Monday, April 26, 2010

Day 105: Inspection Report

Hi friends,

There wasn't any work done on site today so no photo's, however I received the frame inspection report from Darren of Darbecca on Friday night and as promised below are defects that were found during the inspection.

DEFECTS:

1. The frame work on this property is of a good standard however several issues require additional attention to bring the frame up to compliance with AS 1684.2-2006.

a. It was noted that all walls have NOT been blocked out with a minimum of three blocks and nailed off to connect the walls. Given the height of this dwelling, it should be four blocks based on the 900mm centres requirements of the standard. Plaster cracking will occur to these areas. The blocking must be installed to ALL intersecting walls to the dwelling and more importantly nailed off with a minimum of two framing nails to each surface when the lockup carpenter straightens the walls. It was also noted that a large number of blocks are underside. The standards call for all blocks to be a minimum of 200mm in size. The current undersized blocks will shatter when nailed. I refer the builder to AS 1684.2, section 6.2.
It was also noted that several walls are missing the blocking, or the connection. Note the walls that are side by side. These walls are still classed as intersecting / connecting walls and must be connected.

b. AS 1684.2-2006 states that when openings in NON-LOADBEARING WALLS over 1200mm occur, both internal and external, a lintel shall be installed and the size of the lintel will be determine by table 23, based on the top plate. All openings over 1200mm will need to be fitted with lintels to comply with the code. Most opening have been completed correctly, however the opening to the master bedroom is over 1200mm and has not been installed.

c. The cutting out of the allowance for the shower base breaches AS 1684.2-2006. Page 60 and 61 of these standard states that the maximum allowance for notching is 25mm. We detected 40mm plus. The timber must be supported by a cleat to add additional support to the stud.

d. A number of noggings are missing. All have been marked on the wall or the floor. Note that the walls must have noggings no greater than 1350mm.

e. The frame over hang to the garage breaches the BCA and AS 1684.2. The maximum allowance for overhang is 10mm. We were able to detect 30mm to several areas. The installation of a timber under the studs is an acceptable solution to this defect.

f. The bracing to the face of the dwelling needs to be replaced. It appears that a trade has smashed the bracing away with a hammer. The bracing must extend from the top plate to the bottom plate and be secured every 150mm as per AS 1684.2, page 143 to page 147, table 8.18.

2. All steel fixing nails to all windows must be removed. The current installation of fixing nails will result in rust bleeding through the paintwork to the dwelling, several years after handover. AS 2047 calls for a zinc, stainless steel or simular treated products only to be installed. The current steel nails will rust and are unacceptable. The use of galvanised nails is completely acceptable. The nail size must be suited to the installation. Again the current fixing gun
installation is unacceptable.

3. The installation of the windows into the corner that has the steel post needs to be reworked. The current installation is not supporting, or firmly holding the windows in place. As discussed on site, the current installation needs to be reworked to secure the windows to the steel post.

Rectification Required YES


For those that are seeking an inspector below is the contact detail of the inspection company I used.

Darren Love (Darbecca P/L)
Independent Building Quality Inspections
ABN 12 115 961 487
PO Box 80
ALTONA VICTORIA 3018
Phone: 0400 199 544
Fax 03 9395 4966
Email: darbecca@bigpond.net.au

2 comments:

  1. Hi Polo,
    Once you got your inspection report who did you forward it to ?. did you send a copy to the CLO and the SS or just headoffice.
    I went through your build and was shocked at the inferior slab. Who is your builder by the way.
    Ours was a P class site and we got added reinforcements thank god we didnt have any issues with the slab.Then again I did my best to check the form works and Iam still checking the slab after it was poured just in case I missed something
    Regards
    Andy

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Andy,

    The inspection was done on Friday and the defects fixing started on Tuesday because Monday was a public holiday. I gave the report to my ss because he want to show it to the carpenter.

    Great to hear that your slab went well, it's disappointing that our slab didn't turn out that well but was told by building surveyor that he think it is normal. So far there are no significant or major cracks to the slab just hairline ones and these haven't gone any larger so I guess the slab is fine but I will assess it again in another 6 months or so.

    ReplyDelete