Frame v Queensland Building and Construction Commission

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Frame v Queensland Building and Construction Commission [2024] QCAT 63

PARTIES:

JADEN FRAME

(applicant)

v

QUEENSLAND BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION COMMISSION

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

GAR635-21

MATTER TYPE:

General administrative review matters

DELIVERED ON:

8 February 2024

HEARING DATE:

8 May 2023

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Davies

ORDERS:

The Queensland Building and Construction Commission decision dated 25 June 2021 to wholly disallow a claim under the Statutory Insurance Scheme is confirmed.

CATCHWORDS:

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – BUILDERS – STATUTORY INSURANCE SCHEME – where a claim was made upon the Queensland Home Warranty Scheme more than three months after the owner became aware of defects in residential construction work – where the claim was disallowed – whether circumstances exist to allow the applicant to advance claim

Acts Interpretation Act 1954 (Qld), s 24AA
Queensland Building and Construction Commission Act 2009 (Qld), s 20, s 24, s 67X
Queensland Building and Construction Regulation 2003 (Qld)
Queensland Building and Construction Regulation 2018 (Qld), s 3, s 15, s 16

Day Ford Pty Ltd v Sciacca [1990] 2 Qd R 209

Gray v WorkCover Queensland & Anor [2000] QSC 418

Jackson & Ors v Queensland Building and Construction Commission [2018] QCAT 290

Kehl v Board of Professional Engineers of Queensland [2010] QCATA 58.

Messaoudi v Queensland Building and Construction Commission [2021] QCAT 124

Walker v Queensland Building and Construction Commission [2021] QCAT 32

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:
Applicant:	Self-represented
Respondent:	A Hoare, Legal Practitioner employed by the Respondent

REASONS FOR DECISION

Introduction

1. By an application instituted on 15 November 2021 Jaden Frame (‘Applicant’) sought a review by the Tribunal of a decision made by the Queensland Building and Construction Commission (‘QBCC’) on 18 October 2021.

2. The decision was an internal review decision. It was made by a Principal Review officer of the QBCC. The decision was to disallow the claim made by the Applicant under the Queensland Home warranty scheme - a statutory insurance scheme (‘SIS’).

3. The Applicant’s rejected claim was in respect of a crack in the bottom of a concrete inground swimming pool constructed for him under a construction contract.

4. In summary, the Applicant’s principal contention is that the decision was wrong. The basis for that contention is that he only became that it was a structural defect that was causing the leak on 19 August 2020 and that he lodged a claim under the SIS on 2 October 2020 which he asserts was within the timeframe required by the SIS.[1] Further, the Applicant raises a subsidiary but related issue. He questions the process by which QBCC rescinded an original insurance decision that was favourable to him.[2]

   [1]This position is articulated in various of the Applicant’s documents including on page 2 of his response to QBCC’s hearing submissions under the heading of Dispute 1.

   [2]Applicant’s Dispute Schedule.

5. For its part, the QBCC position is that the Applicant’s claim was not made within the time it was required to be…