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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
BER / DEAP / Draft Part L
-
20-11-2007 11:38pm#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
[QUOTE
It's to these details that our new draft Part L consultation document refers - and guess what - they're in the process of being updated in the UK - it's always good to know we're ahead of the game![/QUOTE]
Hi A1
Can you clarify - The accredited details were only published in July 07 - are they outdated already ?
When are we likely to see them updated ? 0 -
[QUOTE
It's to these details that our new draft Part L consultation document refers - and guess what - they're in the process of being updated in the UK - it's always good to know we're ahead of the game!
Hi A1
Can you clarify - The accredited details were only published in July 07 - are they outdated already ?When are we likely to see them updated ?[/QUOTE]
The accredited details were available way before july, they were for use in the Eng & Wales 2005 revision of Part L (This was similar to our 2006 Part L)
Our draft Part L aims at a 40% improvement on those standards - the UKs target for 2010 - part of which involved redrawing all the OLD details - should have a draft copy of them this month - aim is to improve the Y value from the 0.08 to 0.04.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
BFH you got it in one
I have been rebuffed elsehwere for suggesting that the cert may expect to be used by some to indicate fuel cost prediction ( hold your horses mods- I know it's not intended to do this - fuel cost will depend on size of house and occupier behaviour , severity of winter season etc etc) .
My point is that Joe Public will be pretty pissed off to pay for something that he probably believes he has a reasoable feel for anyway . 1950's semi d- bad 1990's semi not so bad . He will resent having to get the lable and ( mark my words ) many will feel pee'd off that it is not "even" a fuel cost predictor . He won't accept the speil that is "informing" him . I don't think so anyway .
( I have posted this on another forum before - sorry if you have heard me say this already )
Specifically re BER I see trouble ahead on numerous counts . ( 2009 onwards mostly )
Scenario 1a
Landlord sends in 3 BER assessors , pays for the "correct" result and two fingers to the guys who got it "wrong" .
Scenrio 1b
Really scummy landlords will make tenants pay for the cert ( do you really think this wont happen - come on )
Scenario 2
Big business sues assessor for screwing up property deal for getting assessment "wrong"
Scenario 3
Developer cherry picks "pet" assessors who get it "right" . Developer cherry picks sample units for testing , where extra attention required for air tightness has been carried out . Developer will have "pet " air testers too ( No regulation of testers is included in Draft Part L . Nothing to stop Joe the barman/mini cab driver becoming a tester )
Scenario 4 - the big one - as above
General public (mis) apprehension that BER cert won't actually predict actual fuel spend - reaction - "so what am I paying for then" - Call Joe Duffy now . Fat Kenny "exposes" scam on late late Show . Then again with mis diagnosed cancer patients , big pay rises for the big lads while the ecomony dips for the rest of us and a "wag the dog" style chrisis is manufactued ( prov licenes ) , I guess people will just do the Irish thing - accept it
Ok rant over
0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
If you are trying to quote from multiple sources, click theMellor - how do you do this multi quote thing?
button in each message then reply with 
but I think you already did that above.
I think you may be refering to the posts where a large post is separated into multiple quote boxes to reply to comment individually.
In that case, quote as normal, but separate each section you want to reply to. highlight each section one at a time, then click the
button, this wraps
tags around the text. You can also manually type this text in.
It should look something like so:[ QUOTE]first quote section[ /QUOTE] [COLOR="Red"]Your text here[/COLOR] [ QUOTE]second quote section[ /QUOTE] [COLOR="red"]your text here[/COLOR]
Hope that helps,0 -
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Try multi quoting the last three posts. Hit this yoke on all three and on the last of the three, click this boyo .
You will the see all three quotes as Mellor said earlier like this...[ QUOTE]first quote section[ /QUOTE] [COLOR=black][B]Post your comment here [/B][/COLOR] [ QUOTE]second quote section[ /QUOTE] [COLOR=black][B]Post your comment here[/B][/COLOR] [ QUOTE]third quote section[ /QUOTE] [COLOR=black][B]Post your comment here [/B][/COLOR]
Try it and see, if it doesn't work, I'll edit it.0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
That may soon change.sydthebeat wrote: »The specific profession that is educated to a high level in building regulations are Architectural Technician / Technologists. This profession has no statutory recognition in Ireland and thus has no power to sign certs.
0 -
-
I agree that this is unfair, and for the record many of us around here are hit by this one. Although that said many ATs are in a position to sign of on work through conditions you posted,sydthebeat wrote: »The specific profession that is educated to a high level in building regulations are Architectural Technician / Technologists. This profession has no statutory recognition in Ireland and thus has no power to sign certs.
Because they are separate issues. In theory a building could achieve pass through a BER/DEAP calc even though it fails Part L. It won't comply with building regs as it fails. It has to pass them both, passing the first doesn't override part L. The reason they are not linked is because part L only applies to new builds, BER applies to all housing stock.The BER and DEAP software will give calculations to show whether a building complies with Part L in both elemental and overall u values, and compliance with MPCDER. However my problem is that these calculations hold no weight whatsoever. The building may be shown by calculation to fail compliance, yet the building may already be certified to say it does comply... that my main issue....
Why isn't compliance with Part L statutorily connected to the BER??? That would make a mountain of sense..... a print out of the calculations can be included to compliance and included in the certification package.
My point is that many architects do not understand part L, the ones that don't know don't need to for various reasons. On a large job it is impossible for a single person to know for sure that every aspect of a job is in compliance. The team must do it as a team. Consider a fire cert to comply with part B, on a large job a consultant FC engineer might carry out the work and return it. The project leader signs off on the work compling with the regs (even though he can't possibably check the FC).perhaps you have a different take on this Mellor, are you saying that you dont think the actual 'certifiers' need to know what they are certifying once 'someone else in the design team does'..??? Id love to see that one go to court.....
fingers crossedThat may soon change.
0 -
-
Because they are separate issues. In theory a building could achieve pass through a BER/DEAP calc even though it fails Part L. It won't comply with building regs as it fails. It has to pass them both, passing the first doesn't override part L. The reason they are not linked is because part L only applies to new builds, BER applies to all housing stock.
fingers crossed
DEAP is the methodology for demostrating compliance with Part L
DEAP is also the methodology for determining a BER label classification .
The lable classification just "is" i.e. no pass / fail per se . After 2009 all buildings ( whatever the Part L compliance status ) will have to be labled at point of sale or letting . So plenty of Grade D E F classications will issue .
Oh what fun will we have when buildings recently certified with compliance with Part L say in 2003/4/5 are found by BER cert classications not to .
Most busy one / two man bands who's skills and time are stretched over all building matters ( design , planning , fire , structure ,drainage , contracts , tendering , etc.... ) will have been certing compliance ( with respect to Part L ) on the basis of elemental u values and % glazing and stop at that .These guys will typically have busted a gut to acheive even that with contractors . ( See thread on "look what developers are up to" ) I hope there is not too much pain ahead , for anyone .
Our lack of Local Authority regulation ( UK style ) has allowed this to happen.
In the absence of that system not appearing here anytime soon I beleive the wise course of action for any small practice is to develop a good working relationship with a good BER assesor . The knowledge gap has widened to require this I would say .
( I am sure Mellor you meant to say Draft Part L applies only to new builds , whereas Part L 2005 applies to all building types . )0 -
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
Advertisement