neil248

I casually mentioned to friends that some pool inspectors are failing 100% of pools they visit. We have a few years to register ours but rentals and properties being sold have to register now.

They are in a rental and sure enough the pool fencing had failed the inspection on several counts on technicalities and will now cost the landlord a fair amount of money to make the pool comply. The consensus is that the pool is secure already and any child determined to get in will do so even with the modifications.

The ridiculous thing is that the property is on water with with a pontoon and little beach at the bottom of the garden and the water is home to Bull Sharks,
this of course can stay open.

Outside the front of the house is a road with cars going up and down and no barrier between people and cars.

Common sense says it is wise to fence off a pool but it seems a painful dinosaur of regulation has been created for people owning and inspecting pools.

How long will it be before the first inspector is sued for allowing through a fence 1199mm high at one point or not advising to remove the rock used to prop the gate open.

Alfresco

We're renting and our house and the pool fence was inspected two weeks ago. It's a good fence but he inspected every detail and took measurements and checked how each gate can be propped open on a rock etc...

The only way a kid could drown in it, is to parachute into the pool directly without hitting a palm tree first.

I did take the bungee off the one gate before the inspection though.

neil248

Just looked at the advert on this site for pool inspection.

$220.00. WTF to be told you need to spend even more money on something that is not broken.

Our pool is perfectly safe but is now going to cost $'s to be made to comply.

When we moved in the rock was already there to prop the gate open and stayed there not that we ever propped it open of course.

We now have a young addition to the family who could visit at any time and that rock has been removed and the gate stays shut at all times with no exceptions 24/7. It is our responsibility to make the place safe for the child and other changes in the yard will be made to ensure this as common sense dictates.

One of the attractions of Queensland was the free and easy do your own thing attitude. As far as government is concerned this seems to have changed in the short few years we have been here. If the council or Bligh's state government discovers people enjoying themselves they will work out a way to stop them

fish.01

To play devils advocate there has always been pool fence inspections...they are just making them happen a lot more so more pools are covered more thoroughly and multiple legislation is tidied up into one act. Drowning is still the leading cause of death in queensland for toddlers. How is this a partisan political issue

ABCDiamond

Obviously not in all states. QLD hasn't had them, except the one done before the pool can be filled with water for the first time after installation.

Now they need to do them everytime a house is sold or rented.

Some parts of this law are ridiculous though, especially for those properties that back onto rivers canals or other waterways. The house owner must ensure that no one can swim to their property via the canal or river and then get into your pool, in case they drown in the pool.
Totally OK for them to drown in the river or canal on the way though... NO laws or requirements to fence those off.

fish.01

Yes those inspections plus in qld some councils could inspect subsequently after a complaint subject to a warrant or owners permission. A lot of pools slipped through the gap or changed over time so they are increasing the inspections.

Unless already been done in the past 2 years I think.

This would shift the burden of fixing the fence from the purchaser to the seller. Child is at a greater risk of drowning in the first 6 months after moving into a new home. Sadly sometimes landlords aren't quite as careful with other peoples children as they are with their own.

Why swim the canal....can't pools be accessed from the street sometimes, over the neighbours fence, from a door in the house etc? Exemptions are currently given but the research showed these exemptions were not monitored when circumstances changed. So what was safe no longer was but exemption still in place. Not sure whether this is justifiable or not but would rather see the research before deciding.

What if the yard if fenced off from the canal should the pool be allowed to have no fence for example? Visiting toddlers could still slip out the door of the house and drown in the pool just like any other house...or neighbours kids etc.

moneypenny20

Another devil's advocate here but surely by having these laws is helping the house owner to be protected from liability if there is a drowning? There's no one to sue if someone drowns in a lake/river/ocean but if the regulations aren't enforced and some child gets into a pool the parents/guardian etc would then be able to sue the home owner and it would be a shitty enough event without that happening.

neil248

Hi the last part of my post was no doubt unnecessary and sliding off topic.

My objection is that ours and thousands of other pools are secure, if the gate is shut and nothing is providing foot holds that is and having a toddler visit regularly we are hopefully aware of the dangers.

We had an incident with our own daughter at a friends pool when she was very young and a swimming pool is potentially very dangerous place and a toddler will go straight to the bottom, it was the instant reaction of our friends daughter that prevented any serious consequence.

Drowning is not a topic for clever comments but how many of these deaths are due to a toddler breaching a fence or closed gate.

fish.01

To give you an example I have just bought a house with a pool. The owner provided a pool inspection certificate from a decade ago. I had my first proper look when I moved in and noticed an easy way a toddler could scale the fence by using the multiple horizontal battens across the back of a picket fence that the pool fence is attached too (like a staircase). My son could be over it in a flash. My pool is accessible to the street so the neighbours kids could do it as well.

Under the new laws the owner couldn't sell it like this and I couldn't leave it like that.

Under the old laws he can ignore it and so could I if I wished.

Many family and friends pools have these sort of issues. Remember that lady on tv not that long ago devastated as her toddler climbed over the fence using a nearby brick bbq and died. She had recently moved into a new rental.

ABCDiamond

Common sense should in my opinion be the primary consideration, and if used, would eliminate problems.

If a garden chair is 19 centimetres from the pool fence, then the inspection will fail. If it is 21 centimetres away, it will pass, and the chair can be put back again immediately after the inspector has gone. Similar to all the plant pots next to the pool fence and many other things that can fail an inspection.

Once everyone learns how to pass an inspection, it will OK, but most things will still be the same.

Even the government brochure says "Trim any climbable vegetation on
the barrier". Do that and you pass, no matter if it grows back again and re-allows a climbable option.

Passing the inspection on any one single day, gives zero guarantee of any safety, and some people will always just not bother about maintaining that safety aspect.

ABCDiamond

In theory yes, but in practice ? Did the patio table or chair get left too close to the fence, allowing a claimable object ? Did that kids toy left by the fence allow a height of now less than 120cm to climb over ? Did that vine regrow, allowing climbing ?

In some respects the laws have some merit, but they should make not having common sense a criminal act.

fish.01

To be fair the accompanying image says "Vegetation that can be used to climb into the pool area should be removed." Sure, some of the things inspected may only be a point in time of thing but as well as educating the home owner that still leaves the non time based things.

In my case it would mean the difference between my vendor having to fix an obvious flaw under the new laws or totally ignoring under the old.

I suspect there are many more cases like this than responsible pool owners realise.

Of course some won't change as the owner is already responsible but maybe the pools of some of the family/friends/peers/neighbours the responsible owners child is exposed to through their life will.

I think we may now see many pools improving over time rather than the current situation where many are deteriorating as time passes.

ABCDiamond

To be fair this is what I read:

fish.01

Yeah, same doc as me. Wasn't trying to imply that you weren't being fair, just that to be fair to them the third of the accompanying three example photos adjacent to the three compliance statements is captioned with "Vegetation that can be used to climb into the pool area should be removed" so I assume sometimes we will be forced to remove totally when necessary.

NELBHOY

I posted a few weeks ago asking about this subject as my nephew actually died (thankfully resuscitated) after falling into a recently certified pool. This is link:
http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=492492956095.
Personally, I think if there is a single child saved by the new legislation then it has to be a good thing. The boy made a full recovery by the way. They're calling it miraculous!!