The Notifiable Work That Arrived After the Slab
A registered building surveyor in Victoria is engaged for a two-storey dwelling. The permit was issued for a slab-on-ground with strip footings, and the surveyor inspected the footing trenches and the slab pour. Six weeks later the builder emails a variation: the client has decided to convert the ground-floor study into a self-contained unit with a kitchenette and a second entry door. The builder says the work is 'just internal fit-out' and asks whether a new permit is needed, noting the slab is already poured and the wall frames are up. The surveyor checks the plans and sees the unit adds a new sanitary fixture, a new external door in a load-bearing wall, and changes the building's classification from a Class 1a to effectively two dwellings. The builder wants to keep going next Monday.
1. Advise the builder whether the proposed works require a new building permit, and explain the reasoning against the relevant regulatory tests.
Read the worked answer
A new permit is required. The change is not merely internal fit-out: it alters the building's classification (from a single Class 1a dwelling to two self-contained dwellings, i.e. a Class 1a plus a second Class 1a or a Class 2 arrangement depending on the configuration), adds a sanitary fixture and drainage connection, and introduces a new opening in a load-bearing wall. Each of these is 'building work' for which a building permit is required, and none falls within the limited categories of work exempt from a permit.
The correct sequence is: (1) the builder must not proceed; (2) the owner or agent applies for a new or amended permit with amended plans, a revised structural design for the new opening, and updated plumbing documentation for the additional fixture; (3) the relevant building surveyor assesses the application afresh, including whether the existing slab and footings can carry the altered layout and whether the new unit complies with siting, daylight, energy and fire-separation provisions; (4) only after the permit is issued may the work proceed.
The surveyor should record the advice in writing and note the date the builder was told to stop, because proceeding without a permit exposes the builder to enforcement action and the owner to uninsured or non-compliant work. The surveyor cannot retrospectively 'cover' the work by amending the existing permit if the scope is materially different and the structural and plumbing documentation has not been assessed.
2. The builder argues the surveyor already inspected the slab, so the surveyor has 'signed off' the layout. How should the surveyor respond, and what record-keeping step matters here?
Read the worked answer
The surveyor should reject the argument clearly. A mandatory inspection of footings or a slab confirms only that the stage inspected complies with the permit and approved plans as at that date. It is not an approval of future or different work, and it does not amend the permit. The approval document is the permit and its endorsed plans; the inspection record is evidence of a stage check, not a scope approval.
On records: the surveyor should make a contemporaneous file note of the conversation, the date, the builder's position and the surveyor's direction to stop work, and should issue a written direction (and, if the work continues, consider a building notice or order). The inspection record for the slab should stand as it is - it should not be altered to imply the new layout was inspected. If the matter later goes to the regulator or a tribunal, the file note and the unaltered inspection record are the documents that show the surveyor acted properly. Silence or an ambiguous email would be the surveyor's real exposure.
3. Identify the mandatory inspection stages that will now apply to the new unit and explain why the original inspection schedule is insufficient.
Read the worked answer
The original schedule covered the dwelling's footings, slab, frame, and final. The new unit adds stages that were never scheduled: the new sanitary fixture and its drainage connection require plumbing inspections (below-ground drainage before covering, and the fixture connection), the new opening in the load-bearing wall requires a structural framing inspection before lining, and the new external door and its weatherproofing need to be checked at frame and final. The final inspection must now cover both dwellings, including the kitchenette's services and the fire and acoustic separation if the configuration makes that relevant.
The surveyor should issue a revised inspection schedule to the builder in writing, nominate the notification period, and make clear that covering work before inspection will require the work to be exposed. The original schedule is insufficient because it was built around a single-dwelling scope; a schedule is tied to the permitted scope, and the scope has changed. Leaving the old schedule in place would allow the new drainage and structural work to be concealed without any inspection, which defeats the purpose of the mandatory stage regime.