House Foundation Issues 2 Years after Settlement

Ryugen on 27/05/2019 - 19:55
Last edited 28/05/2019 - 16:01

Just wanted to post this here to get some feedback but more importantly where I should look for more information / who should I be speaking with.

Short story:
Bought house 2 years ago through real estate agent after getting a building inspection. Have had none stop issues with the house in regards to cracking walls, leaking showers, general subsidence etc since settlement. Recently looking at renovating the bathroom however have been recommended to hold off due to the builders believing that the house has a broken / severely damaged foundation. So everything on hold pending investigation.

Long story below:
We settled on a house 2 years ago through a real estate agent. I believed at the time I did my due diligence, first time home buyer and all that. At the time, we were told to get a building / pest inspection done which we did. Having never bought a house before, I asked the real estate agent who I should use for an inspection and they recommended a mob they have had numerous dealings with in the past for both selling and buying.

So inspection came and went, got the report and everything was good (besides a broken roof tile which was repaired and a few maintenance concerns). So bought house, did some kitchen renovations first then moved in. Since that time till now we have had the following issues:

  • Both bathrooms have leaked, been regrouted and have started leaking again due to cracking
  • Numerous internal wall cracks in every single room / cornice (newly installed prior to move in)
  • Main bedroom wardrobe has massive crack that actually lets light in
  • Ensuite internal wall have disfigured so much that the mirror being held on the wall via a frame dropped out of the frame one night and smashed (wall has since been repaired however have start disfiguring again)
  • Floor in multiple areas uneven. During kitchen renovations, the floor was leveled for flooring however have become uneven again (evident from some floor tiles coming off the floor in areas.
  • Numerous ceiling / cornice cracks. Main living room cornice is so bad there is about a 1-1.5cm crack on the wall plaster leading to the ceiling

We were told by the building report (and stated in the building report) that a small amount of cracks were existent during the inspection however it was due to movement of the house and is completely normal and within reason. The above seemed way out of normal however we trusted the expert and let it go.

Currently we are looking at getting both bathrooms renovated however the person that came out for quoting is a friend's friend and said this does not look right at all. He and my wife have collected all the information in regards to the house and have sent it off to a construction company to get a report / analyses and their initial diagnosis is that the housing foundation is severely damaged or just outright broken. They mentioned all the signs that existed prior to us moving in as well as the new signs all point that way. They also mentioned with damage that was there before we moved in, anyone with building knowledge should have picked up something was severely wrong (one of the things that they mentioned was that it looks like all of the metal window frames have sunk about ~1cm, as well as a few of the larger frames bulging from the changes)

We are still waiting for them to send some people out and do a more thorough check, most likely will invest in some specialized checks if required as we want to get to the bottom of this.

My reason for posting here is to see what others have to say about the situation and recommendations on what I should do? Have you had something similar and what was the action / outcome?

My current course of action is this:
Will be contacting the inspection company shortly to see where I can get through direct contact. My goal here is to get them to acknowledge my problems and seeing what assistance they are able to provide me, and seeing if that assistance is adequate. I know they are insured….but have 0 clue what that actually means.

My wife is currently working with the building company on getting all the checks done so we have solid evidence of what the house is like at the moment and how far back these problems go.

We are also looking at getting in contact with a lawyer to explore any legal actions that would be applicable and what our rights are.

Any comments appreciated, thanks for reading this far.

P.S. No, I will not name and shame, not at this time until we know of what the outcome will be.

EDIT: Additional information per questions
Thank you so much for the comments, as per a few repeat questions some additional info:
* House built 1985 in WA Kelmscott / Armadale / Seville Grove area
* Soil is mostly clay (which is the primary source of our issues according to all sources)
* I don't actually know 100% what sort of foundation however will find out after investigation
* House backs onto a park with a minor slope into a pond roughly 20m away, pond drys in summer / filled in winter
* One large tree in the front of the house, approx 2-3 meters away (have also been told this is the second source of our issues, have plans to remove)
* No recent pest inspection since first building inspection, have noticed no visible damage that could be attributed to termites during informal checks with us and quoters for work done

Home & Garden

Comments

  • ihbh on 27/05/2019 - 20:06
    +2

    How old is the house? Is it built on a slab?

    • Ryugen on 28/05/2019 - 15:50

      Built 1985, on slab as far as we know.

  • Seraphin7 on 27/05/2019 - 20:09
    +10

    In short, the probabilities are that you're stuck with the issue.

    Unfortunately, properties in Australia as basically sold on an "as is" basis. So your ability to pursue the previous owner will be something approaching zero. As for the agent, no chance at all.

    Your only possible avenue is through the inspection company, but this too is likely to lead nowhere. If you read the inspection report, you'll not that (a) they are covered in disclaimers and (b) basically only inspect things that are "visible". What this means is that if the cracks, etc. were "normal" at the time of inspection and any issues with the foundation were not "visible" you'll likely be wasting your time there too.

    It totally sucks, but basically the whole system is geared towards sellers in this regard. As a buyer, you can rely on very little other than your own good fortune.

    • Ryugen on 28/05/2019 - 15:52

      Thank you for the detailed reply.

      This is pretty much the feedback we are getting from people we have talked to thus far. In all honesty this is the outcome we are planning for but you know, plan for the worst hope for the best.

  • wei13 on 27/05/2019 - 20:24

    Just a side note, have you had a termite inspection recently? Ie. It's not just termites eating your structure away.

    • Ryugen on 28/05/2019 - 15:51

      Not recently, initial inspection included pest. We've had people come out for quotes and checks before quoting and not noticable pest damage however nothing too thorough.

  • JimmyF on 27/05/2019 - 20:31
    +2

    new or used house? Aka how old is the place OP?

    • Ryugen on 28/05/2019 - 15:52

      1985 built, so old.

  • [Deactivated] on 27/05/2019 - 20:46
    +5

    House Foundation Issues 2 Years after Settlement

    Pardon the pun

  • [Deactivated] on 27/05/2019 - 21:00
    +1

    Old house: buyer beware.

    New house: even new apartments with flammable cladding issues don't seem to be able to sue the developer or builder.

    • nith265 on 28/05/2019 - 08:15

      Earlier this year they did finally manage to sort out the liability of first clading fire in the Lacrosse building. The issue was figuring out who to sue. Everybody in the chain blamed the next person in the chain.

      Builder was found to be at fault however within that they found:

      • Fire engineer: 39% at fault
      • Building inspector : 33% at fault
      • Architects: 25% at fault
      • Leaving 3% fault for builder to wear

      It would make for an interesting OzB forum topic for the French guy who’s cigarette started the whole thing.
      “My discarded cigarette caused 6 million dollars damage to a building – am I at fault”.

      I think I know what most on OzB would say but the answer it seems is he's mostly not:

      “Judge Woodward found Mr Gubitta's responsibility for the loss and damage was "minimal" and made no order directly affecting Mr Gubitta.”

  • 87percent on 27/05/2019 - 21:34

    It's absolutely so stupid that a $29 kettle from Kmart has a warranty, but a $500k house doesn't…

    • Euphemistic on 27/05/2019 - 22:28

      New ones do, 2nd hand ones don’t. But a new house, it will have builders warranty for 7yrs (happy to be corrected) just like a new car lost transfer to a new owner. Buy anything older and are on your own, just like a car.

      • StonedWizard on 27/05/2019 - 23:32
        +1

        Courts said a TV should last 7 years.

        How on earth can someone expect a house to only be warranted for 7 bloody years, the same as a TV !

        • Beanvee on 28/05/2019 - 12:26
          +1

          To play devils advocate, TV's are all manufactured to be the identical. It's easier to guarantee longevity if each unit is all built to the same spec and thresholds. I imagine the materials probably have less variation than bricks and mortar.

          Houses are all different though, in different places, different floor plans, different environmental conditions etc. While they could probably build them in stronger ways making them more confident to guarantee decades without issue and warranty, it'll probably come at a price no one would pay.

        • ihbh on 28/05/2019 - 19:37

          warranted for

          A TV works or it doesn't or the picture/sound quality isn't up to par.

          Is a crack in the cornice covered by warranty or something much more substaintial?

  • mcneil on 27/05/2019 - 22:29
    +3

    OK so we've recently bought a house that had severe foundation issues 6 years after construction (developer cheaped out on the foundations). Owners were having similar issues you are having. They ended up contacting the Building Services Authority (BSA) according to my next door neighbour . The house was assessed and required underpinning. Forty-nine 6m piers later, and a total of $109,000, the house was fixed. BSA covered all costs! She hasn't moved a mm since it was done back in 2012.

    In spite of paying extra for proper foundation work, our next door neighbour had some issues. All the repairs were covered by BSA and it didn't cost them a cent either.

    Contact BSA. You may be fine.

    EDIT: the 7 year building warranty may be a thing…
    "Structural Defective Work – The owner can lodge a complaint within 6 years 6 months from when the work is completed and within 12 months of noticing the defect."

    • spal on 28/05/2019 - 06:20

      Do you mean that you bought a house from a real estate agent who developed and sold the property to you?
      New properties in Victoria have seven years builders warranty. This is your best avenue of getting it fixed. See the comment above regarding the timelines. Do your research before you contact the building warranty insurance. You might need specific information to make a claim and need to make that claim within the limitation periods that apply.

    • mcneil on 28/05/2019 - 09:35

      The house started showing issues in 2012 after the end of the drought. A common issue when reactive soils dry out and then get dumped with water. Luckily the original owners of the property were still in possession in 2012, so it was all fixed under warranty back in 2013. 2 owners have had it since. We made sure we got an engineering inspection done on the property before purchase earlier this year.

  • Woodinski on 27/05/2019 - 23:28

    Need to provide a bit more information to be able to comment with any real value:
    - What is the house founded on (slab, stumps, piers?)
    - How old is the house?
    - Do you know what the house is founded on (clay, sand, etc)
    - Is the house near a slope?
    - Do you have any large trees near the house that have gotten significantly bigger since you moved in (or have you planted any near the house?)
    Just realised you are in Perth, what suburb are you in as that will tell me a lot of the info I need to know (PM if you want).

  • mbck on 27/05/2019 - 23:38
    +1

    House inspectors. The most useless lot.

  • brad1-8tsi on 28/05/2019 - 08:17
    +1

    The house inspectors report always has a "even if it's blindingly obvious and we miss it, it's still not our problem" clause. Building inspections are a massive waste of money.
    I'm guessing you have no recourse and am stuck with it unless it's a relatively new build (<7 years) and still under warranty

    Is it slab or strip footings?

    What is the soil type? Sandy? reactive clay?

    Hopefully you can stabilise the foundations with chemical injection into the soil. Otherwise you'll have to underpin.

    • nith265 on 28/05/2019 - 09:37

      Building inspections are a massive waste of money.

      The one time I paid for a building inspection was for an old period house that presented well but I was concerned about the structure.

      Nearly every single comment was so vague as to be completely useless like:

      "…appears in reasonable condition considering age…"

      or so blindingly obvious

      "..minor crack in plaster, fill and paint to rectify…"

  • garetz on 28/05/2019 - 09:08

    You may have recourse against the building inspection, seek legal advice from an actual lawyer. However the burden of proof is on you.

    • Ryugen on 28/05/2019 - 15:55

      Absolutely under stand the burden of proof due to civil, which is why my wife is trying to collect as much as possible.

  • Ryugen on 28/05/2019 - 16:01

    Have updated OP with an edit to answer some questions in the comments.

    • Capo93 on 28/05/2019 - 17:25

      https://www.illawarramercury.com.au/story/4499476/shoddy-bui…

      Have a read of that article, was a local incident where a building inspector deemed it safe then 6 months later a kid fell through the hand rail and the inspector was fined.

      • Ryugen on 28/05/2019 - 18:27

        Very interesting read, fingers crossed it doesn't come to collapsing ceilings and what not but good to see there the inspector is liable for their reports.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join