Calls for strong regulations on Tasmanian pre-purchase home building inspectors

Prospective homebuyers are being left high and dry as building inspectors – who are not properly regulated or require any experience – dole out “purely observational” advice.

• New sampling results at a mouldy South Hobart home reveal high levels of mould
• Montrose mother Jasmine Garrett says her family’s health has suffered while living in mouldy unit

TASMANIAN pre-purchase home inspections have been likened to a skin specialist making a cancer diagnosis without performing a test.

Prospective Tasmanian homebuyer Janet Richardson said she found a host of structural issues at a Kingston property after the inspectors report, she paid $500 for, found “no visible defects”.

“There was cracking on exterior walls which I even picked up on from the online photos of the house,” she said.

“My experience with the inspector was a farce. It cost hundreds for their service plus some legal costs for advice. Had I gone through with the purchase I most likely would have spent months, if not years, pursuing for compensation.”

Ms Richardson said she was dismayed when she was unable to locate a Tasmanian building inspector licensing authority to report the inspector to.

Hobart consultant engineer Michael O’Halloran, who specialises in structural repairs to residential properties, said he was increasingly being called to fix housing issues that were not identified in pre-purchase building reports.

Hobart structural engineer Michael O'Halloran.

He said structural issues were arising in Tasmanian homes because pre-purchase home inspectors are not properly regulated and require no prerequisite qualifications or experience to operate.

“One of the inspectors has set up an app that he brags a 12-year-old can use. And that sums up his attitude towards inspections – that it’s purely observational and no interpretation is required,” he said.

“It’s like a skin specialist looking at the freckles on your hand to determine if you’ve got cancer, but not doing any blood tests. It’s the same analogy – you’re looking at the surface – the very obvious stuff – and then making an assessment based on that.”

Mr O’Halloran said the risks were enormous.

“It’s so risky. We’ll end up with houses that are just nightmares because previous property owners could have just covered up problems.

“It does more harm than good in my view, because homebuyers base their view of a property on a pre-purchase assessment, whereas if there wasn’t a report buyers might be more inclined to assess the property with their own judgment.”

“Clients regularly provide me with superficial reports that have either missed significant footing or dampness problems altogether, or have played down the seriousness of the issue due to a lack of understanding of the critical signs to look for.”

Independent Clark MP Andrew Wilkie said responsibility sat with the state government to enforce tough regulation on pre-purchase checks.

Independent Member for Clark Andrew Wilkie said he hears of many homeowners who have been out of pocket due to poor building inspections. (AAP Image/Mick Tsikas)

“Many in the community would be alarmed to learn that inspections of their prospective homes are sometimes being undertaken by people who have no formal qualifications or experience,” Mr Wilkie said.

“After borrowing to their limit to buy a property, owners are often unable to borrow more funds to pay for repairs later, sometimes up to $90,000.

“I see all too often the emotional and financial stress this predicament causes families. There is no justification for pre-purchase inspectors to be unregulated and continuing to offer misleading reports.”

The state government has been contacted for comment.