4 August 2024

Builder's crash leaves couple high and dry in the Sierra townhouse development

| Ian Bushnell
Join the conversation
10
unfinished apartment block

In limbo: Liz and Rob Sharpe have been waiting since 2019 for their townhouse to be completed. Photo: Ian Bushnell.

It’s been five years since Liz and Rob Sharpe exchanged contracts on their $1.3 million, off-the-plan purchase of a new four-bedroom townhouse in the Sierra development in the heights of Narrabundah.

It was to be their retirement lock’n’go home. Now it’s a case of so near yet so far.

Sierra is a $22-million, 45-lot townhouse project in Leahy Close being developed by the Macedonian Orthodox Church.

The builder was Project Coordination, one of Canberra’s most reputable companies. But in the wake of the pandemic amid soaring material and labour costs and a tightening of finance, reputation wasn’t enough.

READ ALSO Don’t go it alone when designing your dream home

Project Coordination went into voluntary administration on 19 March. Administrator RSM advised the Sharpes officially by email on 22 March.

Since then, the couple has heard next to nothing apart from Deloitte advising them on 31 May that it had taken over management of Sierra from RSM.

“We are currently undertaking an urgent assessment of the company and the Sierra Project to explore the options that may be available for completion,” Deloitte said.

“In addition, work is required to collate information and understand the contracts and agreements that are in place regarding the Sierra Project.”

While most of the dozen incomplete Canberra projects have new builders, Sierra isn’t one of them, although Liz says he has been told that several builders have priced it.

A phone call to Deloitte a couple of weeks ago shed no light on the issue, with a spokesperson saying there was nothing to report.

The Sharpes say they have been patient enough, having to endure constant delays throughout the COVID period and afterwards.

Last year, they sold their home so they would be able to move in at Christmas, based on the latest advice from the builder about completion. Then it was to be in June.

For six months, the Sharpes rented a property, but since Christmas, they have been staying with relatives in Canberra.

“They have been very generous,” Liz said.

render of project

An artist’s impression of the Sierra townhouse development in Narrabundah being developed by the Macedonian Orthodox Church. Image: Zango.

It is now more than four months since Project Coordination went down and the Sharpes are worried about possible rescission of their contract or extra costs to complete the project.

They believed they would be protected by legislation passed in December 2021 to prevent developers from walking away from contracts when there are delays, but it also includes a provision for extenuating circumstances, which might come into play in their situation.

She knows of two other buyers who have decided to rescind their contracts and get their deposits back but the Sharpe’s townhouse is so close to completion it isn’t in their interests to walk away.

“For us to buy that townhouse now in Narrabundah or Red Hill would be $1.6 million,” Liz said.

A former registered nurse and midwife, Liz works part-time in the health infrastructure industry and regularly travels for work.

The plan was to move into the new property and join Rob in retirement for the next stage of their life together.

That has all been put on hold.

READ ALSO The best electricians in Canberra

“We just want to know where we’re at with our life,” Liz said.

“At the end of the day, they need to put options on the table.

“We were selling our house to go to this one in good faith, so we weren’t going to have bridging finance.”

Liz said they could still be in their old home, which they owned and would still be appreciating.

“It’s so frustrating.”

A Deloitte spokesperson said the Receivers hoped to advise on how they propose to progress the development by the end of August 2024.

Several consultants had been engaged to assist their assessment of the partly constructed development and inform options available to recommence construction.

“The Receivers are certainly conscious their appointment, and the prior Administrators, over the developer and builder has caused uncertainty for presale purchasers, and they have been communicating with this group on the progress of their work,” the spokesperson said.

“As Receivers of the project, the team has been working closely with various stakeholders, consultants, and the Administrators, to determine the right strategy to get work started again and the development completed.”

Join the conversation

10
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

Reputable builder LOL

Heywood Smith3:07 pm 24 Jul 24

And yet somehow, all the former directors etc of said building companies that have gone bust still seem to live quite the extravagant lifestyles! They never seem to forget to pay themselves!

Incidental Tourist9:18 am 24 Jul 24

Sorry for this couple and others in similar circumstances. But this is expected given the populism of ACT Labor and Greens. They introduced a raft of “customer protections” which shifted more risks and costs to developers. People have to realise that there is no free certainty on the market where interest rates, costs of labor and materials, taxes, and costs of new regulations (like most recent developer’s licencing) change daily. If the new townhouse costs $1.6M and the contract was for $1.3M then where do they expect $300,000 coming from? The developer is neither a charity nor a money printing machine. If the developer can’t pass on extra costs to the buyer then they go out of business which is what has happened.
Downsizers and first home buyers should shop on the secondary market instead. Thanks to the same populism of Labor and Greens who tightened tenancy regulations like rent caps, no fault lease termination plus steep land tax hikes many rental properties are now on the market. Reduction of rental stock is tomorrow’s problem though.

“If the new townhouse costs $1.6M and the contract was for $1.3M then where do they expect $300,000 coming from? … If the developer can’t pass on extra costs to the buyer…”

What a ridiculous argument. If you contract to buy for a fixed price with no uplift clause then why should the seller, having blown their cost, risk and profit budgets, be entitled to say they’ll just have another 23% thanks?

The purchasers took risk as it was by buying off the plan (with risk eventuating) and the builder failed to manage their own. It’s called the free market, or capitalism, not Builders’ Eternal Benefit Plan.

Ever heard the term ‘moral hazard’?

Incidental Tourist11:58 am 24 Jul 24

The contract was exchanged 5 years ago when the developer could pass on extra material and labour costs to the buyer. In fact this was not a fixed price contract inclusive of labour and material costs because the legislation at the time was different, mortgage interest rates were 2% and labor and materials cost less. In late 2021 the legislation has changed effectively fixing the contract and removing cost pass on provisions existed before. Then we had this hype of registering developers and yet again there are licence, time and bureaucracy costs to it. The industry warned that new legislation will not protect buyers but result in more severe risks like this one. So today “for the peace of mind” if the townhouse today costs $1.6M it should be sold off the for $2.5M which adds possible interests increases, inflation risks and new populist ideas coming out from politicians. Don’t like it? – then become developer yourself and we sit and think what more regulations, taxes and licensing cost we can impose of you.

Why should all risk sit with the buyer? Why should it effectively be a one sided contract, where the developer just passes it on willy nilly, as they please.

What a joke.

Incidental Tourist1:41 pm 24 Jul 24

Increasing bankrupts prove that most of the cost risks are with the developers/builders. To put 23% cost increase in perspective ($1.3M to 1.6M) government is managing many its projects with the cost overrun many times more and still get voted in. I wish we had tram project cost overrun by 23% then it would be best project delivered ever.

Where did legislation change price terms for prior contracts? Please quote the Section.

The legislation was principally about rescission terms, as introduced in NSW back in 2015.

Incidental Tourist4:30 pm 24 Jul 24

Indirectly perhaps. At the time of exchange (pre-legislation) developer could have assumed that they could easier and earlier (!) negotiate higher price or rescind the project citing higher costs.

“… or rescind the project citing higher costs.”

Perfectly identifying the moral hazard, aka a ‘get out of jail free’ card.

Perhaps they should have paid more attention to highly public legislation in the otherwise more conservative State of NSW 6 years before ACT acted.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.