How we understood the 12-month build assurance

The builder’s assurance uses strong language about reliability and confidence. It refers to an “open book promise”, “trust our build times and delivery standards”, describes the assurance as a “commitment” being put “into action”, and states that the customer’s “peace of mind is paramount.” It also describes the assurance as a “guaranteed pathway” to the new home.

I recall being told during the sales process that ours was a relatively small home and would most likely be completed within a year.

The presentation of the assurance, together with those discussions, gave us the confidence to proceed with this builder.

We acknowledge that the detail in the annexure states that the 12-month period is calculated from the date the first brick is laid. The assurance was one page within a larger package of approximately 15 pages of documents presented for review and signature. Although the first-brick condition appeared in the annexure, it was not specifically highlighted or explained to us.

Against the prominent statements about trust, transparency, reliable build times and putting commitments into action, we did not appreciate that the period between the commencement of site works and the laying of the first brick could sit outside the 12-month assurance.

We understood the prominently promoted 12 Month Build Time Assurance to mean what it appeared to promise on its face: that the construction of our home would take no more than 12 months.

Why the distinction matters to our build

For our build, the distinction is particularly impactful.

Earthworks were completed on 27 February 2026. The slab was poured on 17 March 2026. Bricklayers did not commence until 3 July 2026, following a 108-day period without substantive construction activity observed on site after slab down.

Calculating the assurance from first brick excludes the 4 month+ period between earthworks completion and bricklaying commencing.

The revised practical completion inspection date provided to us in writing is 3 July 2027. That is 491 days or 16 months after earthworks were completed.

Our home is also not fully move-in ready at handover. Wall painting and flooring outside the wet areas are not included in our contract, so additional work will still need to be arranged before we can move in.

Responsibility for strong claims

From our perspective, when a business makes strong claims about trust, transparency, commitment and reliable build times, the responsibility rests with the business to explain clearly how those claims operate in practice.

Customers should not have to identify the practical effect of important qualifications for themselves or ask an endless series of questions simply to understand the likely overall timeframe for their home.

We do not believe the information presented to us about the builder’s current build times accurately reflected the delays and overall construction periods we have since encountered.

During construction, we have also not been given clear explanations of where delays were occurring, how long they were likely to continue, or how they would affect the completion of our home.

Had the operation of the assurance been clearly explained to us, together with an accurate indication of the builder’s likely overall build timeframe and current delays, we would not have chosen to proceed with this builder.