{"id":856,"date":"2014-02-20T11:11:34","date_gmt":"2014-02-20T11:11:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mrinspector.com.au\/?p=856"},"modified":"2014-07-08T02:24:07","modified_gmt":"2014-07-08T02:24:07","slug":"building-inspection-springvale-south-subfloor-defects","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mrinspector.com.au\/building-inspection-springvale-south-subfloor-defects\/","title":{"rendered":"Building Inspections Springvale South &#8211; Sub Floor Defect"},"content":{"rendered":"<h5>This above is a photograph taken by Mr Inspector, a qualified building inspector in Melbourne and shows\u00a0excess water ponding under a home during a house inspection in Springvale South and considered a major structural defect.<\/h5>\n<p>A few years ago a particular civil case between a vendor and a purchaser ended up in the Supreme Court. \u00a0In summary, the purchaser had signed a contract to buy the vendors home subject to a building inspection with a &#8220;major structural fault&#8221; clause. \u00a0The building inspector found damp similar to the photo above and the purchaser wanted to opt out of the purchase.<\/p>\n<p>The vendor argued that water ponding in the sub floor was not a structural defect. \u00a0The Judge hearing the case basically made a finding that the water ponding under the home was not in itself a structural defect but if left as is, had the potential to cause a major structural defect.<\/p>\n<p>The end result of course was that the purchaser did not purchase the home.<\/p>\n<p>This portrays the importance of having Mr Inspector, a qualified building inspector in Melbourne, to carry out your building and pest inspections to locate defects that normally would not be picked up.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This above is a photograph taken by Mr Inspector, a qualified building inspector in Melbourne and shows\u00a0excess water ponding under a home during a house inspection in Springvale South and considered a major structural defect. A few years ago a particular civil case between a vendor and a purchaser ended up in the Supreme Court. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":857,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0},"categories":[11],"tags":[],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mrinspector.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/856"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mrinspector.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mrinspector.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mrinspector.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mrinspector.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=856"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/mrinspector.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/856\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1503,"href":"https:\/\/mrinspector.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/856\/revisions\/1503"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mrinspector.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/857"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mrinspector.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=856"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mrinspector.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=856"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mrinspector.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=856"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}