Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Steps in self building

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Johnnyhpipe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 748 ✭✭✭Johnnyhpipe


    ronnick wrote: »
    kkelliher and byran f - since ye are the experts answer this scenario for us all please - I decide to go down the MC route and appoint one. The MC comes to me and says hey we have an in-house assigned certifier and we can look after that for you also. Sounds good. The builder takes some short cuts during the build and neither the architect or I notice these and they are covered up. Job complete and a year later we pay the retention to the MC and the following week the MC goes /quote]

    I recall a UK case in the past where there was a competent main contractor, competent subbies, an architect, civil/struct eng and mechanical eng. There were problems with the M&E side of things after a year or so and in the meantime the contractor, the M&E subbie, the architect and M&E engineer went bust. The client took it to court and the judge decided that the civil/struct engineer's insurance should foot the bill because he's the only remaining member of the design team left standing, he has insurance and the client should not be put out of pocket..

    I don't expect that any judge would have the same sympathy for someone who takes a fundamental shortcut by appointing themselves as the main contractor...


  • Options
    #33
    4Sticks
    Registered Users Posts: 1,155 ✭✭✭4Sticks


    ronnick wrote: »
    I decide to go down the MC route and appoint one. The MC comes to me and says hey we have an in-house assigned certifier and we can look after that for you also. Sounds good. The builder takes some short cuts during the build and neither the architect or I notice these and they are covered up. Job complete and a year later we pay the retention to the MC and the following week the MC goes burst. Then the problems with the house start to arise. Who's insurance do I claim off??

    The architect. Always the architect.
    plus ça change


  • Options
    #34
    4Sticks
    Registered Users Posts: 1,155 ✭✭✭4Sticks


    ronnick wrote: »
    Why do I need to set up a limited company? Yes my architect is willing to sign off the work. As part of the assigned certifier he has to make numerous visits to site to view the work. I have a construction back ground. If I go down the self build route I will be hiring competent subcontractors to carry out the work.

    Fast foward 10 years. The architect now lives in Canada or Australia or for other reasons is simply not around.

    You have the house sold. The new owner encounters defects. He has building regulations certifications signed by you as builder - and further your signature as owner declaring your self competent.

    Who will the new guy sue ?


  • Options
    #35
    Drift
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,395 ✭✭✭Drift


    Johnnyhpipe wrote: »
    I recall a UK case in the past where there was a competent main contractor, competent subbies, an architect, civil/struct eng and mechanical eng. There were problems with the M&E side of things after a year or so and in the meantime the contractor, the M&E subbie, the architect and M&E engineer went bust. The client took it to court and the judge decided that the civil/struct engineer's insurance should foot the bill because he's the only remaining member of the design team left standing, he has insurance and the client should not be put out of pocket..

    It's scary - We've been warned many times that once you are part of a design team a court will find you just as responsible as any other member of the team regardless of your part in any error. It's a very "pro-consumer" approach and if I spent too long considering the implications it would keep me awake at night.

    Also in recent public jobs in which we've been involved it has been further emphasised by each consultant's contract having a "Joint and Several" liability clause. We've had to provide a letter from our insurers confirming they cover this.


  • Options
    #36
    Drift
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,395 ✭✭✭Drift


    4Sticks wrote: »
    Who will the new guy sue ?

    1. The consumer's solicitor will recommend that he sue everybody.

    2. All the sued parties' solicitors will then recommend that they individually sue each other.

    3. Then all the parties without insurance will claim inability to pay (and declare bankruptcy if necessary).

    4. Then the remaining sued parties, who have insurance, will share the liability via some ratio worked out by the insurers representatives.

    5. The whole thing will probably be sorted before it gets in front of a judge. The consumer will almost certainly get some money and costs. The insured parties will have to pay an excess and their premium will increase. The uninsured parties may declare bankruptcy (or may not even have to!). The people who make the most money will be the legal representatives of all sides.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    4Sticks
    Registered Users Posts: 1,155 ✭✭✭4Sticks


    True Drift but to ronnick who is positing that there will simply be him as self builder and the architect , I was asking him to reflect on that.
    ( in terms of certification it will only be him and the architect)

    I am not knocking ronnick here or anyone else. Just trying to draw attention to one vital thing - the govt have set citizen against citizen here with this new legislation.

    In future when faced with new pyrites / Priory Hall hogans new law simply make it much easier for the state not to invlolve itself.


  • Options
    #38
    Drift
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,395 ✭✭✭Drift


    4Sticks wrote: »
    In future when faced with new pyrites / Priory Hall hogans new law simply make it much easier for the state not to invlolve itself.

    That's the whole reason the new legislation was written. Total scam.


  • Options
    #39
    4Sticks
    Registered Users Posts: 1,155 ✭✭✭4Sticks


    Drift wrote: »
    It's a very "pro-consumer" approach

    Only superficailly. Without a warranty fund for consumers to access in compensation they only get to bankrupt others whilst in all probability not even obtaining adequate compensation for themselves.

    It would be better described as "a very pro Official Ireland" approach as that is what is protected most.


  • Options
    #40
    Drift
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,395 ✭✭✭Drift


    4Sticks wrote: »
    Only superficailly. Without a warranty fund for consumers to access in compensation they only get to bankrupt others whilst in all probability not even obtaining adequate compensation for themselves


    True, but for those of us who keep and maintain adequate insurance it means we end up paying out even when the fault lies elsewhere. So essentially the insurance companies are acting as the fund and our insurance premia are financing said fund.

    I'd have no problem at all with this system if it wasn't for the number of "cowboys" who don't have insurance and hit for the hills the second there is a claim.


  • Options
    #41
    calum22
    Registered Users Posts: 23 ✭calum22


    One of the SelfBuild shows would be perfect for you. Every question answered in one place. There is one coming up in Dublin in September. I have my ticket already, free consultation is hard to beat really


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    ronnick
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭ronnick


    Johnnyhpipe wrote: »
    ronnick wrote: »
    kkelliher and byran f - since ye are the experts answer this scenario for us all please - I decide to go down the MC route and appoint one. The MC comes to me and says hey we have an in-house assigned certifier and we can look after that for you also. Sounds good. The builder takes some short cuts during the build and neither the architect or I notice these and they are covered up. Job complete and a year later we pay the retention to the MC and the following week the MC goes /quote]

    I recall a UK case in the past where there was a competent main contractor, competent subbies, an architect, civil/struct eng and mechanical eng. There were problems with the M&E side of things after a year or so and in the meantime the contractor, the M&E subbie, the architect and M&E engineer went bust. The client took it to court and the judge decided that the civil/struct engineer's insurance should foot the bill because he's the only remaining member of the design team left standing, he has insurance and the client should not be put out of pocket..



    I don't expect that any judge would have the same sympathy for someone who takes a fundamental shortcut by appointing themselves as the main contractor...

    Johnnyhpipe if the architect goes burst then he is still personally liable and the court can go after his personal assists!


  • Options
    #43
    ronnick
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭ronnick


    4Sticks wrote: »
    True Drift but to ronnick who is positing that there will simply be him as self builder and the architect , I was asking him to reflect on that.
    ( in terms of certification it will only be him and the architect)

    I am not knocking ronnick here or anyone else. Just trying to draw attention to one vital thing - the govt have set citizen against citizen here with this new legislation.

    In future when faced with new pyrites / Priory Hall hogans new law simply make it much easier for the state not to invlolve itself.

    Look you are all assuming that there will be a major feck up on site. I'm building this house for my family and whoever gets it once I'm gone to live in for the next 100years so why would I not ensure that the house is built properly. If I go down the self build route then I will build the house to the regs and drawings. I do understand the regs and I know how to read drawings! I'm not a "cowboy" like some of the main contractors who built these problem estates and I have no intention of taking short cuts. Its only a two storey house and not a 44 storey apartment block!


  • Options
    #44
    kkelliher
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators Posts: 1,583 Mod ✭✭✭✭kkelliher


    ronnick wrote: »
    Johnnyhpipe wrote: »

    Johnnyhpipe if the architect goes burst then he is still personally liable and the court can go after his personal assists!

    only if he is a sole trader. you will find most are now companies and therefore its unlikely there would be anything to go after.


  • Options
    #45
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,144 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    ronnick wrote: »
    Its only a two storey house and not a 44 storey apartment block!

    in a lot of cases, there is more co-ordination of trades in a two storey one off dwelling than there is in a modular 44 apartment block.
    Apartment blocks are simple repetition.

    one off dwellings need site specific decisions to be made daily, with the resultant knock on effects to be considered.

    if you believe house building is not difficult, then you do not have sufficient experience.


  • Options
    #46
    ronnick
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭ronnick


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    in a lot of cases, there is more co-ordination of trades in a two storey one off dwelling than there is in a modular 44 apartment block.
    Apartment blocks are simple repetition.

    one off dwellings need site specific decisions to be made daily, with the resultant knock on effects to be considered.

    if you believe house building is not difficult, then you do not have sufficient experience.

    I'm not questioning anyone else's experience here so DONT question mine! I know all about coordination between the trades as I do it on a daily basis. You must be building very complicated houses that you need to make site specific decisions on a daily basis.


  • Options
    #47
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,144 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    ronnick wrote: »
    I'm not questioning anyone else's experience here so DONT question mine! I know all about coordination between the trades as I do it on a daily basis. You must be building very complicated houses that you need to make site specific decisions on a daily basis.

    unless you are a building contractor, dont claim to be something your not, and dont assume things.

    youve already inferred that your not a contractor.

    and yes, decisions are made on a daily basis on a building site which have knock on effects.


  • Options
    #48
    ronnick
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭ronnick


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    unless you are a building contractor, dont claim to be something your not, and dont assume things.

    youve already inferred that your not a contractor.

    and yes, decisions are made on a daily basis on a building site which have knock on effects.

    I'm not a building contractor. You don't have to be a building contractor to be involved in the construction of dwellings from start to finish. What did I assume?

    I suggest you hire a competent architect who will discuss the project in detail with you pre tender stage, make your decisions then and draw construction drawings to suit and then there should be very little DAILY decisions to be made on site. If you fail to prepare then prepare to fail!


  • Options
    #49
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,144 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    ronnick wrote: »
    I'm not a building contractor. You don't have to be a building contractor to be involved in the construction of dwellings from start to finish. What did I assume?

    well when you sign the builders certificate, nomimating yourself as the builder, and state your the principle of a building company....

    you ARE assuming your a building contractor..... or have you missed the whole point ???


  • Options
    #50
    ronnick
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭ronnick


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    well when you sign the builders certificate, nomimating yourself as the builder, and state your the principle of a building company....

    you ARE assuming your a building contractor..... or have you missed the whole point ???

    who got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning? in actual fact I think it is you who have missed the whole point! If you read the thread from the start you will see that I confirmed that you can actually nominate yourself as the builder which another person queried. I didn't say that I was nominating myself. I stated in another thread that there are benefits for appointing a MC.


  • Options
    #51
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,144 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    ronnick wrote: »
    who got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning? in actual fact I think it is you who have missed the whole point! If you read the thread from the start you will see that I confirmed that you can actually nominate yourself as the builder which another person queried. I didn't say that I was nominating myself. I stated in another thread that there are benefits for appointing a MC.

    you cannot confirm that.

    legal advise to the contrary is available.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    ronnick
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭ronnick


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    you cannot confirm that.

    legal advise to the contrary is available.

    I can confirm that! and I did. You can until some date in 2015. I'd check your source because you obviously don't know what you are on about even though you like to think you do. go to bed early tonight I'd say


  • Options
    #53
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,144 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    ronnick wrote: »
    I can confirm that! and I did. You can until some date in 2015. I'd check your source because you obviously don't know what you are on about even though you like to think you do. go to bed early tonight I'd say

    youve confirmed nothing !!

    you should actually go read the iasob information. not only have they advise from europe stating that self-building is NOT an automatic citizen right, they also have information from a solicitor who wrote the article to SCSI stating that in the main self -builders will be unable to state that they are competent.

    so, if you want to confirm its possible put up or shut up and produce the legal proof.


  • Options
    #54
    kkelliher
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators Posts: 1,583 Mod ✭✭✭✭kkelliher


    gents lets keep it nice and on topic and not get into unnecessary heated argument or the thread will close


  • Options
    #55
    ronnick
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭ronnick


    kkelliher wrote: »
    gents lets keep it nice and on topic and not get into unnecessary heated argument or the thread will close

    agreed


  • Options
    #56
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,144 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Still waiting on your legal proof ronnick......


  • Options
    #57
    W123-80's
    Registered Users Posts: 2,075 ✭✭✭W123-80's


    Hello all,
    I'll give my tuppence worth.
    I'm considering a self build. Not fully decided yet.
    I spoke to a reputable engineer who will be looking after the drawings and PP application for me. He has confirmed that he will sign off on a self build for a fee should I opt for that route. I would be signing as the main contractor.

    In terms of a building background, I have no real experience myself apart from harmless labouring on various other family/friends self builds. I have three family members who have all completed self builds and are all living within a half a mile so plenty of advise and help available.

    I also intend to get prices from contractors to see if a self build will be worth it.

    I am not sure what the big issue all of a sudden is with a self build. Surely like any other project there are steps and checks along the way.
    The build would be off plans. I have an engineer willing and certified to sign off.
    To borrow a famous phrase 'What can go wrong'...:pac:

    None of the self builds I have helped out on over the last 10 years or so have fallen down yet.!

    I should mention this will be a main family residence. Not for selling on. Ever.!

    From a non expert point of view, there appears to be alot of muddying the water going on and an awful lot of scaremongering in relation to self builds. Apart from additional paperwork and physical checks surely a Self build house is no more complicated today than it was last year?

    I expect people to scoff at my mention of help from family who have already completed self builds as they are not qualified professionals. But surely the engineer is my qualified proffessional. Checking each stage of the project.

    So if I am happy, the engineer is happy, the paperwork is filled, what is the problem?


  • Options
    #58
    DOCARCH
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 17,774 Mod ✭✭✭✭DOCARCH


    W123-80's wrote: »
    ...what is the problem?

    Problem is that you have to sign a statutory/legal document that you are the principal or director of a building company.

    Have a look here: http://www.iaosb.com/the_two_main_problems_that_self_builders_are_facing_following_the_commencement_of_%20s.i_9_on_1st_of_march_2014.html

    Sounds like you have 'Problem 2' solved...so fair play on that front (and to your willing engineer). :)


  • Options
    #59
    W123-80's
    Registered Users Posts: 2,075 ✭✭✭W123-80's


    DOCARCH wrote: »
    Problem is that you have to sign a statutory/legal document that you are the principal or director of a building company.

    Have a look here: http://www.iaosb.com/the_two_main_problems_that_self_builders_are_facing_following_the_commencement_of_%20s.i_9_on_1st_of_march_2014.html

    Sounds like you have 'Problem 2' solved...so fair play on that front (and to your willing engineer). :)

    Fair enough.
    To be honest once I get me figures in order and have a better idea of self build Vs Contractor, if that document is all that is stopping me building the family home I'll sign away.!

    It appears to be one big legal mumbo jumbo mess.


  • Options
    #60
    DOCARCH
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 17,774 Mod ✭✭✭✭DOCARCH


    W123-80's wrote: »
    It appears to be one big legal mumbo jumbo mess.

    Can't disagree with you on that one!

    As far as I am concerned, this measure is as much about tax collection as protecting the self builder from themselves!!!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,144 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    W123-80's wrote: »
    So if I am happy, the engineer is happy, the paperwork is filled, what is the problem?

    ever project begins with everyone happy :D

    not every project ends with everyone happy, be it immediately or 5, 10, 15 years down the line.

    say your engineer dies suddenly straight after, and alas something happens which means you must sell.
    If a problem arose say a year into the new occupier which was serious and structural, who gets sued?
    you have signed the builders cert to say you are competent.... you are then the "last man standing" therefore the target is firmly on you.
    As you are not a professional builder you cannot obtain professional indemnity insurance. This means that YOU can be personally sued for all your personal value.

    this may be hypothetical, but its possible.

    Self-builders have found themselves in the middle of a mess that wasnt of their making.

    But ignoring the mess by burying the head in the sand is a serious mistake.


Advertisement