Dianella unregistered builder Silvano Rossi, trading as Deluxe Bathrooms, has been prosecuted by the Building Commissioner for registration and contractual offences he committed in contracting for and carrying out home building work at a Cottesloe property between March and September 2013.

On 19 May 2016, the Perth Magistrates Court ordered Mr Rossi to pay fines of $20,000 and costs of $5319.14 after the magistrate found him guilty of two charges under the Building Services (Registration) Act 2011 and two charges under the Home Building Contracts Act 1991.

The court found Mr Rossi had:

• contracted for and carried out prescribed building services without the required registration;
• failed to ensure that the home owner was provided with the prescribed notice before the owner signed the building contract; and
• failed to obtain a policy of home indemnity insurance for the home building work.

Valued at $120,000, the home building work involved alterations and additions to an existing dwelling, including the removal of existing walls, construction of new walls and the conversion of a bedroom into an ensuite and walk-in robe. The works were also to include the installation of flooring throughout the dwelling, painting, tiling and new plumbing fixtures in wet areas.

“In Western Australia, if residential building work is valued over $20,000 and requires a building permit, the builder must be a registered building contractor and is required to take out a policy of home indemnity insurance in the owner’s name before accepting payment or commencing work,” Building Commissioner Peter Gow said.

“Homeowners can check a builder holds the require registration on the Building Commission website at www.commerce.wa.gov.au/building-commission or by phoning 1300 489 099.

“The Building Commission will continue to hold to account and name those who put the public interest and reputation of the building industry at risk."

END OF RELEASE

Building Commission media contacts (for journalists/producers only)

General enquiries

Piara Waters builder Param Jeet Singh Karnail Singh (BP14537) has been fined $5,000 by the Building Services Board for negligent conduct relating to building work he carried out at properties in Willetton and Mirrabooka in 2015.

The Board found Mr Singh was negligent under the Building Services (Registration) Act 2011 in that:

• he entered into contracts for and carried out building services at the two properties without a valid registration;
• both of the contracts provided for him to receive a deposit in excess of 6.5 per cent of the total value of work; and
• he demanded a payment from the Willetton property owners without having first provided them with a copy of the policy of home indemnity insurance.

The Willetton contract was for the construction of a granny flat to a value of $130,955. The Mirrabooka contract was for an addition to an existing home to a value of $46,000. Both owners paid Mr Singh a deposit of approximately 40 per cent of the total contract value.

At the time the works were carried out, Mr Singh was registered as a building practitioner but not a building contractor and therefore was not entitled to contract for the work. Despite this, Mr Singh named himself as the building contractor when applying to the City of Canning and City of Stirling for the respective building permits and to an insurance company for home indemnity insurance.

“The disciplinary matters committed by Mr Singh put the property owners at risk of significant personal and financial loss,” Building Commissioner Peter Gow said.

“Thankfully for the owners, the insurance company in this instance has confirmed that the home indemnity insurance policies issued in relation to both sites are effective and will be honoured in the event of a claim.”

At the time this media statement was issued, the owners of the Willetton property were still in dispute with Mr Singh regarding a number of workmanship issues.

“The Building Commission is committed to removing this type of conduct from the building industry,” Mr Gow said. “We will continue to hold to account and name those who put the public interest and the reputation of the building industry at risk.”

Builders and consumers can find out more about their rights and responsibilities in the building process on the Building Commission website at www.commerce.wa.gov.au/building-commission or phone 1300 489 099.

END OF RELEASE

Building Commission media contacts (for journalists/producers only)

General enquiries

Building company Ribshire Pty Ltd (BC14107), trading as Goodline, and its director John Michael Kennedy (BP14106) have been ordered to pay fines totalling $10,000 for negligent conduct as a result of disciplinary action by the Building Services Board.

The Board found the company was negligent in carrying out building work at two sites in Wedgefield and one each in South Hedland and Port Hedland between 2008 and 2016 in that it:

• failed to ensure that a valid demolition licence was in place prior to demolishing a workshop at one of the Wedgefield sites;
• failed to ensure that a valid building permit was in place prior to commencing the construction of a shed at the second Wedgefield site; and
• carried out building work, in the form of an accommodation building/motel at the South Hedland site and a shed at the Port Hedland site, without obtaining the relevant building permits.

The Board fined Ribshire $5,000 for its negligence. As the sole director and nominated supervisor who consented to the company’s actions, Mr Kennedy was taken to have also committed the offences of the company and fined $5,000.

The company’s conduct in relation to the two Wedgefield sites was brought to the Building Commission’s attention by the Town of Port Hedland in January 2015. The other two sites were identified as part of the Building Commission’s investigation.

“It is important that builders meet their responsibilities in respect to building and demolition permits for safety reasons – it is the person named as the builder on the permit who is responsible for ensuring that the building is completed in accordance with the plans and specifications and complies with the applicable standards,” Building Commissioner Peter Gow said.

“Anyone who intends to break the building laws is reminded that they face disciplinary or prosecution action by the Building Commissioner, which can result in significant penalties, including fines.

“The Building Commission will continue to hold to account and name those who put the public interest and the reputation of the building industry at risk.”

END OF RELEASE

Building Commission media contacts (for journalists/producers only)

General enquiries

A Gosnells tradesman who took big deposits for concreting jobs but failed to carry out the work has been fined $22,500 for breaking consumer law and ordered to pay compensation of more than $4,500 to customers.

In keeping with his previous attendance record Christopher Ronald Francis Gordon, who trades as Flash Concrete, didn’t show up to Court for his trial (15 June 2016) but was convicted of three breaches of the Australian Consumer Law in his absence. His Honour Magistrate Wilson described the conduct as serious – akin to fraud – and ordered Mr Gordon to pay:

• a fine of $7,500 for each offence, totalling $22,500;
• compensation of $4,283.85 to a victim from Bull Creek;
• $491.75 to a victim in Harrisdale who obtained a partial refund; and
• prosecution costs of $3,911.60.

(A third victim of Mr Gordon, residing in Guildford, is owed $2,163.00 for an uncompleted driveway and has previously obtained a civil judgment. No compensation was ordered on that charge to avoid duplication).

Acting Commissioner for Consumer Protection David Hillyard welcomes the penalty handed down.

“In the first quarter of 2015 Mr Gordon took almost $12,000 from three separate customers after quoting on jobs. Mr Gordon said the 50% deposits locked in bookings for concrete work and paid for materials.

“Mr Gordon repeatedly failed to show up as promised, avoided phone calls, provided a variety of excuses, generally via text message, and then ceased communication altogether when asked to pay back the money he’d received.

“Attempts by Consumer Protection to resolve the complaints against Mr Gordon, or obtain refunds for customers, proved unsuccessful. He has shown a complete disregard for the Australian Consumer Law but hopefully this significant fine is a strong deterrent to any other tradesperson or business thinking of doing the same.”

In 2015 Consumer Protection warned Western Australians not to do business with Mr Gordon under his trading name of Flash Concrete due to his lack of reliability.

The Acting Commissioner says Mr Gordon continues to quote for work and should be avoided because he cannot be trusted.

“WA consumers looking for a concreter may come across Flash Concrete online, for example on Facebook, and our previous warning not to pay any deposit money to Mr Gordon stands.”

Mr Hillyard also advised general caution when hiring tradespeople.

• Get recommendations, verify references or sight previous work and carry out some online research, including checking any business name or ABN.
• Don’t pay a deposit you can’t afford to lose; we recommend less than 10%.
• Remember handing over a large amount of money for nothing is risky and we say never pay the balance in full until the job is done.
• If you can pay by credit card, consider that option because you can seek a charge back if you do not get what you paid for, or if the business goes bust.

When works cost more than $7,500, WA’s Home Building Contracts Act makes it illegal to take a deposit over 6.5% of the total contract price.

Under the Australian Consumer Law, it is a serious offence to accept payment for work and not complete it as agreed, or within a reasonable timeframe. Services must also be carried out with due care and skill.

For help resolving a dispute with of this nature, call Consumer Protection on 1300 30 40 54 or email consumer@commerce.wa.gov.au. Your case may be referred to the Building Commission.

Waterford builder Nicholas Hunter (BC10879 and BP10879) has been fined $2,500 by the Building Services Board for negligent conduct relating to building work he carried out at a Bullcreek property between August and December 2013.

The Board determined that Mr Hunter was negligent under the Building Services (Registration) Act 2011 in that he:

• performed the home building work without providing a complying written contract to the owner;
• entered into a contract that provided for him to receive a deposit in excess of 6.5 per cent of the total value of work; and
• performed building work without having first obtained a building permit from the City of Melville. Mr Hunter has since obtained retrospective approval for the unauthorised building work.

The home building work contract Mr Hunter entered into with the owner was for structural work valued at $14,732. The work related to a bathroom, kitchen and games room renovation. In quoting for the work, Mr Hunter demanded a deposit of 70 per cent of the total contract value.

Building Commissioner Peter Gow said it was the responsibility of anyone who carried out building work to be aware of their obligations under the building laws.

“Mr Hunter’s experience in the industry suggests he would have been aware of his obligation to obtain a building permit before he carried out the structural building work,” Mr Gow said.

“It is important that builders meet their responsibilities in respect to building permits for safety reasons – it is the person named as the builder on the permit who is responsible for ensuring that the building is completed in accordance with the plans and specifications and complies with the applicable standards.

“The Building Commission will continue to hold to account and name those who put the public interest and the reputation of the building industry at risk.”

END OF RELEASE

Building Commission media contacts (for journalists/producers only)

General enquiries

Como building company Richmount Enterprises Pty Ltd (BC11026) has been fined $1,000 by the Building Services Board for failing to comply with orders of both the Building Commissioner and the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT).

The builder’s conduct was in relation to work it contracted for and carried out at a Mindarie property between September 2006 and April 2008. The home building work contract was for the construction of a two-storey dwelling with an undercroft residential dwelling valued at $917,514.

Having identified numerous faults with the building work carried out by Richmount, and dissatisfied with the builder’s numerous attempts to rectify the faults during the next five years, the owners lodged a building service complaint with the Building Commission in June 2013. The Building Commissioner issued Richmount with a building remedy order requiring the rectification of 19 items by 2 March 2014.

On 2 April 2014, the owners lodged a further complaint with the SAT about a leak in the swimming pool constructed by Richmount. The complaint was referred to the SAT, which ordered the builder to rectify the issue by 31 December 2015.

Richmount failed to comply with both orders by their due dates.

“Richmount had a responsibility to ensure the rectification of building work was carried out in a workmanlike manner and within the timeframe of the orders,” Building Commissioner Peter Gow said.

“While the builder voluntarily surrendered its building contractor registration on 11 February 2016, the Building Services Board is still able to consider a disciplinary matter and a fine was considered appropriate.”

The Building Commission is in the process of converting the building remedy order into an order to pay the owners. The SAT order was converted to an order to pay the owners $6,093, which Richmount has complied with.

“This case is a reminder to anyone who carries out building work that the Building Commissioner or State Administrative Tribunal can order them to remedy or pay money for incomplete or unsatisfactory work and will hold them to account if they do not comply with an order,” Mr Gow said. “The Building Commission will continue to hold to account and name those who put the public interest and the integrity of the building industry at risk.”

END OF RELEASE

Building Commission media contacts (for journalists/producers only)

General enquiries

The Building Commission is currently considering the creation of a technical advisory committee for the purpose of considering and providing advice on technical building matters and queries regarding the requirements of building legislation, the Building Code of Australia (BCA), and related Australian Standards. The committee will be named the Building Rules Advisory Committee (BRAC).

The Building Commission is seeking:

• expressions of interest from individual experts in the building and construction industry to form the membership of BRAC; and
• comment as to whether the formation of BRAC, to provide advice in regards to technical building matters, will be of benefit to the building industry and local and State government agencies in Western Australia.

Building Rules Advisory Committee (BRAC) – Expressions of Interest & discussion paper

As submissions made in response to this paper will be subject to freedom of information requests, please do not include any personal or confidential information that you do not wish to become available to the public.

Expressions of interest, written comments, queries and submissions should be forwarded no later than close of business Friday, 22 July 2016.

A report by Auditor General Colin Murphy has assessed how well the Building Commission regulates Western Australia’s residential building industry.

While for the most part a positive trend is evident, the report includes a number of recommendations to assist the Commission with improvements to its operations.

The audit has been a valuable, independent review of the regulation of builders and building surveyors since the introduction of new legislation in 2011. The findings will help the Building Commission to improve its delivery of service for the benefit of both the building industry and consumers.

The Auditor General’s report, Regulation of Builders and Building Surveyors (Report 12 – June 2016), is available on the Office of the Auditor General website at: https://audit.wa.gov.au/reports-and-publications/reports/.

On Wednesday 1 June 2016, the WorkSafe Western Australia Commissioner released the Discussion Paper - Work Health and Safety Regulations for Western Australia (the discussion paper) for public consultation. 

WorkSafe subsequently conducted a number of public information sessions in Perth and regional locations.  A podcast from the sessions is now available. The podcast provides further information about the discussion paper, a selection of the modifications that are proposed and how your input will contribute towards the final decision.

on on occupational safety and health laws in WA. 

Pemberton builder John George Ryan (BP8830 & BC8830) has been fined $5,000 by the Building Services Board for failing to manage and supervise work he carried out at a Manjimup property between March 2010 and July 2011.

The Board determined that the management and supervision of the building work carried out by Mr Ryan was not sufficient to ensure it was carried out in a proficient and workmanlike manner. In particular, a number of failures to comply with the plans and drawings approved by the Shire of Manjimup, the Building Code of Australia and industry standards were identified.

The work Mr Ryan carried out at the property included a rear deck extension valued at $170,000, and rectification and finishing works ordered by the former Building Disputes Tribunal (BDT).

In 2011 and 2012, the BDT issued three orders in relation to the building work, including joint orders to pay and remedy made against both Mr Ryan and the owners. The orders included the requirement for independent inspection reports to be provided upon completion of the work. A final order to pay the owners $2,500 to settle the dispute was issued to Mr Ryan in May 2012, which he complied with.

“The disciplinary matter committed by Mr Ryan is significant because it involved a failure to carry out the building service in a proficient manner and to comply with the Building Code of Australia,” said Building Commissioner Peter Gow.

“Anyone thinking about breaking the building laws is reminded that these are serious offences that can compromise public safety and may attract significant penalties.

“The Building Commission is committed to maintaining high standards in the building industry and will continue to hold to account and name those who put consumer interests and the reputation of the building industry at risk.”

END OF RELEASE

Building Commission media contacts (for journalists/producers only)

General enquiries

Banksia Grove man Gordon Leslie Bodsworth, trading as Utopia Landscape Projects, has been prosecuted by the Building Commissioner for offences he committed in contracting for landscaping work at an Iluka property in September 2014.

On 1 July 2016, the Joondalup Magistrates Court found Mr Bodsworth guilty in his absence of two charges under the Home Building Contracts Act 1991 and ordered him to pay fines of $2,500 and costs of $414.

The magistrate found Mr Bodsworth had:

• failed to ensure that the home building work contract for the work was in writing, contained the date and all the terms of the agreement and was signed by both parties; and
• entered into a contract which provided for him to receive a deposit in excess of 6.5 per cent of the total value of work (approximately 40 per cent of the total contract value).

Valued at $20,871, the home building work contract was for landscaping works including paving, concreting and the construction of a limestone planter box and retaining wall.

“The Home Building Contracts Act sets out the minimum requirements for contracts and applies to home building and associated work valued between $7,500 and $500,000,” Building Commissioner Peter Gow said.

“Failure to comply with the provisions of the Home Building Contracts Act may result in penalties of up to $10,000 per charge in the case of an individual and $50,000 for a company.

“Consumers can protect themselves by knowing their rights and responsibilities before they engage a person to carry out home building work. Some helpful information is available in the ‘Building or renovating your home’ section of the Building Commission website.

“The Building Commission will continue to hold to account and name those who put the public interest and the reputation of the building industry at risk.”

END OF RELEASE

Building Commission media contacts (for journalists/producers only)

General enquiries

Western Australian Building Commissioner Peter Gow today announced that the Building Commission will carry out an independent audit of the use of Yuanda products in the WA construction industry, beginning with the Perth Children’s Hospital.

The Commissioner said the initial focus was to ensure the safety of the Perth Children’s Hospital site and that any risks to public safety are managed.

“The audit will check that the building has been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications, so the public can be confident it is suitable and safe to be used,” Mr Gow said.

“We will also be checking whether the building laws have been complied with and how the building standards have been applied.

“This is only the first step in a wide-ranging investigation. In association with our WorkSafe colleagues and other agencies, we will work to determine where other products supplied by Yuanda have been used across the State and that those buildings are suitable and safe to be used.”

Mr Gow said the relevant regulators are also working to identify how this product containing asbestos was able to enter the country, and would take action against builders or importers if required.

“If during the investigation there is any evidence of inappropriate or improper conduct, it will be dealt with accordingly by the relevant regulator,” he said.

END OF RELEASE

Media contact: Phone 6251 1335 or 0466 409 828, or email bcmedia@commerce.wa.gov.au

Where a licensed plumbing contractor is choosing to include an alternative solution, there are a number of additional steps to follow.

These steps are outlined in the ‘Guidance Note for Installing Alternative Plumbing and Drainage Solutions in WA’.

Appendices to the guidance note:

Appendix A – WA Variations to AS/NZS 3500:2003
Appendix B – Compliance with the NCC
Appendix C – Development of performance solutions
Appendix D – PCA assessment methods
Appendix E – Understanding the PCA case study
Appendix F – Flow diagram for alternative plumbing or drainage solution installations

Kinross man Hajir Mobin trading as Danny’s Plumbing and Gas Services, whose conduct has been the subject of several public warnings and prosecution action by the Department of Commerce, has been prosecuted by the Plumbers Licensing Board (PLB) for carrying out unauthorised plumbing work.

On 1 July 2016, the Joondalup Magistrates Court fined Mr Mobin $7,450 and ordered him to pay costs of $562.60 after finding him guilty in his absence of six charges under the Plumbers Licensing and Plumbing Standards Regulations 2000.

Mr Mobin’s conviction relates to water supply and sanitary plumbing work he carried out at five rental properties and one business in Kinross, Mindarie and Ocean Reef between June 2014 and August 2015. The magistrate convicted Mr Mobin of three charges for carrying out unlicensed plumbing work and three charges for failing to comply with rectification notices issued by the PLB.

PLB Chairperson Howard Croxon OAM said joint public warnings about Mr Mobin’s conduct issued by the Building Commission, EnergySafety and Consumer Protection in August and September 2015 still applied.

“Mr Mobin does not hold the plumbing licence and gasfitting permit required for carrying out plumbing or gasfitting work in Western Australia and consumers should continue to avoid engaging him to carry out any plumbing or gasfitting work,” Mr Croxon said.

Mr Mobin was previously prosecuted for plumbing-related offences in July 2015 and fined $5,000 (read the media statement).

EnergySafety prosecuted Mr Mobin in January 2016 and January 2009 for unlicensed gasfitting and advertising-related offences. In the 2016 prosecution, Mr Mobin was fined $47,500 and in 2009, he was fined $24,000.

Consumer Protection prosecuted Mr Mobin in February 2009 for falsely advertising that he was a licensed plumber. He was fined $10,800. In advertising his services, Mr Mobin used several licence numbers that did not belong to him.

“If plumbing work is done incorrectly it can result in the failure of plumbing equipment or systems, which can compromise public health and safety and result in property damage, disease, injury or even death,” Mr Croxon said.

“Consumers should check that the person they engage to carry out plumbing work holds the required licence at www.commerce.wa.gov.au/plumbersearch or by contacting the Building Commission.

“The Plumbers Licensing Board and the Building Commission will continue to hold to account and name those who put the public interest and the reputation of the plumbing industry at risk.”

END OF RELEASE

Building Commission media contacts (for journalists/producers only)

General enquiries

Malaga company Shed Systems Pty Ltd and its sole director David Walter Ah Chee have been prosecuted by the Building Commissioner and fined a total of $100,000 plus costs for contractual and registration-related offences.

On 1 July 2016, the Joondalup Magistrates Court found the company and Mr Ah Chee guilty in their absence of the same 10 charges under the Home Building Contracts Act 1991 and one charge under the Building Services (Registration) Act 2011.

The offences related to home building work the company contracted for at two properties – one in Nilgen and the other in Ravenswood – between November 2014 and February 2015. Valued at $9,904.82 and $28,800 respectively, both contracts were for the supply and installation of a shed.

The magistrate found that in relation to both sites the company had committed several contractual offences, including failing to ensure that the home building work contract was in writing, contained the date and all the terms of the agreement and was signed by both parties; and entering into a contract that provided for it to receive or demand a deposit in excess of 6.5 per cent of the total value of work. The company was also found to have undertaken to carry out builder work without the required registration at the Ravenswood site.

Shed Systems was ordered to pay a fine of $75,000 and costs of $789.88. As the sole director who consented to the company’s actions, Mr Ah Chee was taken to have also committed the offences of the company and was ordered to pay a fine of $25,000 and costs of $789.88.

Despite having demanded and received the full contract price before commencement, the company never completed its work at the Nilgen site. The owner of the Ravenswood site cancelled their contract with the company before any work was carried out.

“The conduct of this company and its director show how important it is for homeowners to know their rights and responsibilities before they engage the services of a builder,” Building Commissioner Peter Gow said.

“Some helpful information for home owners is available in the ‘Building or renovating your home’ section of the Building Commission website.

“The Building Commission will continue to hold to account and name those who put the public interest and the reputation of the building industry at risk.”

In 2008, Mr Ah Chee, as the sole director of the now deregistered company Shed Co Pty Ltd, was successfully prosecuted by the former Builders Registration Board for contractual and registration-related offences. He was ordered to pay a fine of $12,000 and costs of $258.70.

END OF RELEASE

Building Commission media contacts (for journalists/producers only)

General enquiries

The Building Services Board (BSB) has refreshed its builder examinations to align with current legislation and building practices. The last refresh was undertaken by the former Builders Registration Board which was replaced by the BSB in 2011.  The refreshed examinations apply from 1 June 2016.

This change will not affect most applicants for building practitioner registration who have already commenced the examination process.

The examinations are part of some of the five different pathways to becoming a building practitioner.  Registration as a building practitioner may be necessary for people who intend to bring their building skills and knowledge to a building business.  If you intend to be the 'nominated supervisor' of a 'building contractor' you must be registered as a 'building practitioner'.

The examinations are for applicants who do not have the Diploma of Building and Construction (Building) to show the BSB that they have the same knowledge as a builder who has completed the Diploma.

These applicants will now need to complete the five refreshed exams, one of which is a new project-based assessment. The examinations must be completed prior to application for building practitioner registration.

The five exam topics are:

• Residential low rise construction
• Commercial medium rise construction
• Estimating
• Financial, contractual and legislative
• Site management (project-based assessment)

For the project-based assessment, candidates will be given two weeks to complete an assignment.

Costs apply for each of the exams.

Anyone who wishes to enrol for the Board exams can find more information on the Building Commission website www.commerce.wa.gov.au/building-commission/board-examinations-builders or phone 1300 489 099.

People considering registration as a building practitioner or contractor are invited to attend the Building Commission’s regular free information seminars on how to become a builder at: www.commerce.wa.gov.au/building-commission/events-and-seminars-0.

The Building Commission has commenced an independent audit of Yuanda-supplied building products in the WA construction industry, beginning with the Perth Children's Hospital (PCH) and products that may contain asbestos. Announced by Building Commissioner Peter Gow on 15 July 2016, the audit follows the discovery of Yuanda building products containing asbestos in the under construction PCH building.

View the Audit of Yuanda building products webpage

Update on audit progress

On the Monday following the audit’s announcement, WA Building Commission officers met with Department of Treasury Strategic Projects staff at the PCH site to gain background and other information relevant to its audit.  

Strategic Projects has enabled the Building Commission to access the project records management and building information systems for the project. The audit team is focussing on the PCH and is identifying areas and products of interest and gathering information to assess compliance and risk.

To date, no other building products containing asbestos have been found at the PCH site.

The Building Commission has issued a formal notice in writing of the compliance audit to the builder of the PCH, John Holland. Building Commission officers met with representatives of the company to discuss scope of audit, and the company has been cooperating with Building Commission officers on the audit.

The Building Commission has also contacted Yuanda to discuss scope of the audits being carried out on their products in the PCH and nine other buildings. This has been checked against an initial list of WA buildings believed to contain Yuanda-supplied products obtained from the CFMEU and other sources.

Yuanda is currently testing all of its products imported into Australia. Early results have not detected any asbestos.

The Asbestos Safety and Eradication Agency activated its Rapid Response Protocol which enables government agencies to work cooperatively across jurisdictions when products containing asbestos are discovered.

The Australian Border Force is investigating whether Yuanda knowingly imported asbestos products into Australia and is controlling the import of Yuanda products. State agencies in Victoria and Queensland have commenced their own audit programs.

Working with the City of Perth, the Building Commission has begun investigating the use of Yuanda products in other WA Buildings. 

Through the national Building Ministers’ Forum, building ministers including the WA Minister for Commerce, the Hon Michael Mischin MLC, are working cooperatively to address safety issues associated with non-conforming and non-complying building products. 

In July 2015 building ministers established a Senior Officers’ Group (SOG) with representatives from all jurisdictions to report on ways to minimise the risks to consumers, businesses and the community. 

At a SOG meeting in Brisbane this week, the WA Building Commission’s Director of Compliance briefed members on the WA audit of Yuanda products and obtained details of audits and action being taken in other jurisdictions. No new products containing asbestos have been found to date.

The next steps

The WA Building Commission will continue to search, receive and assess information relevant to the PCH audit. The Commission will meet with Yuanda to confirm the full list of products supplied to WA building constructions, and will continue to carry out general inspection audits of other WA buildings found to contain Yuanda building products.

The Building Commission will provide regular updates on the audit’s progress and, upon completion, will report on its findings.

Building Commission media contacts (for journalists/producers only)

General enquiries

Malaga company Barrowman Holdings Pty Ltd, trading as Perth Window & Door Replacement Company, and its sole director and secretary Stuart William Barrowman of Woodvale, have been prosecuted by the Building Commissioner for contractual offences and fined a total of $15,000.

On 22 July 2016, the Mandurah Magistrates Court accepted Mr Barrowman and the company’s guilty plea in writing to three charges under the Home Building Contracts Act 1991. The magistrate found that in contracting for home building work valued at $19,918 at an Erskine property in 2014, the company had:

• failed to provide the owner with the prescribed notice prior to signing the contract;
• entered into a contract that provided for it to receive a deposit in excess of 6.5 per cent of the total value of the work (approximately 95 per cent of the total amount payable); and
• entered into a contract that contained a rise and fall clause.

The company was fined $10,000 and ordered to pay costs of $412.62. As the sole director who consented to the company’s actions, Mr Barrowman was taken to have also committed the offences of the company and was ordered to pay a $5,000 fine and costs of $412.62.

Barrowman Holdings and Mr Barrowman were previously prosecuted by the Building Commission for contractual offences in June 2013. The company was fined $3,750 and Mr Barrowman $500 (read the media statement).

“The Home Building Contracts Act sets out the minimum requirements for contracts and applies to home building and associated work valued between $7,500 and $500,000,” Building Commissioner Peter Gow said.

“Failure to comply with the provisions of the Home Building Contracts Act may result in penalties of up to $10,000 per charge in the case of an individual and $50,000 for a company.

“Consumers can protect themselves by knowing their rights and responsibilities before they engage a person to carry out home building work. Some helpful information is available in the ‘Building or renovating your home’ section of the Building Commission website.

“The Building Commission will continue to hold to account and name those who put the public interest and the reputation of the building industry at risk.”

END OF RELEASE

Building Commission media contacts (for journalists/producers only)

General enquiries

Perth company Top Class Roof Restorations Pty Ltd and its sole director and secretary Troy Anthony Coward have been prosecuted by the Building Commissioner for contractual offences and fined a total of $7,000.

On 18 July 2016, the Midland Magistrates Court, in their absence, found the company and Mr Coward guilty of four charges under the Home Building Contracts Act 1991. Three of the charges related to work valued at $11,605 the company contracted for at a Helena Valley property in 2014. One charge related to work valued at $14,945 the company contracted for at a Kalamunda property that same year.

Both home building work contracts involved the installation of a new roof, including gutters and downpipes.

In relation to the Helena Valley property, the court found the company had:

• failed to ensure that the home building work contract for the work was in writing, contained the date and all the terms of the agreement and was signed by both parties; and
• entered into a contract that provided for it to receive a deposit in excess of 6.5 per cent of the total value of the work (approximately 44 per cent of the total amount payable).

In relation to both sites, the company failed to provide the owner with the prescribed notice prior to signing the contract.

The company was fined $5,500. As the sole director who consented to the company’s actions, Mr Coward was taken to have also committed the offences of the company and was ordered to pay a $1,500 fine and costs of $563.79.

“By failing to meet its contractual obligations, this company has denied these home owners of their right to enter into a contract that complies with the building laws and which is designed to protect the interests of both parties,” Building Commissioner Peter Gow said.

“The Building Commission will continue to hold to account and name those who put the public interest and the reputation of the building industry at risk.”

In 2013, the Building Commission formally cautioned Mr Coward’s previous company Top Class Renovations Pty Ltd (now deregistered) about non-complying contracts.

END OF RELEASE

This application is used to apply for approval to commence training for a Restricted Electrical licence (Electronics and communication licence).