Some houses are old and tired in an honest way. Some houses are new and wrong. The second category is the one that most confuses a pre-purchase inspection, because the paint is still clean and the defect is a missing flashing, a deck that was never approved, or a wet area that was signed off in a hurry. Incomplete work and defective work are not the same thing. They often sit in the same report, and they lead to different conversations with builders, insurers and, if it comes to it, a tribunal.
This is a practical reading of how inspectors record those items, and of the remedies that exist in outline in New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia. It is not a how-to-sue guide, and it is not legal or financial advice. It belongs with our defects and construction reporting, and it sits beside new builds versus established homes and off-the-plan apartments.
Incomplete is a gap; defective is a failure
Incomplete work is the job that stopped. The balustrade was never fitted. The stormwater still discharges onto the clay. The ensuite is tiled but the door has no sill and the cavity flashing was never dressed. Someone moved in because the kitchen was usable. The house is a dwelling with a construction site attached.
Defective work is the job that was finished and is wrong. The flashing is there and it does not work. The articulation joints were filled with mortar. The wet-area membrane, if it exists, has failed at the waste. The roof screws are the wrong class for the wind region. The work was done; it does not meet the standard, the plans, or the contract that paid for it.
Inspectors are not judges of contracts. They are observers of fabric. The useful move in a report is to say, in ordinary language, that an item is not there, or that an item is there and is not performing. “Incomplete balustrade to rear deck — fall to ground approximately 1.8 metres — engage a licensed builder” is a complete thought. “Workmanship poor” is not.
Incomplete work is a gap. Defective work is a failure. The same house can carry both, and the remedy path is not always the same.
The same house can carry both. Owner-builder projects are famous for it: a careful kitchen, an unapproved deck, a bathroom that was tiled over a weekend, a roof that was finished by someone who knew what they were doing. The inspection should not average those facts into a single mood.
Owner-builders, and the jobs that never had a site supervisor
Owner-builder work is legal in every state, with courses, permits and limits that change by jurisdiction. Some of it is excellent. Some of it is a sequence of weekends and favours. The inspection does not know which, until it looks.
What the inspector can see is the consistency of the detailing. Flashings that stop short. A deck that is fixed to the house without a visible flashing or a separation gap. A garage conversion with a shower, a kitchenette and a smoke alarm hanging from a lead. Electrical work that looks like it was done after the lining. Stormwater that was never connected because the slab went down first.
None of that proves the owner-builder was unlicensed in a trade they should not have touched. It is a pattern that justifies a closer look by licensed people, and a council search. Buyers who treat “owner-builder” on a contract as a bargain are sometimes buying a list of incomplete items that will not be finished by the person who started them.
Unapproved structures: decks, granny flats, converted garages
The unapproved structure is the other regular. Inspectors do not carry the council file. They carry a camera and a habit of noticing when a building does not look like the rest of the house. The usual cast is:
- a deck that grew, often without a balustrade or a flashing at the house
- a carport that became a room
- a “studio” with a stove, or a garage with a shower
- a second storey that does not match the street
- a granny flat that has always been “used as one”
They record the structure as a structure. They note missing bushfire or termite details if those are visible. They note waterproofing at the door, the height of the deck, the presence or absence of a balustrade, the way the roof is tied, the way the room is lined. They say, if it is obvious, that the work appears to be an addition or a conversion and that approval should be confirmed.
That last sentence is doing a lot of work. An unapproved deck can be a safety problem (no balustrade, rotten joists) and a planning problem (too close to the boundary, too high, in a flood overlay). An unapproved granny flat can be a fire-separation problem and a finance problem. A converted garage can fail as a habitable room on lighting, ventilation and damp. The inspection describes the fabric. The buyer’s solicitor or conveyancer, and a council search, describe the approval. Those two files should meet before anyone is sentimental about the extra bedroom.
Incomplete work on apartments has a different cast of characters — the builder, the owners corporation, the occupation certificate — but the same distinction between not finished and finished badly.
How an inspector records incomplete items
A competent report is specific and photographic. The item is named. The location is named. The risk is named if it is obvious — a fall, a leak, a fire separation, an unsanitary waste. The limitation is named if the inspector could not see behind a lining. The recommendation is a licensed trade or a further investigation, not a quote.
Inspectors should not be shy about incomplete work on a house that is being sold as finished. “House appears occupied; rear deck incomplete; no balustrade; no visible flashing at house junction” is a fair set of sentences. So is “garage conversion includes shower and kitchenette; wet-area detailing not visible; no evidence of stormwater from the added roof on site”. Those sentences can be attached to a price conversation. They can also be attached, later, to a warranty conversation if the work is still inside the statutory period.
What the inspector should not do is invent a legal category. They should not write “illegal dwelling” unless they have a basis that is more than a second tap. They should not write “complies with the National Construction Code” unless they were engaged to assess that, which a standard pre-purchase inspection is not. They describe. They photograph. They recommend.
If a defect is later alleged to have been missed, the photographs and the limitations clause become the record of what was possible on the day. That is a separate subject — missed defects and an inspector’s duty of care — but it starts with the same habit of evidence.
Statutory warranties, still running
Residential building work in Australia generally carries statutory warranties. The names and the periods differ by state, and they change, but the idea is stable: the work will be performed in a proper and workmanlike manner, in accordance with the plans and the law, and it will be reasonably fit for the purpose. Major or structural defects usually have a longer warranty than minor ones. Time runs from completion, not from the day you noticed the leak.
A buyer of a recently built house, or of a house with a recent renovation, may still be inside that period. The warranty can run with the work, which means a later owner may still have a path to the original builder — subject to the legislation, the contract, and facts this article will not pretend to settle. The inspection is useful here as a dated list. It is not the claim.
Home warranty insurance, builders warranty, and the various state indemnity schemes sit beside the statutory warranty. They have their own triggers, their own caps, and their own habit of excluding things buyers assume are covered. An inspector does not interpret the policy. They record the defect. Anyone who is considering a claim needs advice from someone who is not this website.
Builders, insurers, and the tribunals in outline
The practical remedies, in the order people usually try them, are the builder, the insurer, and a tribunal or court. This is an overview, not a procedure.
The builder is the first call when the work is recent and the builder still exists. A clear list, with photographs and a reasonable time to attend, is more useful than a speech. Some builders come back. Some disappear. Some argue that the item is maintenance, or that the owner changed the drainage, or that the work was never in the contract.
The insurer is the call when the builder cannot or will not, and when a policy exists. The policy will have a process. The process will want evidence. The inspection report is part of that evidence if it is specific. A report that says “various defects noted, engage builder” is a weak exhibit.
The tribunals are the last of the usual forums: NCAT in New South Wales, VCAT in Victoria, QCAT in Queensland, SAT in Western Australia, with equivalents elsewhere. They hear building disputes, among many other things. They are not free, they are not instant, and they are not a substitute for a report that already describes the work. People who arrive with a folder of close-up photographs and no context do less well than people who arrive with a dated inspection, a contract, and a short history of what they asked the builder to do.
This is as far as a journalism site should go. The next step, if you need one, is a lawyer or a licensed building advocate who works in your state. Do not treat a paragraph about NCAT as a filing instruction.
Photographs are the remedy you already have
Whatever path you take, the file that helps is the one the inspector should already have started: wide shots that show where the item sits in the house, close shots that show the detail, and a report that ties those images to a sentence. Take your own photographs on the day you get the keys, and again after rain. Date them.
Incomplete work is particularly easy to lose in a sale. A vendor will finish the kitchen and leave the deck. A tenant will hang a sheet where the balustrade should be. A skip will hide the disconnected stormwater. The inspection photographs are the record that the item was incomplete on a named date. That record is useful in a price talk, in a warranty talk, and, if it comes to it, in a tribunal. It is also useful if you simply decide to finish the work yourself with licensed people and a proper permit.
How to read a report that is full of unfinished business
Read the incomplete items as a list of jobs, not as a mood. Price the jobs. Add the approval risk for anything that looks like an addition. Then read the defective items as a separate list: these were finished, and they may have a warranty path that the incomplete items do not, or vice versa.
If the house is new, read this report beside the builder’s own defects list and beside any occupation or completion certificate. Those documents are not a clean bill of health. They are a set of administrative facts. The independent inspection is the one that is allowed to be rude about the deck.
If the house is old, incomplete work is often a renovation that ran out of money. That is a simpler story. You can see the gap. You can decide whether you want to fill it. The inspection has done its job when you are no longer guessing which.