Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2013

sydthebeat

DOCARCH wrote: »

But...the problem is, there is no definintion of competent (for builders)?

The draft code of practise introduces a definition:

“Competent Person”: a person is deemed to be a competent person where, having regard to the task he or she is required to perform and taking account of the size and/or complexity of the building or works, the person possesses sufficient training, experience and knowledge appropriate to the nature of the work to be undertaken;

as for who determines competence, ive no idea.
Its conceivable that under the new regs a person with no experience or knowledge of building can be the client, builder and 'competent person' without any questions asked.


Again, it all comes back onto the certifier.

Open A

martinn123 wrote: »

What about the Professional Integrity of the Certifyer, or is that just a myth

Lots of great buildings in Ireland attest to professional integrity and competent building contractors.. but we need a system robust enough to catch the McFeelys of this world!

Open A

DOCARCH wrote: »

But...the problem is, there is no definintion of competent (for builders)?

.

It sounds like CIF want to restrict access to the register to those who have already completed three projects in Ireland.. so it would become like the old taxi plate system!

DOCARCH

Open A wrote: »

It sounds like CIF want to restrict access to the register to those who have already completed three projects in Ireland.. so it would become like the old taxi plate system!

Every builder I deal with would consider themselves competent...:rolleyes: More often that not I have to beg to differ!

Maybe if a builder owns a Homebond Manual, they can deem themselves competent? It would be a start at least. I am always amazed, that some builders, who are fully paid up CIF members, do not posess a Homebond Manual.

sydthebeat

Open A wrote: »

It sounds like CIF want to restrict access to the register to those who have already completed three projects in Ireland.. so it would become like the old taxi plate system!

I would hope a site inspection by the CIF into one of those three projects would be a prerequisite to registration or not. I know many good knowledgeable builders out there, but i also know some i wouldn't let build a dog house... i hope theres a attempt to restrict their registration.

If this is the case of course......

DOCARCH

With regard to consumer protection, and your average Joe building a house or sizeable extension, I wonder if they are taking much of the responsibility/liability back on themselves?

In the 'Notice of Assignment of Builder', that the client/employer/house owner fills out and submis to Building Control, thay have to confirm they have appointed a 'competent builder'.

...if...something goes wrong...and the builder turns out, in fact, to be incompetent...where does that leave the client/employer/house owner?

Maybe they sue themselves??? :P

sydthebeat

DOCARCH wrote: »

With regard to consumer protection, and your average Joe building a house or sizeable extension, I wonder if they are taking much of the responsibility/liability back on themselves?

In the 'Notice of Assignment of Builder', that the client/employer/house owner fills out and submis to Building Control, thay have to confirm they have appointed a 'competent builder'.

...if...something goes wrong...and the builder turns out, in fact, to be incompetent...where does that leave the client/employer/house owner?

Maybe they sue themselves??? :P

are you saying what if they nominate themselves as builder? or what if they hire a cowboy?

DOCARCH

sydthebeat wrote: »

are you saying what if they nominate themselves as builder? or what if they hire a cowboy?

Both...but I was probably thinking more the later!

sydthebeat

well by my reading

1. if they nominate themselves as 'builder' they still are required to ensure that a competent person over sees the build

2. if the cowboy has CIF registration and a reg number, im sure a court would deem that the determination of competence has been made by CIF and not the client.

The only recourse i can see from a certifiers point of view is that the 'builder' is provided with enough drawings and documents so as to ensure they build in compliance, therefore the cannot enact their get out clause in their certification.


heres an interesting one, what if the builder is given a full set of building regulation TGD's as part of the 'supporting drawings and documents' by the designer / assigned certifer??
Surely then the builder has no option but to read, become educated and construct full in accordance with the regs?
and thus they cannot enact their getout clause should defects become apparent?

just putting it out there..............

BryanF

sydthebeat wrote: »

heres an interesting one, what if the builder is given a full set of building regulation TGD's as part of the 'supporting drawings and documents' by the designer / assigned certifer??
Surely then the builder has no option but to read, become educated and construct full in accordance with the regs?
and thus they cannot enact their getout clause should defects become apparent?

just putting it out there..............

as apposed to 'all construction must comply with current building regulations'

DOCARCH

sydthebeat wrote: »

...what if the builder is given a full set of building regulation TGD's as part of the 'supporting drawings and documents' by the designer / assigned certifer??

Nice one! Print off TGD's A to M and provide to the contractor!!! Off ya go....

newbie2013

DOCARCH wrote: »

But...the problem is, there is no definintion of competent (for builders)?

A builder building away on his own for the last 30 odd years might have lots of experience, but, is he competent?

I came across one 'highly rated' builder recently - lots and lots of past experience and projects under his belt (in excess of 25 years) - I found him tying a cavity wall with 215 solid blocks across the cavity (tying the inner and outer leaf) at intervals. I basically said...WTF!...despite having a set of construction drawings to work to, he said that's the way he had always built cavity walls!

The mind boggles! That's a guy with loads of experience at building, but, no understanding of what he is doing.

Dont believe you. A builder doing work like this for 25 years would end up never getting any work!!

sydthebeat wrote: »

there is still an element out there who think its their god given right to build their own home without a 'competent person' to over see.

IMO, its a basic human right to build ones own home.

DOCARCH

newbie2013 wrote: »

Dont believe you.

The 25 years bit? It may have been around 20 years (at the time I came across him)! Still out there...working away.

One of the problems in this country is people believe builders are professionals and know what they are doing.

sydthebeat

newbie2013 wrote: »

IMO, its a basic human right to build ones own home.

Thankfully we don't live in mud huts anymore.

BryanF

the Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2013

can we avoid going down the human rights angle

if you feel the need to discuss this consider emailing the following

Poor Uncle Tom

BryanF wrote: »

the Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2013

can we avoid going down the human rights angle

if you feel the need to discuss this consider emailing the following

It was just getting interesting as well......:rolleyes:

rodzer

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

It was just getting interesting as well......:rolleyes:

Sticking to topic, I can believe the 25 year bit. My plasterer couldn't believe it when I told him I wanted a grey coat on the inner face of my cavity wall (for Airtightness) before we erected the insulated plasterboard. He is plastering for decades but never did this before.

sydthebeat

rodzer wrote: »

Sticking to topic, I can believe the 25 year bit. My plasterer couldn't believe it when I told him I wanted a grey coat on the inner face of my cavity wall (for Airtightness) before we erected the insulated plasterboard. He is plastering for decades but never did this before.

these are the problems with people thinking building is simple.

Since 1997 there has been 13 different revisions to the TGDs.
Since 1997 there has been 4 separate and severe revisions to Part L alone.

Only 3 of the 12 TGDs remain as they were in 1997 and all three of these are at draft revision stage.

So someone saying they have been building for 25 years is absolutely no guarantee that they are up to speed with current regulations. If there are still building as they did 20 years ago then they are seriously behind.

edit:

for the craic i just did this quick calculation

1997 TGD = 392 pages

Current regulations = 658 pages + 308 pages of supplementary Part L documents.

So from 392 to almost 1000 pages over 16 years, with 3 more sever revisions to come in the near future.

kkelliher

sydthebeat wrote: »

these are the problems with people thinking building is simple.

Since 1997 there has been 13 different revisions to the TGDs.
Since 1997 there has been 4 separate and severe revisions to Part L alone.

Only 3 of the 12 TGDs remain as they were in 1997 and all three of these are at draft revision stage.

So someone saying they have been building for 25 years is absolutely no guarantee that they are up to speed with current regulations. If there are still building as they did 20 years ago then they are seriously behind.

edit:

for the craic i just did this quick calculation

1997 TGD = 392 pages

Current regulations = 658 pages + 308 pages of supplementary Part L documents.

So from 392 to almost 1000 pages over 16 years, with 3 more sever revisions to come in the near future.

added to the technical issues are the clear fact that there is a clear culture issue in Ireland where everyone and anyone believes they can build something (clearly evident from a high number of posts in construction and planning forum) irrespective of any knowledge whatsoever in respect to the building procees.

4Sticks

kkelliher wrote: »

added to the technical issues are the clear fact that there is a clear culture issue in Ireland where everyone and anyone believes they can build something (clearly evident from a high number of posts in construction and planning forum) irrespective of any knowledge whatsoever in respect to the building procees.

It is a human right !

Apparently.

kkelliher

4Sticks wrote: »

It is a human right !

Apparently.

Its not a human right to endanger others by neglegence through poor and unknowledgeable building..... bottom line

kkelliher

<snip-deleted post>

No matter how big or how high the tree is, you will always have some bad apples growing on it and the same goes for every profession. I personally find Architects painful to deal with in alot of occasions but I have also meet regularly with excellent, technically minded architects who were a comfort to deal with.

DOCARCH

wirehairmax wrote: »

Another problem I've seen is people putting faith in "architects" who are no more than cad monkeys...

* whistles * I've obviously rattled someones cage! :P

wirehairmax wrote: »

....isn't that long after making some effort to distance themselves from some of the mess that a lot of architects left behind.

Care to expand on that one?

At least now there is registration of architects, who have to meet certain criteria and minimum educational requirements, and, in addition, meet certain continuing/ongoing educational requirments every year (i.e. keep learning).

If the architect f**ks up, they can be removed from the register and the profession.

The same applies to engineers and surveyors.

All I was getting at with my posts is that builders need to be on the same footing/be registered on the same basis.

Most posters on here are all too familiar with builders who 10 years behind in their basic knowledge of the Building Regulations.

martinn123

DOCARCH wrote: »

All I was getting at with my posts is that builders need to be on the same footing/be registered on the same basis.

Most posters on here are all too familiar with builders who 10 years behind in their basic knowledge of the Building Regulations.

Sure with Architects on site ''every day'' from now on what's the problem?

DOCARCH

martinn123 wrote: »

Sure with Architects on site ''every day'' from now on what's the problem?

I have enough babysitting to do as it is (after work/when I get home)!

BryanF

DOCARCH wrote: »

builders need to be on the same footing/be registered on the same basis.

so the CIF need to become more like the CIOB (maybe suck in the homebond bucks aswell)

and then you enshrine into law their position like the RIAI, RICS & IEI

the new CIF can charge builders handsome premiums, doing very little other than the odd over priced CPD, but critically they can exclude any group they do not deem qualified

and every things hunky dory..

DOCARCH

This is just hot off the presses....

...the Construction Industry Register Ireland (CIRI)

Hubert Fitzpatrick, Director of the Construction Industry Federation (CIF) gave a presentation on the CIRI at CIF headquarters on 5 December 2013.

Key points:

1.1 Governance
- The Construction Industry Register Ireland (CIRI) will be established and operated by the CIF.
- There will be a Construction Industry Registration Board (composed of 10 Members, including nominees by DoECLG, OPW and DoJEI)
- Complaints and Appeals Committee
- Executive and Administration Office

1.2. Who is the Register for
Designed for all construction practitioners including:
- Main contractors and builders who deliver overall projects
- Specialist contractors and sub-contractors who delivery overall projects and /or elements of projects
- Other trades who may be engaged by other contractors, sub-contractors or by domestic clients
- Annual registration will be required

1.3. Entry to the Register will be for those with:
-Practical experience of working in construction, generally for a period of no less than 3 years
Requirements will include
-Knowledge and understanding of the legislative and regulatory context in which construction is practiced, e.g. Building Control Regulations; Health and Safety Regulations
- Delivery of construction services / construction management experience
- Adherence to Code of Ethics and Member Obligations applicable
- Commitment to CPD / ongoing training and development
- Acceptable record which demonstrates compliance with regulatory requirements

Other Areas will cover:

1.4 Quality Assurance Checks – commitment that registered members:
- Only undertake works that they are competent to undertake
- Ensure that any persons employed or engaged will be competent to undertake the works for which they are engaged
- Undertake construction works in accordance with any plans and specifications issued for such works
- Cooperate with any inspection programmes in place
- Where appropriate, certify that the works in compliance with the requirements of the building regulations
- Notify the CIRB of any enforcement convictions under the Building Control Act within 20 working days

1.5 Consumer Protection – a commitment to adhere to business management processes so that:
- Adequate insurances are maintained
- Provide guarantees as to quality of workmanship in accordance with the contract
- A dedicated website (www.ciri.ie) will go live in December 2013 with appointments to the Register commencing in January 2013.

sydthebeat

BryanF wrote: »

so the ICF need to become more like the CIOB (maybe suck in the homebond bucks aswell)

and then you enshrine into law their position like the RIAI, RICS & IEI

the new ICF can charge builders handsome premiums, doing very little other than the odd over priced CPD, but critically they can exclude any group they do not deem qualified

and every things hunky dory..

CIF bryan

without professional registration and recognition of builders, there will never be a system where the builder must by professionally indemnified.

Thats the major issue with the proposed changes.
The one professional thats indemnified is expected to carry the responsibility for everyone else. Thats unequal, unfair and unworkable.

martinn123

DOCARCH wrote: »

I have enough babysitting to do as it is (after work/when I get home)!

Hm, someone has not been following this thread

sydthebeat wrote:

therefore the certifier is left with the reponsibility to determine what the frequency should be and how often works need to be inspected. Most certifiers that you ask would say that that certification would require an inspection (conservatively) almost every - to every other working day ... with the risk of defects increasing with every day of no inspection.

because, at the end of the day, its not the blocklayer, carpenter, plumber etc etc etc that is responsible for the quality of their work, its the certifier.

not surprising really, as it's been quite a few posts ago where discussion of the Building Reg's 2013 ceased, and it became a slagging match/bitchfest.

sydthebeat

interesting

1.3. Entry to the Register will be for those with:
-Practical experience of working in construction, generally for a period of no less than 3 years
Requirements will include
-Knowledge and understanding of the legislative and regulatory context in which construction is practiced, e.g. Building Control Regulations; Health and Safety Regulations
- Delivery of construction services / construction management experience
- Adherence to Code of Ethics and Member Obligations applicable
- Commitment to CPD / ongoing training and development
- Acceptable record which demonstrates compliance with regulatory requirements

Id love to see this fleshed out more.

I was expecting a free for all where any one could register... looks like (hopefully) it will be fairly restrictive.