Thread: Fears of defects in Melbourne's tallest building

This ones a media beat up. One of the new residents has been making a fuss because of some structural movement as the top half of the building is still under construction. Can’t and won’t disclose any more about said resident and how I know but there’s nothing wrong with the building.

I have more of an issue with them moving people in when the place is still a construction zone. As they finish a floor fitout a floor a few levels below is opened up to the new residents. Not surprising people complain about noise and movement when there’s still 40 floors left to be built, buildings like this are designed to move quite a lot and fine cracking of the structure won’t stop until a bit after the whole thing is complete. Anyone that’s been involved in construction like this has seen what happens as the floors stack up.

Cefects? Are they the one's that come before the Defects but after Befects.

Originally Posted by ChookD2

Cefects? Are they the one's that come before the Defects but after Befects.

eixed.

Originally Posted by bob10

eixed.

you type like me.

When more laws are suggested there are screams from developers saying growth is being strangled. Look at the cladding saga all round the world, developers go for the cheap flamable option and looks like taxpayers are going to foot the bill for repair and replacement. It appears the dodgy highrise problems were not just a one off with buildings all over the country reporting major structural failures. If developers are going to liquidate after building and no longer have any liability for shonky building practices then they should be paying a massive bond, either that or take all assets off the previous directors, makum liable.
Why should the public pay for shonky developers retirement?

Originally Posted by Fourgearsticks

When more laws are suggested there are screams from developers saying growth is being strangled. Look at the cladding saga all round the world, developers go for the cheap flamable option and looks like taxpayers are going to foot the bill for repair and replacement. It appears the dodgy highrise problems were not just a one off with buildings all over the country reporting major structural failures. If developers are going to liquidate after building and no longer have any liability for shonky building practices then they should be paying a massive bond, either that or take all assets off the previous directors, makum liable.
Why should the public pay for shonky developers retirement?

While I agree with the sentiment I personally don’t think Multiplex falls into the ‘shonky’ pile by any stretch nor this project. They aren’t going to do anything dodgy on one project out of hundreds they have going or on the books. Agree others have done this and there is plenty out there showing exactly this but don’t go tarring them all with the same brush.

OOPs.That's better. Defective buildings signed off as within standards.

In its submission, the Mascot Towers Owners Corporation said owners and residents “relied on the ‘system’ to provide a satisfactory dwelling”, but the state government had failed to set a sufficiently tough regulatory framework for builders, certifiers and property developers.This included the failure of the private building certification process, a lack of supervision over builders and the owners’ responsibility for defects.“Our residents have inherited a building with numerous defects … defects which were originally signed off on by our government, engineers and certifiers as ‘within standards’.“Somewhere along the lines, maximising profit has become a misinterpretation for ‘delivering quality’,” the submission said.

Mascot Towers owners reveal building defects spanning a decade

Not sure quality has ever come into any of these residential high rises - anyone that's been in some of these will know had bad they are as far as ventilation, design and fit and finish goes. I think a lot of these will become slums in 20 or 30 years. You should at least expect any of them to stay standing though.