Search results

Once again, you misinterpret and misrepresent. At *NO STAGE* have I talked about the inspections. I entirely agree with you that if I hire someone qualified to test the smoke alarms (i.e. absolutely anyone!) and they report to me in writing that they tested the alarms and they were found to be...

Nobody. The LL is only responsible for the alarms to be working and correctly located at the start of a tenancy. You are not expected to be clairvoyant.

Suppose you had a handyman who was not a licenced tradesman install a step on an IP. He gets a phone call and leaves one step not properly secured and loose. Suppose also you can shown to have walked up those stairs. Tenant steps on step and falls down and breaks a hip. Is the tradie...

Absolutely correct. So if your builder located the alarms, you are almost certainly covered because it is in the building code - i.e. the person who placed the alarm can be expected to know more about it than you. This will be the case for all builds going forward. I am only talking about cases...

If the location and placement is wrong, regardless of whether some handyman came around and said it was OK (and that's what the smoke alarm firms are, BTW. Handymen) you are still potentially liable. You are required to know. The information is freely available and fully understandable by the...

1. There are no "professionals" (except for the case when they are hardwired, in which case installation needs to be done by qualified tradespeople.) I have this from the horse's mouth. 2. Just like the people who go around and charge money, If I were doing it myself I would (a) take pains...

Very insightful post, thank Perp. A couple of points to add that came from my discussions with the compliance section in the Qld public service: 1) I was told that the legislation was specifically written so that non-experts could comply. 2) When I asked how you could identify an expert...