Will the VBA ever make it to "compliant"?
Is the Victorian Building Authority finally on a better track?
After a decade of worsening, unchecked scandals, and radical mismanagement by the state government, is the Victorian Building Authority finally on a better track? One motivation has been exposure of poor enforcement through YouTube, TikTok and Instagram.
Mon Dec 23 2024
The Victorian Building Authority, in the wake of recent scandals, has set out to revitalise itself. While promising to improve its current practices, and to become more "consumer-centric" rather than "industry-centric", the end diagnosis is that it simply can't do the job it needs to do in its current form.
As a result, it is set to amalgamate with several other Victorian government entities to form a super-organisation, which might have a better chance at holding back the wave of dodgy builders that have entered the industry.
For tradies that means increased awareness that their work will undergo increased scrutiny. Hopefully this will also mean a reduction in those cases where builders ask tradies to "cut corners" on work such as dodgy apartment builds.
Social media pressure
"Non-compliant!" "It's a complete schmozzle!"
If those phrases don't make you crack a smile then, mate, you're not keeping up with your basic Tik-Tok.
Following on (somewhat) from the success of some private building inspectors in the US who popularised their reviews of new house builds in states such as Arizona and Texas on Tik-Tok and YouTube, Australia has spun up its own generation of truly unique home inspection Tik-Tok and YouTube creators.
Cy Porter, Arizona, USA
Posting on TikTok and YouTube as @cyfyhomeinspections , starting with YouTube on 30 June 2020. He's achieved more success on YouTube than TikTok (his content is more complex than quirky), with his top "shorts" video receiving 116 million views, though the average outside of the 10 videos with over a million views is around 100,000 views.
Cy specialises in doing inspections for owners immediately before handover, as well as at the one-year and two-year warranty intervals. He's somewhat scathing about the quality of builders in his part of Arizona. Some major builders have complained about his actions, and sought to have him de-registered, but all these attempts have failed.
He focuses particularly on "flood testing" shower installations, blocking the drains and flooding them to two inches of water. Some the failures are immediate and near-catastrophic - more than one, on brand-new, professionally built homes, and no waterproofing at all.
Trey Hill, Gold Star Inspections, Texas, USA
For y'all that ain't no never done heard a proper Texas accent afore, well, y'all take it slow, y'hear? We'd take it right kindly ifn y'all'd pay 'tension to Trey Hill of Gold Star Inspections, 'cause he definitely got a mite he'd be tellin' y'all.
Trey uses a degree of country charm to wrap up his acute but still amusing observations into a highly entertaining package.
Zeher Khalil, Site Inspections, Melbourne, Australia
Melbourne has the very funny (but also very serious) home inspector Zeher Khalil. You can access his YouTube channel at: /https://www.youtube.com/@Siteinspections}Zeher Khalil Site Inspections
A former tradie turned site inspector, Zeher combines an earnest sense of outrage, with a degree of always-astonished good humour. He's made the simple phrase "non-compliant" into an instant punchline for those in the know.
Dressed in what seems like a mixture between riot cop, special forces and work overalls, Mr Khalil enthusiastically and entertainingly uncovers the shoddy work that has become more commonplace since around 2018 or so.
Be warned, though, as some of what Melbourne-based Mr Khalil does uncover is truly alarming. For example, the use of China-sourced steel framing that is painted to look like Bluescope's Truecore, broken trusses on new homes, a peculiar ongoing inability to get roof drainage right, and some truly dodgy waterproofing jobs.
The Project profile:
Videos:
One common focus for many of Mr Khalil's videos are state building inspectors, particularly those from the Victorian Building Authority (VBA). His videos show him standing in front of some near ruin of construction, wondering just how some state authority could have certified the build. Those laments have not, apparently, gone unnoticed either, with the VBA motivated to explore on some (but not all) of those featured.
The Victorian Building Authority mea culpa
Which brings us to a recent publication from the VBA entitled "Victorian Building Authority - The Case for Transformation", authored by Bronwyn Weir and Frances Hall of the independent firm Weir Legal & Consulting.
That the VBA has been problematic for over a decade is hardly an industry secret. According to the Executive Summary to the report:
The building industry has been the subject of negative commentary for some time. Confidence in the industry has been affected by reports about combustible cladding, the Porter Davis collapse, mouldy and defective homes and high rates of building practitioner insolvency. There have also been reports about poor culture within the VBA and its lack of effectiveness, with many consumers and practitioners unhappy with their interactions with the VBA.
The Government publicly expressed concerns about the VBA in early 2023 and in July 2023 the VBA Board appointed a new CEO, Anna Conin. In March 2024, Minister Kilkenny dissolved the VBA Board and appointed Anna Cronin as the sole Commissioner and CEO.
Those changes led to Ms Cronin appointing Weir to produce this report, with a focus on seven cases/complaints which demonstrate the extent of the VBA's utter incompetence in the past. As the executive summary states:
It is important that this report acknowledges very clearly the dreadful experience these complainants have had in their interactions with the building industry, the VBA and the legal system. Each and every one of them has suffered and continues to suffer severe financial, emotional and physical distress. Every aspect of their lives has been negatively impacted. They have watched their savings or superannuation be replaced with debts they cannot bear. The families and friends of these people have been called on for financial and emotional support, extending the impacts of defective building work and buildings well beyond the complainants in our case studies.
Going into detail for the seven case studies is not necessary, but they do make harrowing reading. One of the stand-out elements is that there is one builder responsible for cases 2, 3 and 4 - which shows the importance of acting faster than a two- or three-year delay in banning a builder. There are allegations not only of sheer incompetence, but also collusion between various parties to the disadvantage of the owners of the properties.
In terms of VBA incompetence, the following is part of the report into case study 6:
The complainant in case study 6 is one of 33 apartment owners. The owners first came to the VBA about defects in their 33-unit development in late 2014. They had just moved in. Twelve months later, despite the VBA not having undertaken any inspection of the site, the owners were told by the VBA their complaint had not been substantiated. Six months later, Council issued an Emergency Order and Building Notice because one of the balconies showed signs of imminent collapse. In late 2018, the site was assessed as part of the statewide cladding audit program which led to the issuing of a second Emergency Order just before Christmas.
So first, based one assumes on some previously unknown form of compliance seance, the VBA determines there is nothing wrong with the building. Then the balconies start to collapse. And then an emergency order is announced. That is a pattern that repeats in different ways throughout all seven cases.
To summarise this report's criticism regarding the conduct of many relevant building surveyors (RBSs):
Exercising their enforcement powers against owners, but not against builders. For multiple sites, rather than issuing a DTF to the builder, the RBS did not take enforcement action on more significant non-compliances, even where the owners had raised concerns with them on multiple occasions. Only after the building contract was terminated and the builder had left the site did the RBS issue a building notice to the owners which identified non-compliances and required their rectification. The reticence of the RBS to inspect more promptly and issue a DTF against the builder is concerning.
In line with this, what is perhaps the most relevant and important statement in the report is this, point 16.7, contained in Part C, titled "The VBA's handling of the complaints":
The culture at the organisation was focussed on practitioners, not on consumers and was risk averse, which resulted in an overly legalistic and defensive approach to carrying out of its functions including the investigation and discipline of practitioners. The VBA staff were working with poor IT systems and did not feel properly supported or managed in their roles. When combined with a significant backlog of complaints, this led to an approach where the procedures adopted were aimed at closing complaints and keeping investigations narrowly focussed wherever possible, to get through the workload.
In short, the VBA neglected its external responsibilities, and became focused instead on its internal requirements. The bureaucracy functioned to sustain itself, rather than to meet the needs of the people paying for homes to be built.
We can't say with complete certainty that this applies to the VBA, but what typically happens in similar situation with government departments, is that faced with a lack of funds, instead of directing their services to the most vulnerable, they instead direct those funds to least vulnerable, who are capable of fighting back. It is possible that to "stay out of trouble", they might cave into developers with big budgets and lawyers on call, while ignoring the plight of small homeowners whose limited budgets are already stressed to afford building a home in the first place.
Future promises
While this report is a litany of every problem you can imagine being developed in a state government authority, its positive side is that it does indicate some intent to change things for the better - why else the title "A Case for Transformation"? The following are some of the suggest improvements contained in the document.
Complaints
The VBA is in the process of implementing a new end-to-end complaint management system which will be applied to each complaint and be accessible to all staff. The system is designed to provide for complainants to lodge a single complaint which can be updated and added to.
Technical assessments of building work
The VBA recognises the need to increase its inspections, audit and compliance activity. In its 2023/24 budget, Government allocated $63 million for building reform, which included significant funding for the VBA. A significant component of this funding is to be directed to more 'boots on the ground'.
Prosecution of registered practitioners
The VBA is close to finalising a new Prosecutions Policy. This new approach will involve greater use of all the VBA enforcement tools, including prosecutions. It provides that the VBA prefers to use the disciplinary process for registered builder, but it will consider prosecution instead or as well, if appropriate. The policy says the VBA may also seek an injunction to secure remedial or rectification outcomes, where feasible and to complement disciplinary action or prosecution.
Interactions with complainants
The new Regulatory Policy Statement makes it clear that the VBA aims to be consumer centric. The VBA says this has been made clear to staff in management directions and in training. The VBA has created new policies on the management of complaints about practitioners and about the VBA. It also has a new VBA Services Charter which sets out service commitments and service standards. Staff have been trained on these documents and new procedures for interacting with complaints are being implemented.
Recommendations
"The Case for Transformation" includes a list of 20 recommendations. The most significant from the perspective of builders are:
A new authority
The next stage for the VBA will be to merge into the Building and Plumbing Commission. This will integrate the Victorian Building Authority (VBA), Domestic Building Dispute Resolution Victoria (DBDRV) and VMIA's Domestic Building Insurance (DBI) functions into a single entity. According to the state minister responsible, Victorian Minister for Planning Sonya Kilkenny:
For the first time, the Regulator will bring together all aspects of building quality control - regulation, insurance and dispute resolution - into a single agency.
Currently, the regulator can only direct builders to fix substandard work before occupants move in. Under new rules the Building & Plumbing Commission will be able to direct to fix work not just before move-in day - but beyond. The Government will work with industry to define the eligible time period.
New powers will also enable the watchdog to stop apartments with serious defects from being sold, as well as increased reporting requirements before occupancy certificates are signed off on new builds.
This is scheduled to occur in 2025 - which likely means March 2026, given past performance.