Operating-building due diligence in Bali

Where does review begin?

With an asset description and review purpose. Buying one apartment in a scheme, a villa with separate systems and a commercial unit call for different questions. Do not begin with an enormous list. First establish which systems, records and people actually affect your asset.

The short answer

Maintain three connected lines: inspection of actual condition; maintenance and incident history; and records plus roles of responsible parties. Every observation needs a source, date, boundary and next question. Then ‘building due diligence’ stops being a feeling of concern and becomes a decision memo.

1. Draw the operating map

List what the asset uses every day: water, power, drainage, access, parking, ventilation, pool, lifts, security, internet, common areas or separate systems. Beside each item, note who provides it, who maintains it and who sees the report history.

The map is not a decorative diagram. It shows where an asset depends on a scheme and where a problem may sit inside the unit itself. Without this boundary, it is easy to request data a manager does not hold or miss a system for which the owner is responsible.

2. A record and current condition answer different questions

PP 16/2021 provides a national framework for building administration. SIMBG describes PBG, SLF and building-data processes within its system. These sources help explain that formal records and statuses exist, but they do not by themselves prove the current condition of a selected system today.

That is why documents need an inspection and dated work history beside them. Inspection, in turn, needs the question of who explains what was repaired, what is being monitored and what fell outside scope. None of these lines should be presented as another.

3. Maintenance history matters more than a list of promises

Request not only ‘does everything work?’ but a history: which work was done, on which system, by whom, when a report was closed, which work remains and where that is supported. Absence of one universal log does not itself mean a problem; it means sources may be split among owner, manager and contractors.

Mark the history period separately. An old receipt does not say a point is closed today. A new promise does not explain what happened before it. A good register makes the gap between those two extremes visible.

4. A viewing needs questions, not only a ready camera

Before a visit, make a short route: access and approach; rooms and common areas; visible system elements; locations of past work; and things that should transfer to the buyer. A photograph is useful when it has date, place and question beside it, not as proof that a system works or fails.

If an observation arises during a viewing, do not turn it into a diagnosis. Record where it was seen, what was noticed, who can explain it, which record or professional is needed and whether it changes the decision now. This format preserves facts without pretending to be engineering expertise.

5. Finish with a decision register, not a verdict

Separate observations into confirmed, requiring a record, requiring professional inspection and immaterial for the chosen purpose. Give each an owner and next-action date. Then the buyer has not a dramatic risk list, but a clear answer: what is already supported, what can be agreed for closure and what should not be ignored.

Useful questions for a technical professional are concrete: what fell within the inspection; what did not; which records or measurements were used; which observations need further review; and what missing data means. This is stronger than asking ‘is this a good house?’.

Decision steps

1. Define purpose

   Name the asset, use scenario and questions on which the decision depends.

2. Build the systems map

   Mark systems, asset boundaries and data owner for each.

3. Request history

   Collect dated works, incidents, agreements and open reports by source.

4. Conduct viewing

   Record observations with place, date and next question without self-diagnosis.

5. Build the decision memo

   Separate what is supported, unknown and requiring professional review.

What to check

Sources

Next reading

In this section