Question: What’s the difference between a building inspection and a proper condition assessment for an older apartment block?
Our body corporate is in a 25-year-old building in Brisbane. We’ve never had any major defect claims and the building “looks fine.” Still, a few of us on the committee are starting to notice small signs of wear, hairline cracking on the façade, some staining near balcony edges, ageing sealant around windows. Nothing dramatic, but enough to make us wonder what we’re not seeing.
We’re due for our 10-year maintenance plan review, and I want to push for a proper assessment of the building’s condition, not just a routine compliance inspection. What’s the difference between the basic safety/compliance reports we’re used to and a more thorough building condition assessment?
What would a qualified building surveyor be looking for, and is this something we should be doing proactively even without an obvious problem, or is it overkill for a building with no known defects?
Answer: Compliance inspections check today’s risks, while condition assessments help you plan for the next 10 years.
A compliance inspection checks against a checklist, fire safety, WHS, accessibility, and tells you whether the building passes today. It’s a reactive thing; identifying immediate risk issues and eliminating them.
A condition assessment is strategic. It’s a non-intrusive, high-level examination of all components. It asks why something looks the way it does, and what that means over the next 10 years. It provides the committee with the context to make informed decisions about not just what to spend money on, but in what order, based on risk prioritisation, having confidence to defer items that may otherwise be replaced/repaired earlier.
This post appears in the August 2026 edition of The QLD Strata Magazine.
Craig McDonald Beyond Condition E: craig@beyondcondition.com
