A panel of the cladding fell off the facade of the building, and is now being held together by ratchet straps. Credit:Justin McManus Unlike flammable cladding, the material on the facade is not at risk of catching fire. However, an engineering and building report conducted for the residents found that the cement sheet cladding was "not installed to manufacturer's instructions", contributing to the water damage and even causing some of the panels to fall off the facade. As debate rages about building industry standards in Melbourne and Sydney, residents of the St Kilda block say that despite the report, which found that the cladding wasn't installed properly when it was developed almost two decades ago, they will be forced to foot the multimillion-dollar bill. They will not be covered by the $600 million fund to remove flammable cladding announced by the Andrews government this month as the panels on the building are not flammable, and they cannot pursue legal action due to the expiration of the builders’ warranty insurance and the statute of limitations.

Trent, who did not want his surname published, bought an apartment in the block in 2007. However, in mid-2012, leaks started appearing. "It was just pooling in. I had a tarp on the roof to stop the carpet from getting wet. It was coming in steady through the windows as well," he said. The roof was patched up in 2014, but leaking started again in 2015. Apartment owners Brian Skirving, Reymon Makkar and Trent outside their St Kilda building. Credit:Justin McManus "In December 2016 it got completely flooded - all the carpet, flooring, all my bed and everything got thrown out. Then in April 2017 water started coming in again and on the front side of the building … since then the leaks have been constant."

Illustration: Matt Golding Credit: His apartment has been gutted for more than two years, during which time Trent has been forced to rent an apartment down the road while still paying his mortgage. Some of the rent has been covered by the owners corporation, but much of it he has paid out of pocket. "At the moment, it’s uninhabitable," he said. "I loved this area. I still love the area, I just wish I didn’t buy." He is now unsure what he will do with the apartment after the building repairs and says he would be "very hesitant" about ever buying an apartment in Melbourne again. "I’m caught between a rock and a hard place. I just don’t know what to do … I just try not to think about it because it's pretty upsetting."

The Age has chosen not to publish the address of the property, or name the developer or builder for legal reasons. Phil Dwyer, from the Builders Collective Australia, which is calling to establish a royal commission into the Australian residential construction sector, said many apartment owners across the city were having to cough up money to fix problems in their building. The facade of the apartment block. Credit:Justin McManus "A lot of people are in trouble at the moment," he said. "In most cases most people can’t get a claim up … At the moment, they are better off biting the bullet and not wasting money on lawyers' fees and fixing the property."

He said there should "absolutely be more protections for consumers and homeowners. Loading "It’s an absolute disgrace," he said. "Not one part of the process is working well." The report about the St Kilda building by engineering and building consultants Buildcheck, completed in 2017, found that when the block was being developed from an office building in the early 2000s, the original facade was replaced with a non-combustible cement sheet cladding.

“The [cladding] facade was not installed to manufacturer’s instructions, and there was no cavity between the panels and the timber structure to which they were attached,” the report found. Loading Buildcheck found a cavity and a moisture barrier between the structure and the cladding - which is designed to protect the inside from water and is specified in current installation manuals - were not present at the St Kilda block. The owners corporation has been quoted a total price of $2,634,284 to replace the cladding, a figure that may balloon if more damage is found when the panels are removed. The works will be extensive, including replacing most of the cladding and dozens of windows, refurbishing balconies and painting works.

Some owners have had to reach into their super funds to pay for the extensive works, while at least one has had to take out a reverse mortgage in order to get the money. Reymon Makkar, who is the chair of the owners corporation, said the insurance premiums for the building had quadrupled this year. "We have spent thousands on all the investigations, lawyers, inspections, consultants, all of that. Before we even selected a builder, we spent $56,000. Not to mention the hours everyone has put in," he said. He said he believed the industry needed to be better regulated, with greater protections for home-owners when a property is out of warranty.

"I do believe there should be a statute of limitations for some things, but there needs to be more protection where there are clear signs of negligence," he said. "I was so excited to buy this apartment. What was supposed to be the next step for us in our lives has become a part-time job. "It’s just taking so long and it’s so frustrating and people are hurting and it seems like the system is designed to make it as hard as possible to fix this." He said he would never buy an apartment in Melbourne again. "Not a chance. I don’t think we will stay here. It’s actually haunting. I’m reminded every time I get home at night and I see the leaks and I look at the rotting and I don’t know even once it’s all done if I can voluntarily do this."