200mm of wool between rafters

Chris Arch

I was called to deliver an opinion for compliance in relation to an attic conversion and a single storey extension exempt from planning permission.

I found that the attic was converted using 200mm of wool compressed between the 50x150mm rafters with a skimmed pasterboard covering internaly.

The rafters are not ventilated, there is no breather membrane. The builder is telling me that he insulated attics this way all his life. I think that he should have stopped since part L of the building regulations from 2002.

There was no architect or designer involved with the project, but the bank wants a cert to release the final payment.

I guess that they will find someone else to certify the work, dispite the non compliance with TGD L and F... But I am wondering who is at fault here. Is it the client who should have appointed a competent professional or the builder who should comply with the building regs despite the absence of design. The fact is that both of them claim ignorance...

sinnerboy

Building owners are primarily responsible to ensure that works they commission are compliant .

Chris Arch

Ok Thanks,

your statement is true for developments non exempted from planning permission, but for exempted developments, don't you think that the builder should ask for a designer to be appointed if he is not sure of what he is doing? Because honestly, in most of the cases it is the builder who convince the clients that a designer is not necessary.

Chris Arch

Another point, which gives me doubts on where the responsibility lies, is that there is no information available for consumers on this matter.

Many of them are told that there is no need for planning permission for some developments and then they understand that there is no need for an architect or any one else... The builder is aware of the procedure and should honestly inform the clients if he needs someone to help him out... They generally do not do so because they prefer cut corners and maximise their profit. Why should the consumers be responsible for that?

Poor Uncle Tom

When I buy a car I presume that the car has passed some set of minimum standards in order for the salesman to sell it to me for use here. If I am stopped by a Garda for, say, defective lights, who gets fined?

In the same way, ultimately it's the responsibility of the house owner to ensure their house complies with the Building Regulations when any works are being carried out. It should also follow that any person got to do work on the house should be competent and capable of doing the works and responsible for the standard of works and workmanship carried out. After all it is not necessary for every householder doing works to know all the Building Regulations. However, anybody physically doing those works should have a very good knowledge of the Regulations or, they should know who to ask if they don't know.

'I've always done it this way' is not a defence and it will not stand up.

sydthebeat

you are being engaged to certify compliance, so its up to you to let the client know what complies and what does not. Developments exempt from planning are not exempt from building regs.

you can give a qualified certificate, but id be very surprised if the banks solicitors would accept it.

Chris Arch

sydthebeat wrote: »

you are being engaged to certify compliance, so its up to you to let the client know what complies and what does not. Developments exempt from planning are not exempt from building regs.

you can give a qualified certificate, but id be very surprised if the banks solicitors would accept it.

Hi Sydthebeat,

I have issued certs for the last 6 years giving details of my experience, PI insurance and qualifications; they were never refused neither by banks nor solicitors. I have issued certificates this year and last year without any problem so far. However I am concerned that as soon as the registration procedure will be fully in place it will become an issue. The Law Society of Ireland is fully aware of what is going on and so far they have refused to give the RIAI a monopoly on certification. They have published 2 articles from Architects’ Alliance in their Gazette this year.

I never heard about a qualified certificate before? What do you mean? Are you just trying to put me down again?

I was not employed to design or to oversee the project. I have informed the client about the insulation deficiency. Now the problem is that the ceilings and walls are already skimmed and that it will significantly increase the cost of the works to rectify the insulation at this stage.

The client asked me for some advise. I have informed her that if her contractor refuses to carry out the works without raising his price, she may have to share the cost with him because she should have appointed an architect or a designer to guide him and because there is only a verbal contract and a quote forming the building agreement. However, her builder told her that he did not need anyone to carry out the works; and to me it sounds like if the contractor took advantage of the situation and misinformed the client.

What would you guys do in this situation?

Poor Uncle Tom

Chris Arch wrote: »

I never heard about a qualified certificate before? What do you mean? Are you just trying to put me down again?

Please, lose the attitude, if you don't understand something just ask, don't automatically assume someone is having a go at you.

A qualified Certificate of Compliance is a COC which has caveats written in concerning the parts of the Building Regulations or Planning Conditions which are felt to be non compliant.

sydthebeat

chris, lose the attitude if you want help here.

id seriously wonder how youve certifed work for the last 6 years yet you do not know what to do in this situtaion, and youve never heard of a qualified certificate.

its simple, youve been asked to certify works to draw down the money, either you refuse to give a full certificate based on your recognition of non complaince, or you give a qualifed certificate, outlining the non compliance as you see it, and leave it to the banks sloicitors to make the judgement on it.

muffler

sydthebeat wrote: »

id seriously wonder how youve certifed work for the last 6 years yet you do not know what to do in this situtaion, and youve never heard of a qualified certificate.

I've wondered about this myself. Issuing a qualified Cert. of Compliance isn't anything new for experienced professionals.

As mentioned by my fellow mods there is a level of aggressiveness being asserted by this poster which we can deal with unless there's a change on his part.

Chris Arch

sydthebeat wrote: »

chris, lose the attitude if you want help here.

Sorry Sydthebeat but I thought that you were trying to put down my qualification again as you done in another thread, another forum...

sydthebeat wrote: »

id seriously wonder how youve certifed work for the last 6 years yet you do not know what to do in this situtaion, and youve never heard of a qualified certificate.

Simple, I do not certify the works when it does not comply. I give instructions for compliance to be achieved. If the certificate is required at completion whithout me being involved during construction then I inform the client about the part which is not complying. But I never thought about that as a certificate of non compliance or whatever you call it. I call it a "survey report" and of course I detail the object of the survey and other related matters.

sydthebeat wrote: »

its simple, youve been asked to certify works to draw down the money, either you refuse to give a full certificate based on your recognition of non complaince, or you give a qualifed certificate, outlining the non compliance as you see it, and leave it to the banks sloicitors to make the judgement on it.

I have informed by writing the client about the part which I found in non-compliance with the Building Regulations, however, because the works are nearly completed they are asking me who is liable. This is what I am not sure about, because the client has been misled by the builder with regard to the necessity of an architect/designer.

Some of you say that it is the client to ensure that the works will comply with the building regulations, and in general I agree with that, but when the builder inform the client that he can carry out the works without design, I think that he should be the one to blame, even if this will be difficult to prove because there is no written contract.

sinnerboy

Chris Arch wrote: »

they are asking me who is liable

One more time ... the client is liable . It is up to the client now what action to take not you .

It is very bad luck that the client got bad advice before from a builder and without a contract . But that is not of your doing - it is of the clients doing.

Chris Arch wrote: »

I have informed by writing the client about the part which I found in non-compliance with the Building Regulations

Now tell the client of their responsibilities as building owner --- and invoice them !!

Unless they agree to formally appoint you to sort out their mess for them - for an agreed fee - well personally I would cut my losses and depart .

sinnerboy

I suggest you look here too .

Anybody using "builder only" services should do so with eyes wide open .

sydthebeat

ck, if you have issues with another thread, keep them there please!

your questions have been answered over and over here

The client is liable and you have two options regarding the certificate.
This has already been stated to you, so why do you keep repeating the question?

Look, no final cert = no draw down of funds = no payment for the builder

if the builder wants payment hes going to have to take an action:
1. pay for remedial works out of his own pocket
2. demand extra from the client to do this remedial work
3. do nothing and get paid to date minus what the remedial works will cost

your client has responsibilities to under the building regulations as the building owner

Chris Arch

sydthebeat wrote: »

ck, if you have issues with another thread, keep them there please!

your questions have been answered over and over here

The client is liable and you have two options regarding the certificate.
This has already been stated to you, so why do you keep repeating the question?

Look, no final cert = no draw down of funds = no payment for the builder

if the builder wants payment hes going to have to take an action:
1. pay for remedial works out of his own pocket
2. demand extra from the client to do this remedial work
3. do nothing and get paid to date minus what the remedial works will cost

your client has responsibilities to under the building regulations as the building owner

I will refer the case directly to her solicitor. To me this lady in her mid fifties did nothing wrong. I do not agree that she is supposed to know about her responsibility for appointing an architect or designer. The only information available on this matter stipulates that the works must be carried out in compliance with the building regulations. There are many design and build companies out there who proposed design and build services. I think that she was fully abused and that it could even become worst.

Her builder already told her that he will find someone else to certify the work. This would mean that she will pay for works that have not been carried out correctly.

Chris Arch

On your reference about what you called a “qualified certificate” I found no relevant information on the web on this type of certificate.

These are the links that I found that describe the term:

http://www.post.trust.ie/ProductsServices/Pages/QualifiedCertificates.aspx

http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/Communications/Business+and+Technology/CSP+Supervision.htm


I am aware of the RIAI standard form of certification, there is nothing such as a “qualified certificate”. Can you give more details on this matter, because I am sure that I am not the only one to be curious about it?

Thanks

sinnerboy

Chris Arch wrote: »

I will refer the case directly to her solicitor.

Only she can do that . Will you pay her fees ? You don't have the right to incur fees for her

Chris Arch wrote: »

To me this lady in her mid fifties did nothing wrong.

You did not pose a moral question - but a question regarding liability .

Chris Arch wrote: »

I do not agree that she is supposed to know about her responsibility for appointing an architect or designer.

Well one can take a horse to water

Chris Arch wrote: »

The only information available

where ?

Chris Arch wrote: »

on this matter stipulates that the works must be carried out in compliance with the building regulations.

- in whose opinion ?

Chris Arch wrote: »

There are many design and build companies out there who proposed design and build services.

To whom ? When ? Are you making a general comment - or specific to this case ?

Chris Arch wrote: »

I think that she was fully abused and that it could even become worst.

You may well be right

Chris Arch wrote: »

Her builder already told her that he will find someone else to certify the work. This would mean that she will pay for works that have not been carried out correctly.

And this is YOUR problem ? Send in your invoice now my friend .

.

sydthebeat

chris,

for a second time, your questions regarding liability and options have been answered... what exactly are you trying to do now???

ever hear the phrase "dont hate the player, hate the game"......

its very possible that the builder will encourage the client to get someone else to certify, it makes complete sense for him. Your responsibility is to your cleint. Inform her of her responsibilities and of the options. Advise her where you can, but ultimately its her decision.

this is the last ill post here.

Chris Arch

sydthebeat wrote: »

chris,

for a second time, your questions regarding liability and options have been answered... what exactly are you trying to do now???

ever hear the phrase "dont hate the player, hate the game"......

its very possible that the builder will encourage the client to get someone else to certify, it makes complete sense for him. Your responsibility is to your cleint. Inform her of her responsibilities and of the options. Advise her where you can, but ultimately its her decision.

this is the last ill post here.

You have replied using a term that exists in computer network architecture but not in conventional architecture... There is no reference to the term that you used "qualified certificate" in the construction field. Can I doubt your ability to answer the question here? Or can you tell me what you want without me being permitted to question your answers?

You are telling me that the client is liable, and you seem unhappy that I doubt your point of view… Well give me your reference for claiming that the client is fully liable… I am not aware of any law or regulation that would say so… The Health and Safety regulations say that the client is responsible to appoint a competent designer, but this cannot be relevant for small building work. How can the consumer decide when the designer is competent or not, when the designer is necessary or not. The problem with Irish construction law is that it is uncompleted.

I presume that you are aware of the design and build services provided by some contractors. It seems that you pretend that if a client is using design and build services (the client was provided with contractor’s hand sketches and told that there was no need of additional drawings) then the client still liable… This is not right because the client is unaware of the system and she was misled by someone who is aware of the system.

If you guys are bored with the subject… Then don’t answer it… You are under no obligation. I know that with your moderator statute you can ban me at any time, but this is a discussion boards isn’t it?… And I am not convince by your answers on this liability issues.

sinnerboy

Maybe this is not the forum for you Chris .

Several posters have tried in vain to help you .

I too have better things to do . So - I'm out .

Chris Arch

sinnerboy wrote: »

You did not pose a moral question - but a question regarding liability .

And this is YOUR problem ? Send in your invoice now my friend .

.

I have sent my invoice and a survey report. However, the client asks me for some advice, why would I refuse to do so... It is a new situation for me, but I have time for helping her out then I am trying to do so...

If, as per Irish Law, she is the one to blame, then I think that once again there is another part of the Irish Law to be reviewed.

sydthebeat

you know what, i was going to post a long winded expalin in detail how unbelievable arrogant you are with your "i am not aware, so it must be incorrect" attitude.... but no.

Like Sinnerboy im out too.

Figure it out for yourself!!

DOCARCH

Chris, for a simple situation, it's quite complex to you to say or decide who is liable, especially in the absence of either a formal contract or a supervising specifier/designer, etc.

As you are coming in at the end, I'd suggest all you can do is simply give them your findings, tell them what way it should be done and let them sort it out either mutually, legally or whatever way.

My own thougt would be that the builder is mostly to blame as I am sure the builder would have put himself forward as 'the expert'. Builders should know and build in accordance with the building regulations (afterall they are 'building' regulations - not 'architect' or designer regulations). The biggest problem is that I have yet to come across a builder fully up to speed with the building regulations!

Chris Arch

DOCARCH wrote: »

Chris, for a simple situation, it's quite complex to you to say or decide who is liable, especially in the absence of either a formal contract or a supervising specifier/designer, etc.

As you are coming in at the end, I'd suggest all you can do is simply give them your findings, tell them what way it should be done and let them sort it out either mutually, legally or whatever way.

My own thougt would be that the builder is mostly to blame as I am sure the builder would have put himself forward as 'the expert'. Builders should know and build in accordance with the building regulations (afterall they are 'building' regulations - not 'architect' or designer regulations). The biggest problem is that I have yet to come across a builder fully up to speed with the building regulations!

Thanks Doc, I share your opinion on this...

I will make sure that her solicitor who asked for the cert will receive a copy of my report.

Chris Arch

sydthebeat wrote: »

you know what, i was going to post a long winded expalin in detail how unbelievable arrogant you are with your "i am not aware, so it must be incorrect" attitude.... but no.

Like Sinnerboy im out too.

Figure it out for yourself!!

Enlighten me on your "qualified Certificate" Sydthebeat"...

muffler

Chris Arch wrote: »

Enlighten me on your "qualified Certificate" Sydthebeat"...

No! Enough is enough.

You have had your query addressed (repeatedly) but you still persist with being confrontational.

See a solicitor for legal advice as no one else is going to offer any more opinions.

Thread locked.