QBCC hits back at Sunshine Coast homeowner over building dispute

A Sunshine Coast homeowner has been accused of filing court proceedings with the intention of simply “protecting his reputation” after a dispute involving two builders.

The Queensland Building and Construction Commission. Picture: QBCC

A Sunshine Coast homeowner has been accused of filing court proceedings with the intention of simply “protecting his reputation” after a dispute involving two builders.

Homeowner Ricky O’Connell applied to begin legal proceedings in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal against the Queensland Building and Construction Commision, regarding a home he had built in Palmview.

According to the court documents, the QBCC issued two building companies employed by Mr O’Connell with orders to rectify defects in the Palmview house.

The building companies then took the matters to a tribunal for a review of the alleged defects.

Ultimately, the outcome of the defects matters were that the QBCC fixed them under the statutory insurance scheme, and the companies had their direction to rectify orders set aside.

However, Mr O’Connell argued the QBCC did not give him the opportunity to “defend himself” against allegations made by the companies that he refused builders entry to fix the defects.

He also stated, according to the court documents, “there is a need for proper oversight and accountability within the statutory insurance scheme”.

The QBCC stated there was nothing to be gained from legal proceedings regarding the issues Mr O’Connell had.

“The only outcome that will arise upon a successful review is the recording of a direction to rectify on PJ Burns Builder’s licence, which is not an outcome that is personal to the applicant,” the QBCC argued in the court documents.

The court documents also show the QBCC allege Mr O’Connell’s reason for applying was to protect his personal reputation.

“The applicant is seeking to use the proceedings for the “collateral purpose” of protecting his reputation and refuting accusations, and not the legitimate purpose of obtaining a remedy for defective building work,” the QBCC stated.

QCAT member Sasanka Munasinghe ultimately agreed with the submissions made by the QBCC and dismissed Mr O’Connell’s application.

“It is obvious, on any plain reading of the applicant’s submissions, that his primary motivation for bringing these proceedings is to refute and defend allegations that he denied PJ Burns and Metalla access to his property to effect rectification work,” Mr Munasinghe said.

“In my view, it is highly improper for the Tribunal’s finite resources to be depleted for the purpose of enabling the applicant to contest perceived slights to his reputation.”

Originally published as QBCC hits back at Sunshine Coast homeowner over building dispute