the whole process, just like they do on everything else they collect fees for. That's what councils and governments do. They are supposed to use the income to provide services to their constituents. The State government gives them the power to collect these fees. Some of it goes into their pockets, some goes to the State government, and some goes to the builder's long service levy (I'm talking NSW here). I have absolutely no doubt that the laws were created to control a problem, not simply to raise revenue. Just like the speeding laws and the requirement to have a license to operate a brothel.
By no means am I a government apologist, but I can see the need for some sort of laws to control what goes on, if only as a measure of protection for future home buyers. It's better than the alternative.
And to add further to the renovation/regulation debate, this is in today's Age:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/nation...941158337.html
Are we becoming (already are?) the most over-regulated country in the world?:oo: