Pool Entrapments Spike as Supervision and Contract Controls Dipdip

Over the past two to three years, and right up to now, we’ve seen a marked rise in entrapment incidents in newly built swimming pools.

NextGen Experts has been engaged in multiple litigated matters and has been instructed to produce expert reports for builders, insurers, lawyers and owners.

A clear pattern is emerging: inadequate supervision of hydraulic trades and weak contract management are fuelling technical failures, consumer disputes and costly tribunal appearances across Australia.

This is dangerous, costly and preventable.

The importance of abiding by the standard

Australian Standard 1926.3 (Water recirculation systems) is clear about the safe design and installation of skimmers, outlets and circulation systems. Yet we still see builds where suction outlets are misplaced or poorly detailed, pump flow exceeds the rated capacity of outlet covers and frames, dual outlets aren’t correctly spaced or interconnected (one was even capped on site), and vacuum points are left live without protective devices.

These lapses elevate the risk of hair, body, limb and evisceration entrapment, especially in pools with high-performance pumps, aggressive hydraulics and tight geometries that concentrate flows.

Builders must actively supervise hydraulic trades from set-out through commissioning and must not cover, bury or encase pipework until compliance with AS 1926.3 and manufacturer ratings is verified by inspection-point sign-off and pressure testing.

Do not “set and forget”; do not allow tilers or finishers to “make good” non-conforming hydraulics; do not cap or disable any suction point to save time; and do not permit undocumented substitutions.

Other recurring failures we’re seeing

Beyond entrapment, three quality failures dominate our recent casework.

Pools out of level. This nearly always traces back to missing inspection points, rushed set-out, and the absence of an independent check before the pour or placement. A 10-minute verification step by a competent person would have caught what ultimately becomes an expensive, visible defect.

Shell movement or “pop-outs”. These typically occur where the hydrostatic risk is underestimated, hydrostatic valves are missing or non-functional, dewatering plans are inadequate, or sequencing is poor around high-water tables and wet seasons. These are planning and supervision failures, not acts of God.

Finishes that fail fast. Debonding mosaics, cracked grout, hollow-sounding coping and visible substrate defects usually stem from a non-conforming substrate or from finishing trades being forced to “make good” structural or hydraulic compromises. Finishes can’t correct upstream defects; they only hide them temporarily.

In nearly every one of these scenarios, the matter ends up in a tribunal. The real expense isn’t just rectification, it’s lost time, document recreation and chasing, and the legal and consultancy costs required to defend positions that are, in many cases, indefensible.

The false economy of speed

We all understand the commercial pressure to finish quickly. But the finish-fast model is a false economy. The short-term margin you see on paper is too often wiped out, then some, by call-backs, re-work, expert reports, legal defence and reputational damage.

Worse, your team’s productivity is cannibalised by after-the fact documentation to prop up claims that basic supervision and record-keeping would have prevented in the first place. Hours that should be spent building get diverted into assembling timelines, photos and affidavits.

Slow down to speed up: a controlled, supervised build or install, underpinned by tight documentation, consistently outperforms a rushed job on both margin and client satisfaction.

Contract control stops money walking out the door

Technical supervision prevents defects; contract management preserves your margin. In our reviews, builders lose money far more often through process gaps than through legal failings.

Loose variations are a recurring leak. When work proceeds without a signed variation, scope creep gets bundled into “goodwill” and is later contested, often successfully by the client.

Extensions of Time (EOT) indiscipline is another. EOT not notified strictly in line with the contract – even when legitimately due for weather, access, or latent conditions – leaves builders exposed to liquidated and consequential damages, or unable to recover additional costs caused by the customer’s actions.

Missing inspection-point signoffs also cost dearly. Without contemporaneous approvals, you can inherit responsibility for downstream re-work you didn’t cause and can’t easily dispute.

A communication vacuum compounds the risk. Concerned owners keep immaculate email and document trails; many builders rely on memory and scattered texts. In a hearing, the better documented story wins.

Finally, late-stage rights assertion rarely works. Waiting until practical completion, or after, to enforce rights is too late – by then, your conduct may already have waived key protections.

Pool builders should consider appointing a dedicated contracts lead – not the busiest site supervisor – to own variations, EOTs, program updates, notices and payment claims. You should standardise templates for variations, EOT, delay notices, site instructions and inspection-point checklists.

Keep a daily site diary with photos – if it isn’t written, it didn’t happen.

Use without-prejudice meetings early and minute outcomes with clear action items. Escalate strictly in accordance with the dispute clause on time – don’t let issues drift.

Early decisions and strong leadership

Builders who supervise trades, document decisions and enforce the contract early, rarely meet consumers in a tribunal. Builders who “keep the peace” by letting process slide usually pay for it later – in cash, time, rectification and reputation.

The message is simple: fast is slow when supervision and contract controls are missing. The spike in entrapment cases and the volume of finish, level and shell issues is not “bad luck”; they’re symptoms of gaps in oversight and process.

Close those gaps to protect swimmers, protect your margin and keep out of court.

If you need help auditing your hydraulics supervision, setting up AS 1926.3 compliance checkpoints, or tightening your contract workflows, get in touch. A week invested in the right habits is cheaper than a year unpicking the wrong ones.