QLD: Q&A Body corporate, tradespeople and contracts?

This article addresses the risks of a Qld body corporate using unlicensed trades.

Table of Contents:

• QUESTION: A garage door upgrade was completed in 2022, but the contractor, also a lot owner, has not provided a tax invoice or system control. How do we resolve this?
• QUESTION: What are the risks of a Qld body corporate using unlicensed trades? Can we bypass the need to engage licensed tradespeople for common property repairs by breaking the invoice into smaller amounts?

Question: A garage door upgrade was completed in 2022, but the contractor, also a lot owner, has not provided a tax invoice or system control. How do we resolve this?

Our strata apartment complex upgraded the garage door remote system in 2022, and the committee is happy with the work.

Frustratingly, after numerous communications, face-to-face discussions, and a formal letter from the body corporate manager, the contractor has not submitted a tax invoice. There is also confusion around the final quotation costs for the upgrade. The contractor, who is also a lot owner, has not handed over control of the FOB code or the procedural login details for the management of the upgraded system.

The worst-case scenario is that the contractor could disable the garage door ingress/egress procedure.

At what stage of the project management process does the body corporate take ownership of the garage door material assets?

Can the committee make an act of grace payment to the contractor based on researched costings for similar equipment plus labour?

Does the contractor’s behaviour constitute a by-law breach?

Answer: Accept that the situation is imperfect and find the most direct path to resolution.

It’s unusual for the matter to go on for so many years. Handover of systems like this is usually after the installation and receipt of the payment.

The matter has become complicated because the contractor was a lot owner and perhaps because clear quotes and contracts weren’t established.

That’s unusual, but I wouldn’t waste too much time thinking about what you could or should have done if it doesn’t bring you to a resolution now.

At this stage, it sounds like you have three options:

• Pay the current contractor a mutually agreed cost and complete the handover.
• Go through a legal process with the current contractor to have details of the system handed over and/or costs agreed upon.
• Pay an alternative contractor to override the current system and let the current contractor take action against the body corporate if they want to.

We don’t know the costs here, but you may need to look at the amounts in question and make a commercial decision based on which is has the lowest cost for the lowest risk. Accept that the situation is imperfect and find the most direct path to resolution.

For your questions:

Making an act of grace payment to the contractor based on researched costings for similar equipment plus labour sounds reasonable, and it may be the simplest pathway to closing the situation.

The contractor’s behaviour possibly constitutes a by-law breach. You need to determine what by-law and in what way by reviewing your by-laws. It may also be a breach of contract issue. It’s hard to say, but if you want to pursue this angle, have a lawyer review and advise.

William Marquand
Tower Body Corporate
E: willmarquand@towerbodycorporate.com.au
P: 07 5609 4924

This post appears in Strata News #742.

Question: What are the risks of a Qld body corporate using unlicensed trades? Can we bypass the need to engage licensed tradespeople for common property repairs by breaking the invoice into smaller amounts?

I’m an owner in a commercial scheme in QLD. Recently, the committee proposed maintenance work for fallen wall tiles and rectified some plumbing issues. The chair appointed a handyman to remove old tiles, sand off existing gyprock walls and retile the walls. A plumber carried out the plumbing work.

Is it against QLD legislation to hire unlicensed trade for tiling work on common area toilets? The chair insisted that by breaking the invoice into small invoices, we can bypass using a licensed tradesperson as the invoiced amounts fall within the handyman’s limit.

Answer: The question for body corporate is, what do you do if something goes wrong?

The QBCC standards are clear on the requirements for when a contractor must carry a licence.

As per their website, individuals and companies must hold a QBCC licence to carry out building work that is:

• valued over $3,300
• valued over $1,100 where it involves Hydraulic Services Design
• of any value where it involves:
  

• drainage
• plumbing and drainage
• gas fitting
• termite management – chemical
• fire protection
• completed residential building inspection
• building design – low rise, medium rise and open
• site classification
• mechanical services.

Body corporate committees have a duty of care to all owners to act in their best interests, including acting legally, so they should follow these rules.

However, it’s not uncommon for people to try and get around the regulations using the justification provided here – split up the invoices so they are under the required levels.

If they do that and the contractor does the work with no issues, then that might be OK. It’s easy to understand the inclination to stick with a contractor you know and trust.

However, the question for body corporate is, what do you do if something goes wrong? If the contractor bodges the work or disappears with your deposit, the body corporate could be stuck with the bill.

If something more serious happens, such as an accident or injury onsite, the situation could escalate, and in the worst scenario, the body corporate could face liability issues. Committee members who have approved the works could face the blame.

You might want to ask the committee whether it is worth taking on these risks just to get the handyman you want.

Remember that approval for works like this is a committee decision, a decision of the whole committee provided it is within the spending limits. The chair has one vote, but the decision should be made by the majority. Perhaps if you explain some of the risks to the committee, they will vote with that in mind.

If the committee does proceed, you might have to consider what to do next. Perhaps you could advise your insurer. They wouldn’t be very happy about this scenario. Maybe you could submit an owner’s motion to force a vote on the issue and help make the matter more public. If there is a regular practice of appointing unqualified contractors, you may need to escalate from there. Advise owners by mail out, propose motions to the next general meeting or take the matter to the commissioner’s office, as required. These last options are usually the final options, but they are what you have to look at if you have a committee engaging in unsafe practices.

William Marquand
Tower Body Corporate
E: willmarquand@towerbodycorporate.com.au
P: 07 5609 4924

This post appears in Strata News #733.

Have a question or something to add to the article? Leave a comment below.

Read next:

• QLD: Community Management Statement (CMS) – What is it?
• QLD: Termites and pest control
• QLD: Utility Infrastructure

Visit Maintenance and Common Property OR Strata Legislation QLD.

Looking for strata information concerning your state? For state-specific strata information, take a look here.

After a free PDF of this article? Log into your existing LookUpStrata Account to download the printable file. Not a member? Simple – join for free on our Registration page.