New changes to regulations from 1st Sep dilemma

Shanry · 31-07-2015 9:57am #1

Hi
We're due to start building our 115m2 extension next week 4th Sep. We have an Engineer hired to certify all the works.
Can we cancel him now with the new changes?
It would be great to put the money to a better use!!

RORY O CONNOR · 31-07-2015 11:11pm

If you have him hired there may be an enforceable contract in place. You may be better to have some sort of supervision in place-perhaps you can revise the terms of your agreement and keep him on board for a lower fee

Gumbo · 01-08-2015 12:43am

Shanry wrote: »

Hi
We're due to start building our 115m2 extension next week 4th Sep. We have an Engineer hired to certify all the works.
Can we cancel him now with the new changes?
It would be great to put the money to a better use!!

Why would you cancel an engineer and supervision?
Who will then supervise the project?
Have you lodged a commencement notice?

And finally, have the DOE announced a September change yet?

BryanF · 01-08-2015 8:13am

Nothing has been changed yet - there was an article in a tabloid newspaper - that's all we have to go on

Edit: the DoE website quotes a government ministers intentionto amend si9 but no detail on this amendment and no fixed date has been set

Shanry · 01-08-2015 8:19am

Thanks for the replies guys.
I phoned my local TD after he announced it on radio and he confirmed it to me. Nothing in writing officially yet I know.
We have submitted the commencement notice.
We have an architect on site and he's been overseeing everything already, he also designed the plans so we're not without supervision.

DOCARCH · 01-08-2015 8:42am

Shanry wrote: »

We have submitted the commencement notice.

If you have already submitted your commencement notice, then you just need to keep moving on under SI9/BCAR.

lawred2 · 04-08-2015 3:19pm

What are these new Sep 1st regulations?

lawred2 · 04-08-2015 3:24pm

Shanry wrote: »

Hi
We're due to start building our 115m2 extension next week 4th Sep. We have an Engineer hired to certify all the works.
Can we cancel him now with the new changes?
It would be great to put the money to a better use!!

You're a month ahead of yourself...

Strolling Bones · 04-08-2015 4:17pm

Shanry wrote: »

It would be great to put the money to a better use!!

All that "book learning" sure is a waste of money ....

DOCARCH · 04-08-2015 4:46pm

lawred2 wrote: »

What are these new Sep 1st regulations?

Part N of the Building Regulations come into effect and every one off house/extension to an existing dwelling must be fitted with a disco ball.

lawred2 · 04-08-2015 4:53pm

DOCARCH wrote: »

Part N of the Building Regulations come into effect and every one off house/extension to an existing dwelling must be fitted with a disco ball.

Well it's about time we put some legislative framework around this stuff..

There's been cowboys neglecting this for years

DOCARCH · 04-08-2015 4:57pm

lawred2 wrote: »

What are these new Sep 1st regulations?

http://www.environ.ie/en/DevelopmentHousing/BuildingStandards/News/MainBody,42399,en.htm

Note the small print...alternative means of demonstrating compliance will be required if somebody chooses to 'opt-out'. What the manderins in the DECLG mean by this is anybody's guess!

Strolling Bones · 04-08-2015 5:21pm

It all tends to foster respect for the law.

No?

Gumbo · 04-08-2015 6:57pm

DOCARCH wrote: »

http://www.environ.ie/en/DevelopmentHousing/BuildingStandards/News/MainBody,42399,en.htm

Note the small print...alternative means of demonstrating compliance will be required if somebody chooses to 'opt-out'. What the manderins in the DECLG mean by this is anybody's guess!

I know from a BCO perspective a simple home owner stating yeah I built it this way will not be accepted.

For straight forward stuff maybe a visual confirmation but for any complex issues a demonstration of compliance will most likely be requested from somebody professionally qualified to offer that opinion.

Strolling Bones · 05-08-2015 9:09am

kceire wrote: »

I know from a BCO perspective a simple home owner stating yeah I built it this way will not be accepted.

You mean the powers conferred upon local authorities since the 1990 Building Control Act may actually be exercised ?
After all this time

Gumbo · 05-08-2015 11:03am

Strolling Bones wrote: »

You mean the powers conferred upon local authorities since the 1990 Building Control Act may actually be exercised ?
After all this time

In Dublin, they are exercised all the time

Maybe outside of the Capital, the LA's should beef up their patrols

No6 · 05-08-2015 12:19pm

DOCARCH wrote: »

http://www.environ.ie/en/DevelopmentHousing/BuildingStandards/News/MainBody,42399,en.htm

Note the small print...alternative means of demonstrating compliance will be required if somebody chooses to 'opt-out'. What the manderins in the DECLG mean by this is anybody's guess!

Here in australia there's a route to achive complaince with the regulations without complying with the Building Code of Australia, it is called an alternative solution and is always signed off by someone. Some are relatviely simple solutions to relatively simple problems but many involve fire engineered solutions, ie another professional putiing his PI on the line. If they adopt a similar approach in Ireland you may avoid on thing only to find the alternative is a lot worse! Beware.

civdef · 05-08-2015 2:44pm

Alternative means of compliance like that have been available here since the Building Regs were introduced.

stickybookmark · 05-08-2015 4:01pm

OP, do not start the build with an assigned certifier.

after your commencement notice has been lodged you have a 28 day day period. if your build hasn't commenced within this, then you have to file a new commencement notice .
wait til 28 days after your commencement notice was filed (which will be post 1st September so new changes will be in force)
then file a new commencement notice as soon as the 28 days are up (ringing up to cancel the old one)
then you can start without an assigned certifier. i have been working with one and it is a pain in the hole. because that person is going to be liable for your house for the rest of their days (regardless of house ownership) they have to be informed of every little thing - which leads to them cribbing about the project taking up too many hours and them having to bill you for more than the fixed price you agreed on at the start. things that the builder/project manager/client could ordinarily work out between them all have to be run past the AC because the AC has responsibility for the house for the rest of their life etc.
also in my case the AC has been ultra conservative in every aspect of the build so far - which has led to increased costs for me and also refusing to embrace new technology because it is not that well known (again ...because they are going to be tied to this house forever)
save yourself a lot of hassle now and nip this in the bud, the timing has suited you perfectly, you have a chance to opt out of a very cumbersome addition to your build

DOCARCH · 05-08-2015 4:16pm

stickybookmark wrote: »

then file a new commencement notice as soon as the 28 days are up (ringing up to cancel the old one)

Who told you/advised you that you can do this? Did you make that up?

stickybookmark · 05-08-2015 4:22pm

DOCARCH wrote: »

Who told you/advised you that you can do this? Did you make that up?

if you don't start building within 28 days you need to file a new commencement notice.
it says it on the bcms site under frequently asked questions

Gumbo · 05-08-2015 4:49pm

stickybookmark wrote: »

OP, do not start the build with an assigned certifier.

after your commencement notice has been lodged you have a 28 day day period. if your build hasn't commenced within this, then you have to file a new commencement notice .
wait til 28 days after your commencement notice was filed (which will be post 1st September so new changes will be in force)
then file a new commencement notice as soon as the 28 days are up (ringing up to cancel the old one)
then you can start without an assigned certifier. i have been working with one and it is a pain in the hole. because that person is going to be liable for your house for the rest of their days (regardless of house ownership) they have to be informed of every little thing - which leads to them cribbing about the project taking up too many hours and them having to bill you for more than the fixed price you agreed on at the start. things that the builder/project manager/client could ordinarily work out between them all have to be run past the AC because the AC has responsibility for the house for the rest of their life etc.
also in my case the AC has been ultra conservative in every aspect of the build so far - which has led to increased costs for me and also refusing to embrace new technology because it is not that well known (again ...because they are going to be tied to this house forever)
save yourself a lot of hassle now and nip this in the bud, the timing has suited you perfectly, you have a chance to opt out of a very cumbersome addition to your build

stickybookmark wrote: »

if you don't start building within 28 days you need to file a new commencement notice.
it says it on the bcms site under frequently asked questions

Minor thing but you cannot ring up and cancel a commencement notice.
Once it becomes valid it will remain valid for the rest of time. If you don't commence then yes you may need to lodge a new notice and then there will be 2 CN's attached to the property.

stickybookmark · 05-08-2015 4:59pm

kceire wrote: »

Minor thing but you cannot ring up and cancel a commencement notice.
Once it becomes valid it will remain valid for the rest of time. If you don't commence then yes you may need to lodge a new notice and then there will be 2 CN's attached to the property.

oh ok sorry. well just file a new one then and let the old one linger there

Gumbo · 05-08-2015 5:11pm

stickybookmark wrote: »

oh ok sorry. well just file a new one then and let the old one linger there

Yes. Entirely possible and does happen very often.

JonathonS · 06-08-2015 12:54am

DOCARCH wrote: »

http://www.environ.ie/en/DevelopmentHousing/BuildingStandards/News/MainBody,42399,en.htm

The press release continues:

Minister Coffey said “I am satisfied that the new arrangements will level the playing field for individuals and families planning to build or extend their own home. They will no longer be held to ransom by excessive quotes for design and completion certificates."

Outrageous insinuation.:rolleyes:

Gumbo · 10-08-2015 2:55pm

The Ammended Regulations will be in force by 1st September 2015.

overshoot · 11-08-2015 7:14pm

kceire wrote: »

The Ammended Regulations will be in force by 1st September 2015.

if only we knew what they were!

Gumbo · 11-08-2015 7:31pm

overshoot wrote: »

if only we knew what they were!

I know they will be. The SI should be released in the coming days.
I've seen the Draft Version.

Home Owners will have the option to opt out of the requirement to appoint an Assigned Certifier.

overshoot · 11-08-2015 7:41pm

kceire wrote: »

I know they will be. The SI should be released in the coming days.
I've seen the Draft Version.

Home Owners will have the option to opt out of the requirement to appoint an Assigned Certifier.

And the "alternative means of demonstrating compliance" aka new home of all the liability will be...?
Or the new fit for purpose inspection system will be?

Gumbo · 11-08-2015 7:46pm

overshoot wrote: »

And the "alternative means of demonstrating compliance" aka new home of all the liability will be...?

The liability will then rest 100% on the home owner, as it should be. If they choose to opt out of the mandatory certification process, then he/she will want to either appoint a competent person to supervise the works for him/her, supervise it themselves or trust the builder, or if he/she is building it themselves, then they better know what they are doing.

overshoot wrote: »

Or the new fit for purpose inspection system will be?

The current Inspection system here in Dublin is working very well, don't know what its like in the sticks though.

overshoot · 11-08-2015 8:04pm

Ok last question... The home owner demonstrates compliance by....?

Inspections... rare! But considering the ground they have to cover vs how many are in the department its no surprise. They also said they would be focusing a lot of their energies on the less reputable certifiers to put it one way...

Gumbo · 11-08-2015 9:15pm

overshoot wrote: »

Ok last question... The home owner demonstrates compliance by....?

Ask more questions, i've no problem answering them

Lets say Building Control pick a site for inspection that has no AC involved, then the home owner has to demonstrate compliance. If its a straight forward standard detail then he/she can use this as premafasia compliance.

If its something out of the ordinary, then they may have to engage an engineer/architect/technician/Part B Specialist/Part M Specialist/Part L Specialist or somebody competent in their field to prove compliance.

I expect that most people that opt out will not plow ahead without supervision, but instead with a Technician or an Engineer/Arch in a less involved role.

But bear in mind, if they opt of out an AC appointment, then the LA will not issue a Completion Cert and will note on the register that the dwelling/extension commenced without an AC.

overshoot wrote: »

Inspections... rare! But considering the ground they have to cover vs how many are in the department its no surprise. They also said they would be focusing a lot of their energies on the less reputable certifiers to put it one way...

Again, I cant answer for outside Dublin but I know the BCO's in Dublin City are inspection over 40% of CN's lodged.

overshoot · 11-08-2015 10:01pm

kceire wrote: »

But bear in mind, if they opt of out an AC appointment, then the LA will not issue a Completion Cert and will note on the register that the dwelling/extension commenced without an AC.

Basically the council are not taking any responsibility, much like BC(A)R put the liability for defects on someone else and away from the public purse. So the status quo will be Kelly's promised "fit for purpose."

Its the Compliance Cert im wondering about. Sort of sounds like they wont be obliged to demonstrate it without actually being asked. And given the typical Irish attitude....
Following from that, my guess is they can arrange whatever level of certification they want to pay for from their supervisor.... eg just the foundations.

It will be interesting to see if banks demand an AC. It could save them a lot of hassle down the line in the case of a default & repossession.

Strolling Bones · 12-08-2015 7:11am

overshoot wrote: »

Basically the council are not taking any responsibility, much like BC(A)R put the liability for defects on someone else and away from the public purse. So the status quo will be Kelly's promised "fit for purpose."

One off self builders will not pay the requsite fee(s) needed for a 3rd party to take on full responsibilty for thier house.

overshoot wrote: »

Its the Compliance Cert im wondering about. Sort of sounds like they wont be obliged to demonstrate it without actually being asked. And given the typical Irish attitude....
Following from that, my guess is they can arrange whatever level of certification they want to pay for from their supervisor.... eg just the foundations.

When selling they will need certification - that will not change.

overshoot wrote: »

It will be interesting to see if banks demand an AC. It could save them a lot of hassle down the line in the case of a default & repossession.

Banks make money by lending money first and foremost hoping not to lose any to bad debts. When it suits their needs they always find ways to not to lend and also when it suits they lend recklessly. This will not change over the long run.

In other words when over time the default position is established that the one off self building market reverts to the absolute minimum level of design, 3rd party inspection and supervision it can get away with , banks will serve that market.

.

No6 · 12-08-2015 10:03am

civdef wrote: »

Alternative means of compliance like that have been available here since the Building Regs were introduced.

I know I have used them in ireland, my point is however that alternative compliance has a tendency here in Australia to be a costly engineered solution, IMO it will be touted as a lower cost alternative that will end up in a lot of cases not being so.

Strolling Bones · 12-08-2015 10:15am

civdef wrote: »

Alternative means of compliance like that have been available here since the Building Regs were introduced.

Alternative means of compliance - with the requirements of the Technical Guidance Documents -have been available here since the Building Regs were introduced.

What is being proposed in this years tinkering with buildings and the law is alternative means of compliance with Building Control Regulations.

What words of clarity do we hope to see .....

Strolling Bones · 12-08-2015 10:19am

overshoot wrote: »

Ok last question... The home owner demonstrates compliance by....?

... producing some assembly of design documentation - drawings and calculations. They produce the documents themesleves or hire someone to do it for them.

I expect so anyway.

overshoot · 12-08-2015 10:39am

Strolling Bones wrote: »

... producing some assembly of design documentation - drawings and calculations. They produce the documents themesleves or hire someone to do it for them.

I expect so anyway.

sorry, thus why i was asking what, if anything would they be obligated to show before being asked. Sorry just the pessimist in me sees a return to building of planning drawings and worry about how they demonstrate it if they are ever inspected. Especially if no one is asking for a certificate of compliance.
and kceire id be surprised to hear of inspections on 4 projects a year, never mind 40%!

Strolling Bones · 12-08-2015 10:44am

overshoot wrote: »

sorry, thus why i was asking what, if anything would they be obligated to show before being asked.

we have to wait and see what the annual tinker-with-regs document says.

Gumbo · 12-08-2015 10:44am

overshoot wrote: »

sorry, thus why i was asking what, if anything would they be obligated to show before being asked. Sorry just the pessimist in me sees a return to building of planning drawings and worry about how they demonstrate it if they are ever inspected. Especially if no one is asking for a certificate of compliance.

Thats why we do not like the new regulations. It will bring back the planning drawing builder, and they may only get supervision if/when inspected or when something goes wrong.

overshoot wrote: »

and kceire id be surprised to hear of inspections on 4 projects a year, never mind 40%!

As i said, thats Dublin, where you are based, there may be alot less inspections.They are official figures released to the DOE for Q2.

MC Goggin · 12-08-2015 7:45pm

"But bear in mind, if they opt of out an AC appointment, then the LA will not issue a Completion Cert and will note on the register that the dwelling/extension commenced without an AC"

....................so?

sydthebeat · 12-08-2015 7:56pm

MC Goggin wrote: »

"But bear in mind, if they opt of out an AC appointment, then the LA will not issue a Completion Cert and will note on the register that the dwelling/extension commenced without an AC"

....................so?

the repercussions of this will be bourne out by the market

i think its very logical to predict the market will see no AC = devalued dwelling

Gumbo · 12-08-2015 9:04pm

MC Goggin wrote: »

"But bear in mind, if they opt of out an AC appointment, then the LA will not issue a Completion Cert and will note on the register that the dwelling/extension commenced without an AC"

....................so?

You registered here just to say that?

*May also mean registered a second username.

Strolling Bones · 12-08-2015 9:36pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

the repercussions of this will be bourne out by the market

i think its very logical to predict the market will see no AC = devalued dwelling

We shall have to wait and see. I think no AC will be the default mode the majority option. The minority of houses with an AC appointed might command a premium. Maybe.

Gumbo · 13-08-2015 12:17am

Strolling Bones wrote: »

We shall have to wait and see. I think no AC will be the default mode the majority option. The minority of houses with an AC appointed might command a premium. Maybe.

I think as long as you have some sort of supervision, and some sort of quantifiable certificate afterwards, I think future buyers will be happy enough.

stickybookmark · 13-08-2015 8:06pm

The BCMS system will still be used from 1st September but when submitting a commencement notice there will be the option to opt out of the AC part.
I assume though if the owner gets an engineer to do a cert of compliance with planning at the end of the build (necessary for Land Registry and for Planning office or else you can never sell) that this cert will be accepted and filed into the BCMS system?

Gumbo · 13-08-2015 8:15pm

stickybookmark wrote: »

The BCMS system will still be used from 1st September but when submitting a commencement notice there will be the option to opt out of the AC part.
I assume though if the owner gets an engineer to do a cert of compliance with planning at the end of the build (necessary for Land Registry and for Planning office or else you can never sell) that this cert will be accepted and filed into the BCMS system?

I think if you opt out of the AC network, there will be no future involvement with the BCMS. so no need to upload documentation, no completion documents and no completion certificate.

The home owner opted to go at it alone, so it's ups the then to be happy basically, and rightly so in my opinion.

stickybookmark · 13-08-2015 8:19pm

kceire wrote: »

I think if you opt out of the AC network, there will be no future involvement with the BCMS. so no need to upload documentation, no completion documents and no completion certificate.

The home owner opted to go at it alone, so it's ups the then to be happy basically, and rightly so in my opinion.

But pre Bcar you still had to submit a cert of compliance with planning if you wanted to register ownership with the Land resgistry and if you wanted your house to be sellable.

It's hardly the case that from 1st Sept anyone that opts out of AC will have no mechanism by which they can register a cert of compliance with planning at the end of the build and therefore make their house sellable??

Gumbo · 13-08-2015 8:23pm

stickybookmark wrote: »

But pre Bcar you still had to submit a cert of compliance with planning if you wanted to register ownership with the Land resgistry and if you wanted your house to be sellable.

It's hardly the case that from 1st Sept anyone that opts out of AC will have no mechanism by which they can register a cert of compliance with planning at the end of the build and therefore make their house sellable??

You didn't have to submit anything of the sort to any local authority.
Before BCAR, the certificate of compliance remained with the owner. They may have had to be submitted to the banks for final payment or mortgage draw down but The council did not require a copy of any certification.

Gumbo · 13-08-2015 8:58pm

stickybookmark wrote: »

Ah ok. I just assumed you had to send it into the planning office/council to show you had complied with planning.

Nope, never a requirement.

sydthebeat · 13-08-2015 9:05pm

The pre bcar system was "do i really have to send a commencement notice in? .... I won't bother"

I predict this will become common place again.

New changes to regulations from 1st Sep dilemma

Comments