The 'End User'? will always have pay to protect their investment
QS PROJECT SERVICES

The 'End User' will always have pay to protect their investment

QS PROJECT SERVICES QS PROJECT SERVICES

QS PROJECT SERVICES

Tender 'Estimating Services' and Construction software related product sales..

发布日期: 2022年8月1日
+ 关注

I read with interest an article in the Real Estate 'property new' in regard to ACT Developers, who generally are opposed to a licensing scheme in the ACT. It would appear from the comments that a large percentage of Canberrans are in favour of a licencing scheme that would require developers to demonstrate financial capacity to complete any proposed developments and have commitment to ethical behaviour.

Whilst in principle it sounds like a good idea, but will it be enough to protect the end purchasers that pay deposits on units being developed only to find that Builders, and sometimes Developers go broke due to everyone fighting for the best result they can get, for the cheapest price. It may well need a re-think of how Developers and Builders co-operate in the early stages that protect the end users and also the Subcontractors and Suppliers that can often be left suffering when something goes wrong.

I would have thought, by now, someone just might have given some thought to providing some form an insurance bond, both for the Developer (if he runs out of money) and the Builder (if he goes broke before finishing the projects). At least this would protect the Clients and Builder if the Developer runs out of money. Or in the event that the Builder goes broke, the Developer, subcontractor, suppliers and the 'End Users'.

Everyone seems to want guarantees if something goes wrong, yet no one seems to want to pay for it. I think it get down to, you can only get this type of protection if you are prepared to pay for it. The question is are the Developers prepared to pay for a guarantee bond, are the Builders also prepared to pay for guarantee bond and last but not least are the End User clients prepared pay for the additional cost to their purchase price to protect their investment.

Look at it from this point of view. The Developer is going to be well scrutinised by a ‘Bond agent’ if he is going to get a bond to secure his risk, as is the Builder. At the end of the day, you’ll be well covered even though you will pay more for your investment. Isn’t this perhaps a better way than losing your total investment.

?Food for Thought.

Trevor Moseley MAIQS., ICECA

QS PROJECT SERVICES

要查看或添加评论，请登录

QS PROJECT SERVICES的更多文章

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了