Practical Completion Report Inspection date 1 st January Client Mohit Vir Job Details Address Lot 3349 Limone street Aveley. W.A. Photograph shows the front elevation of the residence. DESCRIPTION OF THE PREMISES The property in question is a freestanding, single storey, full brick, metal roofed building constructed on a concrete slab floor. It is situated on a level site at a similar height to the street. The weather at the time of my inspection was intermittent showers. The level of completed construction at the residence is considered to be close to Practical Completion. Preamble I attended the residence to undertake a Practical Completion assessment prior to handover to the owner.
About This Report SHS Building Consultants practical completion report identifies defects and incomplete elements in the readily accessible areas of the building. The intention of this report is to provide a list of workmanship concerns at the current stage of construction. The report is non-invasive and is a visual inspection only. The terms and conditions provided to the client prior to inspection should be read in conjunction with this report. The consultant will compare the standard of finish and workmanship with prevailing acceptable industry standards. The report represents SHS building consultants expert building opinion and attempts to identify common defects apparent at the time of the inspection most notably those that may occur in the future as a result of defective installation. The report should not be considered exhaustive and it is noted that builder remains responsible for the identification and rectification of their own and their contractors defective building work. The report does not deal with any contractual issues including whether or not the builder has used or installed a specific brand of tile, tap, appliance, etc. or has built the home to the contracted design. The report does not deal with certification of the building or specific building compliance unless noted. However this report will reference specific building code requirements and Australian Standards when assessing the building for workmanship and acceptable trade practices. The report does not provide details of the method, extent or cost of any remedial work required. The client is made aware that the fit for purpose and design requirements as well as expected performance requirements for all building components including alternative solutions and common building components and installations are not able to be reasonably assessed for the purposes of a pre handover report. Please refer to our terms and conditions which are provided to the client before the date of inspection for clarification on accessible areas, method of inspection and other information relating to the inspection and report. This report does not replace the builders warranty and is not a compliance report. An important note on the identification of defective building work If the builder disputes that an item within this report is defective and he is of the opinion that the item does in fact meet BCA (NCC), manufacturer installation guides or Australian Standard requirements evidence supporting that view must be provided. If the item is a Deemed-to- Satisfy or Alternative Solution, the testing process and a statement regarding how the item complies with the performance requirements of the BCA will need to be provided. All Manufacturer installation requirements are considered mandatory and items are considered defective if they are not installed in accordance with the manufacturer s installation requirements. Items not installed in accordance with the manufacturer installation requirements are generally not covered by the manufacturer s warranty. Australian Standards are referenced within this report as both a means of establishing what is acceptable industry practice and also (for building standards referenced within the BCA) compliance with the BCA. The method used to determine defective building work is in accordance with The Building Commission of Western Australia guidelines. As such this report may be used an expert witness report at the building commission or in court.
A note on acceptable viewing positions The inspection of the finished surfaces and appliances at the residence was undertaken in accordance with accepted industry practice. The accepted industry practice for inspecting defects and surfaces is outlined within Standards and Tolerance Guide 2007 which illustrates: Diagram F: Normal viewing position for the inspection of painting defects is 1.5m from the wall, floor and ceiling and 600mm from fixtures and appliances. The inspection was undertaken on a sunny day with all lights that were illuminating the surface being diffused and not glancing off or parallel to the surface. The contract has not been reviewed therefore no comment has been provided on the contents of the agreement between builder and client. For the purposes of establishing incomplete work items that are not usually included within a completed home have not been assessed in regards to level of completion. All installed items have been inspected regardless of whether the client of the builder supplied or installed them. This report has been provided to the client and as such any correspondence from the builder must be directed to the client. If the client or builder wishes to engage SHS Building Consultants to provide comment on replies to this report a further fee will be applicable. No fee is payable by the client for verbal clarification regarding an item within this report.
Walls (Item 1) I observed that weepholes were not installed above the window head and sill flashings and also to the base of all cavity masonry walls at 1.2m centres. Australian Standard 3700-2011 Masonry structures 4.7.2 Weepholes states: 4.7.2 Weepholes Weepholes shall be provided wherever it is necessary to drain moisture from or through masonry construction. Where flashings are incorporated in the masonry, weepholes shall be provided in the masonry course immediately above the flashing, at centres not exceeding 1200 mm. It is noted that all brick cavities require weepholes to prevent moisture build up (from condensation and / or water entering within the cavity around openings and window / door glazing etc) and that all openings greater than 1m wide require weepholes. It is further noted that the existence of sill or header flashings was not able to be confirmed. However flashings which extend over brick wall cavities are required to all wall openings and window headers not protected by an eave, regardless of size, in accordance with The Building Code of Australia. Further work required: Weepholes are required to be installed to all window flashings not protected by an eave.to direct moisture out of the cavity around wall openings in accordance with Australian Standard 3700-2011. (Item 2) I observed that some of the face bricks throughout the residence and in particular the garage are affected by vanadium staining as indicated by the yellow / green colour to the brick walls as well as mortar residue. Vanadium staining in brickwork is a term that describes minerals and salt residue left behind as moisture evaporates from bricks. It is a normal process of the bricks drying and it is my opinion that bricks affected by staining should be cleaned prior to hand over and again near the end of the builders defect liability period if it reappears. Australian Standard 3700-Masonry Structures 12.10 Cleaning states: Masonry shall be cleaned and stains removed, as necessary, in such a manner that the work is not damaged. Particular care shall be taken to protect adjacent work from the effects of any acid used in cleaning. Care shall be taken when using high-pressure water cleaners not to damage mortar joints and masonry units. Further work required: The face brick walls should be cleaned in accordance with Australian Standard 3700. It is noted that the brick manufacturer s installation guide has the correct procedure for cleaning bricks affected by vanadium and other staining as well as residue from building work and that the common practice of using of hydrochloric acid is not recommended by most brick manufacturers as it usually results in further (and irremovable) staining.
Roof Covering (Item 3) The front parapet wall has been fitted with a flashing which does not extend to cover all sides of the wall. Where gaps exist the gaps have been filled with flexible sealant. Flexible sealant is expected to deteriorate over time with U.V light and weathering as well as cracks resulting from differential building movement which will lead to water entry in coming years. Further work required: Replace the flashing so that all four sides of the parapet are covered and that flexible sealant alone is not relied upon for the purposes of water proofing. (Item 4) A flashing above the front entry has been installed backwards with the mini break bending away from the wall. The gap has been filled with flexible sealant and the sealant has begun to crack. Further work required: Remove the flashing and install a new flashing in accordance with accepted industry practice and the manufacturer s installation requirements. (Item 5) The client is made aware that as a result of the design of the metal roof covering special care must be taken to ensure that even a small amount of debris does not collect on the roof and prohibit rain water escaping the outlets. I am of the opinion that a more efficient design would have eliminated the need for extensive and costly maintenance. A regular roof and gutter cleaning schedule should be implemented to ensure that debris does not cause water to overflow into the roof cavity. Areas of special note to be monitored include the valley gutter at the front of the residence which has been installed on top of the final roof sheet (water passing over the ribs will likely enter the roof cavity if a small amount of debris collects at this location or if rain fall is particularly heavy.) It is noted that the manufacturer (Lysacht) requires full coverage of each adjoining roof sheet and that at this location the rib of the underlying sheet is exposed. Another notable area to be monitored is the front parapet wall where two valleys discharge into a single gutter with a single outlet with no overflow provision. I am of the opinion that water entry at these locations as a result of heavy rainfall would be considered the result of defective building work as there is no overflow provision to the parapet wall gutter. Until such time as the roof leaks I am unable to consider the work to be defective. However the client should be aware that roof leaks at the aforementioned locations are likely and should they occur an experienced building consultant will be able attribute at least part of the resultant damage to the design of the roof covering. It is noted that should water entry occur at these locations the performance requirements of the Building Code of Australia would not be considered to have been met and therefore defective building work would be implied. Cleaning (Item 6) The entire residence and all building components should be cleaned prior to handover to ensure that all window frames, cabinetry, tiled surfaces, glass and all other building components are presented in a clean and as new condition. I note that most of the window frames have plaster residue. Special care should be taken not to damage powder coated window frames and the like. Further work required: Professionally clean the entire residence prior to handover.
General (Item 7) The sealant to one of the ensuite shower recess wall junctions has not been smoothed over and has therefore not adhered to the face of the tiles at the top of the wall tiles. The sealant to the splashback tiles within the shower ensuite is incomplete and does not extend to the end of the tiles over the vanity. I consider that to be effective to prevent water entry and to provide a suitable aesthetic the sealant should be removed and replaced or extended to provide a suitable amount of cover. (Item 8) The painting and paint preparation at the residence was observed to be incomplete. There are several areas of paint which is missing (a hole in the rear portico ceiling, the gaps between rails and shelving in several of the robes and the kitchen pantry). For the purposes of a practical completion inspection not all painted surfaces to the entire residence were inspected for workmanship and it is noted that the work is not yet considered complete. The painting and preparation of all surfaces to be painted by the builder in accordance with the contract should be completed in a neat and tradesman like manner. (Item 9) The front gutter is filled with building debris which is blocking the gutter and interrupting the flow of water from the roof. The gutters should be cleaned of all debris prior to handover. (Item 10) The gutter at the front of the residence has been installed before the render was applied to the wall. As a result the render has been installed around the gutter and is uneven in places. It is expected that the render will crack around the gutter due to the the metal expanding and contracting with changes in air temperature. The uneven render is directly over the front entry and detracts from the finished product. I am of the opinion the area should be rectified to prevent future cracking and provide a suitable aesthetic. (Item 11) The pins to the hinges of the ensuite door require pushing down into the hinge. (Item 12) The grout to the ensuite shower recess floor is a different colour in places. It is unclear whether it is the tile showing through or discoloration to the grout. Notwithstanding the cause I am of the opinion that to achieve a suitable aesthetic the grout should be re-installed so that variation in colour no longer exists. (Item 13) The ceiling mounted brackets to the garage tilt panel door have been cut with a grinder, are of different sizes and are sharp to the touch. I am of the opinion that the brackets have not been installed in manner which the manufacturer of the doors would find acceptable. Therefore I do not consider the brackets to be acceptable and I consider the sharp edges of the poorly cut brackets to be a safety (cut) risk. I note that the brackets are also unpainted. (Item 14) The main bathroom window is damaged at the top of the frame as viewed form outside. I am of the opinion that the window is not of a merchantable quality as a result of the damage. It is my opinion that the window frame should be rectified so that the window is in an as new condition prior to handover. (Item 15) There are several areas where the internal slab is uneven and not smooth. Notably ply wood extends from under the bedroom 2 window. It is expected that the slab should be installed so that any future floor coverings will not be adversely affected or require rectification work to the slab in order to install the flooring. It is noted that some levelling agents may be required, depending on the choice of floor coverings to correct slight dips and valleys within the slab and that this is accepted industry practice and not considered the builders responsibility (if he has not been asked to install the floor covering.) By reading this comment the client should
not consider that the slab should be perfectly smooth and level prior to handover, only that lumps of concrete, pieces of ply and the like should be removed prior to handover to enable the neat installation of floor coverings.. I trust this report is of assistance. If you have any questions regarding this report please contact me. Builders Registration 14348 SHS Building Consultants
Photograph 1 shows no weepholes above a sill flashing. Photograph 2 shows a wall flashing has been installed with the break away from the wall. Note that the sealant has already cracked at this location. Note also that the flashing is allowing water between the wall and the flashing as indicated by the orange arrow.
Photograph 3 shows colour differentiation of the floor tiles in the bathroom shower recess. Photograph 4 shows the fascia requires cleaning.
Photograph 5 shows the slab is not prepared for the floor covering in bedroom 2. Photograph 6 shows gaps between the shelving and rails.
Photograph 7 shows debris in the gutters. Photograph 8 shows excessive use of sealant at the front parapet wall.
Photograph 9 shows a poorly installed valley gutter at the front of the residence. Water entry over the sides of the sheet laps during heavy rainfall is expected at this location.