Defective driveway costs a warning to the construction sector
A concrete business has been held to account after it did not comply with a building remedy order whereby workmanship complaints were lodged by the home owners.
Decorative Concrete Specialists PTY Ltd and directors Gerard Zomer and Paula Seager have been convicted for their roles in not complying with a building remedy order, which is an offence under Western Australia’s building complaint laws.
To continue reading the rest of this article, please log in.
Create free account to get unlimited news articles and more!
Decorative Concrete Specialists had entered into a $7,300 contract to install an exposed aggregate concrete driveway at a Secret Harbour property.
Mr Zomer carried out the work on behalf of the business, of which himself and Ms Seager were directors.
Once the work was completed, the home owners lodged a workmanship complaint with Building and Energy because of cracking and inadequate thickness of the concrete. The regulator then issued a building remedy order for Decorative Concrete Specialists to rectify the driveway within a month.
According to a statement from the Western Australian government, when no rectification was carried out, the home owners then arranged for another concreter to replace the driveway and the original remedy order was changed to a payment order for the additional costs.
In the Rockingham Magistrates Court, the company was fined $10,000 with costs of $500, Mr Zomer was fined $4,000 with costs of $500, and Ms Seager was fined $2,000. Only Ms Seager made an appearance at the hearing.
At the hearing, magistrate Linda Keane acknowledged the home owners had faced “significant inconvenience and cost due to the defective work”, and that included them having to pay another business to replace the driveway.
The state’s Building and Energy executive director Saj Abdoolakhan used the case to highlight that building industry participants who do not uphold their responsibilities will be held to account.
“The significant fines in this case should send a clear message that it is unacceptable to not do the work properly in the first place and to show disregard for the opportunity to make it right,” he stated.
