Queensland Building Services Authority v Reid

CITATION: Queensland Building Services Authority v Reid [2012] QCAT 199

PARTIES:	Queensland Building Services Authority
v
Gary Andrew Reid

APPLICATION NUMBER:   OCR091-11

MATTER TYPE: Occupational regulation matters

HEARING DATE: 20 April 2012

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: Peta Stilgoe, Senior Member

DELIVERED ON: 17 May 2012

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:     

1. Proper grounds exist for taking disciplinary action against Gary Andrew Reid pursuant to s 89(j) of the Queensland Building Services Authority Act1991.

2.    Gary Andrew Reid will pay a penalty of $3,000 to the Queensland Building Services Authority by 10 August 2012.

3.    Gary Andrew Reid will pay the costs of the Queensland Building Services Authority fixed at $1,500 by 10 August 2012.

CATCHWORDS:

OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION – BUILDERS – where builder failed to comply with direction to rectify – where builder submitted direction incapable of compliance – where defective roof and considerable rain during rectification period – factors relevant to penalty

COSTS – whether costs should follow the event – whether builder should pay the Authority’s costs of the proceeding

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, ss 43, 100, 102

Queensland Building Services Authority Act 1991, ss 3, 89(j)

Queensland Building Services Authority v Last Laugh Pty Ltd [2011] QCAT 263
Queensland Building Services Authority v Brian Frederick Black Unreported D033/92, 13 April 1993
Queensland Building Services Authority v T & T Building Pty Ltd [2008] CCT QD009 -08

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

APPLICANT:	Ms K Haywood, in-house lawyer of the Queensland Building Services Authority
RESPONDENT:	Mr G Reid assisted by Mr M Reid

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. Mr Reid built a house for Mr John Atchison.  Mr Atchison and his family moved into the house in December 2007.  In January 2008, Mr Atchison noticed that water was penetrating a number of areas of the home, principally through the roof.

2. In July 2008, Mr Atchison lodged a complaint with the Authority.  The Authority issued a direction to rectify to Mr Reid and he complied with that direction.

3. Mr Atchison lodged a second complaint with the Authority in October 2010.  On 12 November 2010, the Authority issued a second direction to rectify.

4. The Authority says that Mr Reid has not complied with the second direction to rectify, so it has referred Mr Reid to the tribunal for disciplinary proceedings.

5. The Authority submits that, in deciding whether to take disciplinary action, the tribunal must be satisfied of four matters:

a)That Mr Reid was a licensee.

b)That the Authority issued a direction to rectify.

c)The direction to rectify related to tribunal work.

d)That Mr Reid failed to comply with the direction to rectify.

1. Mr Reid does not dispute that: he is a licensee; the Authority issued a direction to rectify; the direction to rectify related to building work or that he did not comply with the direction to rectify.  He submits that the tribunal should not take disciplinary action because the direction to rectify was not capable of compliance.  He says that he could not…