A warning to prospective customers – 4 months without permanent rectification Almost five months after Mainmark’s resin was found blocking approximately 9–10 metres of my stormwater drainage, I still have a substantial trench and temporary pipe beside my house, no complete written rectification plan, and have now received a Deed of Release materially inconsistent with what I was previously told. I engaged Mainmark earlier this year to undertake Teretek re-levelling work at my property. Subsequent to the works being completed, a blockage was identified in my stormwater drainage. A licensed plumber found polyurethane resin used during Mainmark’s work completely blocking approximately 9–10 metres of stormwater pipe. Seeking to resolve the immediate risks of this issue, I contracted a licensed plumber at my own expense to address the immediate problem, requiring excavation of the impacted pipework, removal of the concrete path above the piping, and removal of the affected drainage. Initial costs relating to issue identification and initial temporary remediation ($10,214.60) were already well in excess of the payment to Mainmark for its works ($6,737.50). I formally notified Mainmark in May while the plumber was on site removing the affected pipework. Mainmark inspected the property in June and arranged a further plumbing inspection in July. However, promised response dates repeatedly passed and no complete rectification plan was provided in writing. After more than two months, I lodged a complaint with the QBCC because it had become clear to me that the matter was unlikely to be resolved without independent QBCC involvement. In late August, after notifying Mainmark that I had made a submission to the QBCC, I was told that Mainmark would reimburse costs I had already paid and arrange reinstatement of the plumbing, side path and front garden, with only the impact to the retaining wall remaining disputed. I was therefore extremely surprised to receive an already signed Deed of Release from Mainmark in mid-September, that offered only reimbursement of the cost of these initial repair works. Those costs related solely to the immediate removal of the affected pipework and installation of a temporary drainage pipe which were undertaken months ago. As I read it, the deed instead sought a very broad release relating to Mainmark’s work, including future claims, and imposed confidentiality and non-disparagement obligations. It also appeared capable of affecting the outstanding rectification issues and ongoing QBCC complaint. This was materially different from what had previously been explained to me, and I will not be signing it. For approximately 4 months now, I have had a significant open trench running down the side of my house, together with temporary stormwater arrangements. Despite the time that has passed, I have no confidence that Mainmark will provide a timely and satisfactory solution to the issue resulting from its work. My experience has been prolonged, inconsistent and deeply frustrating. What appeared to be progress towards rectification has instead gone backwards. Based on the way this matter has been handled, I cannot recommend Mainmark.