Permit debacle may leave owners high and dry

THOUSANDS of building permits issued in Victoria over the past five years are believed to be invalid.

The revelation raises fears that many properties could be illegally occupied, not covered by insurance, and in some cases unlawfully bought or sold.

Industry sources say the discovery — which is expected to cost the Building Commission millions to rectify — is being covered up, with the commission playing down the debacle as a "paperwork issue".

The Age has been told that permits issued for new homes, renovations, sheds, swimming pools and spas in up to 60 local government areas are believed to be invalid, possibly affecting more than 3000 property owners. In some cases, the permits have never been finalised.

Building permits for public housing properties may also be in doubt, sources claim.

The Building Commission announced last week that it had suspended a building inspector for unprofessional conduct, following "an investigation into the alleged issuing of irregular building permits".

A statement claimed his suspension related to 785 permits issued by a now defunct Cranbourne company, Casey Building Services, between September 2005 and August 2006. But sources have told The Age that this was a conservative estimate. The commission alleges that during the 11-month period a building inspector, Geoffrey "John" Chambers, signed-off on several occupancy permits (also known as final certificates) without authorisation.

The permits are required to show that the building works have been completed in accordance with the stamped plans and Australian standards.

They can be signed only by the relevant building surveyor appointed at the project's outset.

But when Casey Building Services' surveyor ceased working at the company after a stroke on September 4, 2005, Mr Chambers is alleged to have signed the documents on his behalf. A local government planning officer raised the alarm after seeing an unfamiliar signature above the surveyor's name.

The commission's investigation into Mr Chambers has also revealed that final permits for many jobs have never been completed.

After his suspension, doubts have been raised within the industry about whether any of the jobs that Mr Chambers approved were ever inspected at all. One source said the debacle was likely to have huge ramifications for the building industry, because without the appropriate paperwork, the properties should not be occupied.

One surveyor, who did not want to be named, expressed concerns that some of the affected properties might have also been illegally sold, considering invalid permits formed part of the section 32. He said this also meant properties might not be covered by insurance if, for instance, the structures fell down.

Mr Chambers was charged by the Building Commission in 2003 for operating a company that provided surveyor services without having a surveyor as a director.

He appointed a surveyor as a director and the matter was dropped.

He was this week served with documents to appear before the Building Practitioner's Board on June 4 for a preliminary hearing. He declined to comment on the allegations.

Building Commissioner Tony Arnel last week assured those involved that they would not be disadvantaged by the mess.

He said the commission would provide householders and builders with free advice, inspections and reports and would meet the costs of issuing new building permits if they were needed. He said the irregularities related to "paperwork issues", and there was no reason to believe that the actual building work was substandard or dangerous.

A commission spokeswoman has since said builders and householders who had dealt with Mr Chambers in good faith were assured the discrepancies would not affect the use of their properties or insurance. A Building Commission hotline has been set up for anyone seeking more information. Phone 1300 360 320

The Age
28 May 2007
Andrea Petrie