Strata Roofing: What Body Corporate Committees Should Know Before Engaging a Contractor

In practice, that can be where many body corporate problems start.

Before deciding who should carry out roof work, a committee first needs to understand what is actually wrong, how extensive the problem is, what work is genuinely required and how competing proposals can be compared fairly.

Those are different questions from simply asking a contractor for a quote.

For strata communities, the quality of the decision made before work begins can be just as important as the workmanship that follows.

Start with the condition, not the contractor

A contractor naturally looks at a roof through the lens of the work they may be asked to perform.

A body corporate has a different responsibility. It needs to understand the condition of the common property and make an informed decision about what should happen next.

That usually means establishing a clear picture of the roof before asking the market to price the solution.

Depending on the building, that may involve examining roof coverings, membranes, flashings, drainage, penetrations, sealants, corrosion, previous repairs, rooftop equipment, access arrangements and other relevant components.

Photographic evidence is particularly useful because committee members are rarely able to see the roof themselves.

A good condition assessment should help distinguish between:

• immediate issues;
• short-term maintenance;
• items requiring specialist investigation;
• longer-term capital work; and
• matters that should simply continue to be monitored.

That information becomes the foundation for everything that follows.

A quote is not the same thing as a scope of works

One of the most common problems in strata roofing procurement is asking several contractors to “quote on the roof” without first giving them a consistent scope.

The result can be three prices for three different interpretations of the problem.

One contractor may allow for isolated repairs.

Another may propose replacing a much larger area.

A third may include access, drainage or associated work that the others have excluded.

Those prices cannot be compared properly because the contractors have not been asked to price the same thing.

A properly prepared scope of works changes that.

It defines the work that is being priced and gives contractors a common basis for their submissions.

This does not mean every roof project becomes simple. Existing buildings often contain unknown conditions and legitimate differences in methodology.

But a controlled scope significantly improves the committee’s ability to understand what each tenderer is offering and where the important differences lie.

The lowest strata roofing price may not be the lowest cost

Committees understandably pay close attention to price.

But price should be considered alongside scope, exclusions, methodology, access, programme, proposed materials, warranties, contractor capability and the risks associated with the work.

A tender that appears cheaper may simply contain fewer allowances or more exclusions.

Conversely, a higher price does not automatically mean a better proposal.

The objective is not to select the cheapest contractor or the most expensive contractor.

It is to understand what is actually being offered and whether it responds properly to the building’s requirements.

This is particularly important with roofs because many of the conditions being dealt with are not visible from inside the building.

Independent tender comparison makes the decision clearer

Once contractors are pricing the same defined work, their submissions can be reviewed against consistent criteria.

A useful tender comparison may identify:

• what has been included;
• what has been excluded;
• significant qualifications or assumptions;
• proposed materials or systems;
• programme differences;
• access requirements;
• warranty differences;
• areas where clarification is required; and
• significant departures from the requested scope.

This gives the committee a much better basis for discussion than comparing the total price at the bottom of each quotation.

It also creates a clearer record of how the eventual decision was made.

The decision does not end when the contractor is appointed

Roof projects can change once work begins.

Existing conditions may be exposed.

Variations may be proposed.

Access or sequencing may change.

Completion details can become difficult for a committee to assess from meeting minutes, photographs and contractor correspondence alone.

Independent delivery oversight can help the committee understand progress against the agreed scope and maintain a clearer record of significant observations, milestones, variations and completion information.

This does not replace the contractor’s responsibilities.

It gives the body corporate an additional layer of information about work being carried out on its property.

What should a committee ask before engaging a strata roofing contractor?

Before proceeding to tender or accepting a roofing proposal, seven practical questions are worth asking.