We Ask ChatGPT To Review: Simonds Homes

The Specification

Introduction​ & Method

We're continuing our series where we ask ChatGPT to give us a straight-shooting review of some of Australia’s largest volume builders. The idea is simple: we ask the same set of questions about each builder, in the same way, so you can get a consistent, neutral perspective that cuts through the marketing. This series is about giving you a more balanced view before you commit to a builder.

In this edition, we take a closer look at Simonds.

Founded in 1949 by Gary Simonds, Simonds is one of Australia’s longest-running residential builders. Unlike some of its competitors, Simonds is a publicly listed company, trading on the ASX under Simonds Group Limited (SIO). While this means it must meet financial and governance reporting standards, it doesn’t automatically guarantee quality on the ground—something we’ll explore further in ChatGPT’s review.

Simonds operates in Victoria, Queensland, New South Wales, and South Australia, and has built its name on offering affordable, first-home-friendly house designs, typically single and double-storey homes. They also run their own Registered Training Organisation—the Simonds Building Academy—which aims to address industry skill shortages by training the next generation of tradespeople. This is a commendable initiative in an industry where workforce capability often directly affects build quality.

On the marketing front, Simonds is active on social media, particularly Facebook and Instagram, where they promote display homes, special offers, and customer testimonials. They also maintain a YouTube channel with walk-through and promotional content. Like many builders, the emphasis is on lifestyle and design rather than construction detail—but that’s not unexpected.

So, how does Simonds really stack up when we strip away the brochure speak?
Let’s ask ChatGPT and see what it has to say.

Method

To create this post we followed the method detailed in the original post of this series. We started with the master instruction (prompt) then proceeding through each of the step by step prompt flows recording the output of GPT which is shown below, unedited.

AI-Powered Builder Reviews Of Project Builder Specifications

Understanding builder specifications and inclusions lists can feel like solving a puzzle without knowing the rules of engagement. That’s why we’re launching a new series asking ChatGPT to provide clear, unbiased reviews of the major Project Builders.

Constructor - Build A Better New HomeAnthony Painter

The Unfiltered ChatGPT Review of Simonds

Quality Review 

The Simonds specification and inclusions list presents a product that is best described as budget-conscious and volume builder standard, with a heavy emphasis on base-level compliance and upgrade-driven design. Here's a clear breakdown:

Materials and Methods

Cost-conscious selections are evident throughout. The specifications lean heavily on entry-level or low-to-mid-range products and materials:

• Kitchen uses 600mm Bellissimo/Technika appliances, laminate benchtops, and standard ceramic tile splash backs. These are functional but not premium. Stone benchtops are available—only via upgrades.
• Bathroom fit-out includes semi-framed pivot shower doors, a laminate vanity, and ceramic wall tiles only to the recess—not full height. Fixtures like the Alder tap ware are solid brass but remain basic in design and finish.
• Windows and doors are standard aluminium framed Dowell products, which are acceptable for the price point, but no mention of double glazing or upgraded seals, even as an option.
• Structure is typical: 90mm pine framing, waffle pod slab (M class), basic insulation (R2.0 walls, R3.5 ceilings), and a concrete tile roof (Monier). These meet NCC minimums but are not high-performance materials.
• Standard ceiling height is 2440mm (very low by modern standards). You’ll need to upgrade to 2590mm if you want normal spatial comfort—this is a common cost trap.
• Heating is included (gas ducted), but cooling is not. It’s listed as an upgrade. This is a cost-shifting measure, especially in hotter regions where cooling is effectively essential.

This is not a high-end product. It meets minimum requirements but offers little in the way of performance, longevity, or amenity without added cost.

Value for Purchasers

The value proposition depends on transparency during contract pricing. On face value, the inclusions look fair for a budget-level home, and some concessions (like a structural lifetime guarantee and guaranteed site start with titled land and finance) offer peace of mind. However:

• Many items that are expected as standard elsewhere—cooling, stone benchtops, full height tiling, roller blinds, upgraded flooring, driveway—are paid upgrades. This can inflate the final price significantly.
• Their marketing references “up to $12,800 in value” for a $5,000 upgrade pack—but this is based on RRP of add-ons, not real cost. The savings may be real, but the presentation is promotional, not transparent.
• The “fixed price” claim only applies after land info and developer requirements are assessed. So the site costs may change after initial contract signing, which is a common complaint across volume builders.

The builder uses the base spec as a loss leader, expecting most buyers to spend more to reach a comfortable or modern finish level. This is not inherently bad, but it can undermine affordability for less-experienced buyers if not managed carefully.

Omissions or Red Flags

A few things stand out:

1. No explicit energy efficiency rating target stated. With the 7-star requirement under NCC 2022 becoming mandatory, this omission is notable. No mention of upgraded glazing, external shading, or efficient HVAC systems as standard.
2. Cooling is excluded, even though it’s essential in most regions. The upgrade path is evaporative cooling only, which isn’t suitable for humid climates or bushfire-prone areas (BCA Volume Two, Part 3.7.4).
3. 2440mm ceiling height is tight and significantly affects liveability—particularly in open plan areas.
4. Standard waffle pod slab (M class) assumes stable ground. If your block isn’t dead flat or clean, expect site costs to climb.
5. Flyscreens excluded in Melbourne Metro, which is an odd carve-out and not explained.
6. Reticulated termite barrier (Part B) is included, which is good, but no mention of durable markings, warranty period, or inspection requirements—as required under AS 3660.1.
7. Marketing over-promises “design flexibility” and online control, but the Xpress range clearly has rigid pre-set designs and palette combos. There’s minimal actual customisation.

Bottom line: This is a low-spec entry product that leans on upgrades for appeal. It complies with basic requirements but does not exceed them. Many key inclusions (especially liveability-related features) are not standard. Purchasers must read contracts carefully and assess upgrades with eyes wide open, or the final build cost could escalate quickly beyond expectations.

Language Review

​The language used in the Simonds specifications and marketing material is a mix of consumer-friendly simplicity and deliberate ambiguity, particularly where there may be cost implications, exclusions, or regulatory responsibilities. It lacks the precision and enforceability found in the NCC and Australian Standards, which aim for clarity, defined scope, and measurable performance.

Here’s a breakdown of where the language falls short or becomes problematic:

1. Use of General and Vague Terms

• “From builder’s range”
  This phrase appears throughout (e.g. “Monier concrete roof tile from builder’s range”). It provides no detail about the exact product, style, finish, or colour—giving the builder broad discretion. This creates a loophole where a cheaper or less desirable product could be substituted without breach of contract, so long as it falls within an unspecified internal “range.”
• “Standard plans” / “Standard drawings”
  These are referenced repeatedly (e.g. light point positions, eaves returns, electrical layouts), but not included in the document. This leaves critical design details entirely outside the scope of the advertised specification, relying on what is ultimately another document—often provided only at contract stage.
• “Upgrades available” or “Optional upgrade”
  This language is used extensively and often next to features that are typically expected (e.g. ceiling height, stone benchtops, driveway, blinds, cooling). While not misleading, it obscures the true baseline cost to achieve a modern finish. It also implies a customisation path that is limited in reality to set packs and selections.
• “Nominal internal ceiling height”
  The term “nominal” (e.g. 2440mm nominal) is not incorrect but is non-binding in construction unless defined. The NCC specifies minimum ceiling heights (e.g. 2.4m to habitable rooms), but “nominal” gives flexibility to be marginally under, especially before plaster installation. This could result in disputes if the builder rounds measurements or applies tolerances generously.

2. Lack of Technical Definitions and Missing NCC/AS References

• There is no reference to specific Australian Standards or the NCC, even when discussing regulated areas such as:
  • Smoke alarms (AS 3786 is only mentioned in passing, without performance class or location detail)
  • Waterproofing (no mention of AS 3740)
  • Termite protection (no reference to AS 3660.1 or 3660.2)
  • Slab design (only mentions “M class” and “engineer-designed” but not to AS 2870)

This omission is not illegal but does make it harder for a layperson to cross-check compliance. It removes measurable accountability.

3. Problematic Phrasing and Disclaimers

• “Images and photographs are for illustrative purposes only and may not represent the final product shown.”
  This disclaimer is repeated frequently and broadly. It can be interpreted to void any visual promise shown in brochures or floor plans—this includes facade features, internal layouts, and fixtures.
• “Simonds reserves the right to substitute...”
  Substitution clauses allow for material changes without client approval, under the guise of “maintaining quality” or due to “product unavailability.” While this is common across volume builders, no criteria for substitution are outlined (e.g. same value, warranty, or appearance). This can be problematic if materials are downgraded post-contract.
• “Lifetime Structural Guarantee – refer to our website for T&Cs.”
  There is no detail in the PDF about what this guarantee actually covers. Without definition, “lifetime” is not enforceable under consumer law—it typically defaults to the builder’s defined life of the product or warranty period, which may be far less than a purchaser expects. The lack of included terms in the brochure is concerning.

4. Marketing Language Masquerading as Specification

Terms like “game-changing,” “stylish homes,” “affordable luxury,” “you’re in control,” and “Xpress yourself” create a sales narrative that is not reflected in the rigid structure of the product offering. In practice, the floor plans, colour palettes, and upgrades are locked into pre-set packages with limited customisation—contradicting the language of flexibility.

In Contrast to NCC/AS Language

• NCC and Australian Standards use precise, performance-based or deemed-to-satisfy language. For example:
  • “Minimum R-value of R2.0 for external walls”
  • “Waterproofing must extend a minimum of 150mm above the shower floor level”
  • “Balustrade must resist a minimum concentrated load of 0.6 kN applied at any point”

Simonds’ language is non-technical, vague, and discretionary, with significant reliance on undefined internal documents (“builder’s range,” “standard plans”) and fallback disclaimers that favour the builder.

Conclusion:

The language used across the Simonds documents lacks the clarity, precision, and enforceability of NCC or AS-aligned specifications. It creates room for contractual ambiguity, post-sale substitutions, and customer dissatisfaction if expectations are not managed carefully. Purchasers should request detailed annexes and material schedules at contract signing to protect themselves from assumptions hidden in vague terminology.

What They Say vs. What They Do

Simonds presents itself as a reliable, customer-focused builder with a legacy of 70+ years, backed by a “lifetime structural guarantee,” “guaranteed site start,” and “fixed price” promises. The marketing narrative is polished: empowered buyers, easy online selection, clear pricing, and quality homes. But when compared to documented specifications and publicly available consumer feedback, several contradictions emerge—along with risks that prospective buyers need to be aware of.

Discrepancies Between Claims and Reality

1. "Fixed Price" Contracts Are Not Truly Fixed The builder advertises “fixed price” house and land packages and claims “no hidden extras.” In practice, the price is only fixed after the buyer provides full land information, and Simonds completes a site assessment.
   This opens the door for: This isn’t unique to Simonds, but their language suggests certainty where none exists until post-deposit, increasing risk of contract price escalation.
   • Adjustments based on soil classification
   • Engineering changes (e.g. slab upgrades)
   • Developer guideline upgrades
   • Bushfire compliance upgrades (BAL ratings)
2. "Lifetime Structural Guarantee" Is Undefined The phrase is heavily promoted but no terms are provided in the marketing material or specification. The only direction is “see website for terms.” Without the actual definition:This creates an unrealistic sense of long-term security. In contrast, statutory builder warranties in Victoria under the Domestic Building Contracts Act only require 6 years coverage for structural defects.
   • “Lifetime” could mean 25 years or as little as 6–7 years depending on how Simonds defines the structure’s “useful life.”
   • No explanation of what's covered, what's excluded, how claims are assessed, or what the process is.
3. “Design Flexibility” and “Customisation” Are Misleading Simonds claims buyers can “tailor your home” and have “unprecedented control” via their online Xpress tool. However, the product offering is a selection of rigid floorplans and pre-set upgrade packs. Buyers are limited to:There is little to no real design flexibility outside of toggling pre-approved configurations. This is not true customisation.
   • A fixed range of facades
   • Six internal colour palettes
   • Pre-bundled upgrade options (e.g. Kitchen Pack A or B, Flooring Upgrade 1–4)
4. "Quality and Innovation" Claims Are Unsupported by Specification The base specification is minimal. Notable limitations: There’s no evidence of innovation or above-code performance in the base product.
   • 600mm appliances (low spec) unless upgraded
   • 2440mm ceiling height as standard—below modern expectations
   • Waffle slab (standard) with termite protection but no detail on inspection requirements or lifespan
   • Basic aluminium windows with no mention of double glazing
   • Evaporative cooling not included and only offered as an upgrade (problematic for bushfire zones and humid areas)
5. Online Sentiment Indicates Inconsistent Execution Public reviews across multiple forums (ProductReview, Trustpilot, and Google) indicate recurring problems with: These reviews are mixed, not universally negative, but the trend shows that marketing promises (like “peace of mind,” “confidence,” and “support”) often don’t align with site experience or customer care.
   • Poor site supervision and subcontractor quality
   • Lack of responsiveness during post-contract and build stages
   • Delays not clearly communicated
   • Build defects and poor post-handover service

Biggest Risks for Consumers

• Underestimating Final Cost: The advertised prices and base specs are misleading if buyers don’t fully understand the number of upgrades required to reach a modern finish. Costs can rise sharply.
• Poor Understanding of Warranty Limitations: “Lifetime” warranty language may cause consumers to skip due diligence. Without reading actual terms, they may overestimate post-build protection.
• Disappointment with Standard Inclusions: The base level inclusions are very basic. Many essentials (driveway, cooling, stone benchtops, tiles to full wet area walls) are add-ons.
• Substitute Products Without Approval: The builder reserves the right to change product types/models “to maintain quality” without buyer sign-off. This opens room for downgraded or alternate finishes with little recourse.
• Ambiguity in Contractual Language: Terms like “nominal,” “builder’s range,” “standard drawings,” and “illustrative only” are vague and shift interpretation power to the builder.

Specification Sections Prone to Issues

• Slab/Foundation Clause: “M class waffle slab, maximum 300mm fall and no existing fill.” Most blocks don’t meet this, which triggers cost escalation. Buyers often miss the fine print.
• Insulation and Energy Efficiency: Basic R2.0 wall and R3.5 ceiling insulation is minimum NCC-compliant, but not future-proof. No mention of 7-star NatHERS compliance or solar inclusions beyond hot water.
• Hot Water System: Solar with gas booster is included, but location of panels and tank is “at builder’s discretion,” which may impact usability or future roof solar options.
• Termite Protection: Reticulation system included but with no product name, service schedule, or inspection process detailed. Not aligned with AS 3660.1’s long-term management plan.
• Standard Electrical Layouts Not Provided: Only a verbal mention of “light points as per standard drawing.” Without this document, consumers have no visibility on where lights or power points are placed.

Conclusion:

Simonds’ promotional materials present a polished, buyer-friendly package. But the documentation and actual delivery model reveal a builder focused on scale, not precision. Many consumer protections are implied but not detailed, and the product leans heavily on up-selling to achieve a quality outcome. Buyers who don’t actively interrogate every part of their contract are likely to be caught off guard—either by price creep, limited flexibility, or disappointing inclusions.

Rating: 4.5 out of 10

Rationale:

• Ability to deliver on time:
  Simonds offers a “guaranteed site start” and advertises a 20-week build time for single-storey homes in the Xpress range. However, public feedback suggests frequent delays, particularly in site commencement, approvals, and variation handling. Timeframes appear aspirational rather than consistently achieved.
  Score: 5/10
• Ability to deliver to cost:
  The initial price often excludes essential items. “Fixed price” claims only apply after site evaluation, and upgrades are numerous and necessary to meet modern expectations. Many buyers report surprise increases after deposit or during the tender stage.
  Score: 4/10
• Consistency of high-quality work:
  Quality is inconsistent. The base specification meets minimum code but does not exceed it, and online reviews frequently cite workmanship issues (poor finishes, incorrect installations, service delays). Quality heavily depends on individual supervisors and subcontractors, which varies between regions and projects.
  Score: 4.5/10

Simonds delivers a volume-built, budget-conscious product. They have scale and established systems, but their marketing outpaces the delivery. Consumers should enter contracts with caution, firm documentation, and realistic expectations.