Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2013

4Sticks

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

If a self builder has a contractor then they are not a self-builder.

That is not correct.
That is the last time I intend to engage with you on the point too.

strongback

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

I predict:

General arrangement drawings - Planning drawings with changed title text.
List of design documents (as prepared or to be prepared) - Notes on finishes as sent in at planning stage.
Outline statement of compliance approach - A standard letter to be sent in with every commencement pack.
Proposed inspection plan - A standard letter noting inspections at Foundation stage, roof start, roof finish, etc.

If this type of copy & paste solution is used will the councils prevent commencement. I doubt it very much as their role seems to be that of a storage facility for this information rather than cross checking of it.

I can see what you are outlining happening.

In the lectures I attended with the DOE they indicated it would be acceptable that drawings are developed during the job. Obviously if a builder is constructing foundations and the council do a random site inspection I am sure they would expect the contractor to be working off a job specific foundation construction drawing.

As I see it the final set of uploaded drawings that will be the most important as these are what will be looked at down the line if there is a problem.

My own view is the council will not look at all the drawings/info uploaded to their system unless they have reason to i.e. a particular design team/contractor builds incorrectly on one project and then the council audits all their jobs.

I see it being at the councils discretion if they want to carry out checks but I assume they will do this based on prior experience of certain professionals and builders. The council will need to show accountability and reasoning for what projects they audit.

jonniebgood1

4Sticks wrote: »

That is not correct.
That is the last time I intend to engage with you on the point too.

Suit yourself- I was simply pointing out the inherent contradiction in the idea of a self builder engaging a contractor.

4Sticks

repeat ad infinitum

(For the benefit of others.)

4Sticks

From the horses Hogans' mouth

Question No s . 544 and 554

Chun an Aire Comhshaoil, Pobail agus Rialtais Áitiúil:
To the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government:

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government if his attention has been drawn to the submissions from a group (details supplied) about the certification requirements contained in the Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2014; and if the regulations will be amended to reflect the concerns outlined by the group in question..

- Thomas P. Broughan.

The Irish Association of Self Builders

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government if he will reconsider the proposed amendment S.I number 9 of the Building Control Amendment Regulations 2013 which if introduced could discourage the tradition of self builders here; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Olivia Mitchell.

For WRITTEN answer on Tuesday, 28th January, 2014.

Ref No s : 3932/14 and 4147/14

REPLY

Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government (Mr. P. Hogan)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 544 and 554 together.

The new Building Control Amendment Regulations which come into operation on 1 March 2014 will greatly strengthen the arrangements currently in place for the control of building activity by requiring greater accountability in relation to compliance with Building Regulations in the form of statutory certification of design and construction, lodgement of compliance documentation, mandatory inspections during construction and validation and registration of certificates.

The new regulations are necessary following the widespread instances of failure by owners, designers and builders to comply with their statutory obligations under the Building Control Act 1990 to design and construct buildings in accordance with the building regulations. These obligations apply to all sectors of the housing market, including the self-build sector.

Neither the Building Control Act or any regulations thereunder, including the new Building Control Regulations , place any restrictions on whom an owner may assign as a builder once the owner is satisfied that the builder is competent to undertake the works involved. An owner who intends to self-build will assume responsibility for ensuring that building or works concerned will comply with the requirements of the second schedule to the building regulations. They must undertake to do everything necessary to achieve this and to ensure they are in a position to certify the building or works on completion thereby taking legal responsibility as builder. The new regulations also require an owner to assign a competent, registered professional to certify the design prior to commencement and to inspect the works during construction so that the assigned certifier is in a position, in conjunction with the owner-builder, to sign a certificate of compliance on completion. A building project cannot proceed until such assignment s (which may be one and the same person) ha ve been made. Confidence in the builder will be a key factor influencing a professional’s decision on accepting a role as assigned certifier , in particular, and owners who intend to self-build will need to be aware of this.

My Department will be happy to liaise with the Irish Association of Self-Builders in relation to their concerns and to assist them in understanding their obligations in the context of the new regulations.

wirehairmax

4Sticks wrote: »

From the horses Hogans' mouth

So nothing changes then. Anybody can still call themselves a builder as long as they can find someone to sign the paperwork for a fee. What's to stop someone building a block of apartments "a la priory hall" and declaring themselves competent? If they are willing to pay, some architect somewhere will take the money and sign anything that's put in front of them.
The CIF are in charge of compiling a register of competent construction companies which is going to cost in the region of €900 a year to be a member of as well as the cost of compulsory CPD courses. I was gearing up to get registered but after reading that pile of waffle from hogan, I am hesitant to spend any money if this is going to be the case as it will be business as usual out there.

4Sticks

I hear you buddy , I hear you ....

jonniebgood1

4Sticks wrote: »

From the horses Hogans' mouth

Question No s . 544 and 554
...
They must undertake to do everything necessary to achieve this and to ensure they are in a position to certify the building or works on completion thereby taking legal responsibility as builder. The new regulations also require an owner to assign a competent, registered professional to certify the design prior to commencement and to inspect the works during construction so that the assigned certifier is in a position, in conjunction with the owner-builder, to sign a certificate of compliance on completion. A building project cannot proceed until such assignment s (which may be one and the same person) ha ve been made. Confidence in the builder will be a key factor influencing a professional’s decision on accepting a role as assigned certifier , in particular, and owners who intend to self-build will need to be aware of this.

My Department will be happy to liaise with the Irish Association of Self-Builders in relation to their concerns and to assist them in understanding their obligations in the context of the new regulations.

This is going in circles. The only way they can be legal is to hire a registered contractor unless the 'self builder' themselves are members of CIRI.

sydthebeat

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

This is going in circles. The only way they can be legal is to hire a registered contractor unless the 'self builder' themselves are members of CIRI.

The iaosb have already recognised that the ministers response didn't at all deal with the question that was asked and the have requested clarification.
It's worth nothing that the responses are generally stock answers trotted out by civil servants.

dathi

oh lord 35 pages of angst and gnashing of teeth then the " minister" opens his gob and says carry on as you were lads

4Sticks

Get one thing straight. The state his simply ensured it will not be "caught out" again. In the event of more pyrites / Priory Halls - under SI 9 2014 all the states organs will be completely in the clear. Self builders, contractors , designers all have had liabilities increased . The state will simply store - and sell for "the reasonable cost of printing" - documentation. The 1990 building control Act expressly provides that LA don't even have to warrant it's ( the documentations ) integrity. The biggest winners potentially will be the legals and we will not have increased building standards in Ireland.

archtech

The requirement to provide lateral defects insurance and its cost will, going forward make it difficult for the direct labour route as I can see the premium been too high for the individual with no building experience. It's like the construction bonds at the moment, the good builders with the proven track record get them and cheaper, than those with little or no track record, if they do at all.

I can't see too many professionals taking on direct labour jobs without at least an additional fee. At the end of the day if something does go wrong, the judge will consider that it's the professional that's responsible 'as the educated person'.

leax27

hi guys im in the process of applying for playing for an extension on to front of my house its under 40sqm so was wondering do the new regulations apply 2 me.

martinn123

4Sticks wrote: »

Get one thing straight. The state his simply ensured it will not be "caught out" again. In the event of more pyrites / Priory Halls - under SI 9 2014 all the states organs will be completely in the clear. Self builders, contractors , designers all have had liabilities increased . The state will simply store - and sell for "the reasonable cost of printing" - documentation. The 1990 building control Act expressly provides that LA don't even have to warrant it's ( the documentations ) integrity. The biggest winners potentially will be the legals and we will not have increased building standards in Ireland.

Controversial opinion perhaps, but substitute '' The Tax-payer'' for the highlighted above

then Substitute that for '' My tax take''

Is perhaps this an attempt to stop the tax-payer being the Underwriter.

Maybe its poorly designed, but how deep do you want my Grandchildren, and your's pockets to be.

Gumbo

leax27 wrote: »

hi guys im in the process of applying for playing for an extension on to front of my house its under 40sqm so was wondering do the new regulations apply 2 me.

No. Don't think they will because you are under the 40 sq. m
The building regulations apply to you but the building control regulations will not.

4Sticks

martinn123 wrote: »

Controversial opinion perhaps, but substitute '' The Tax-payer'' for the highlighted above

then Substitute that for '' My tax take''Is perhaps this an attempt to stop the tax-payer being the Underwrite
Maybe its poorly designed, but how deep do you want my Grandchildren, and your's pockets to be.

Fair point well made but consider -



The new legislation is a direct response for government to " do something" about those with pyrite problems together with the occupants of priory hall. Hogan has indeed done "something".

Now your post to me suggests you see us all in Ireland as millions of independent economic units. Others see it that we are all connected in a society. None should suffer alone.

martinn123

4Sticks wrote: »

Faif point well made but consider -

the new legislation is a direct response for government to " do something'

maybe it's a response to all that has gone before

Bankers, f''d up, Taxpayer picks up the tab
Builders f''d up ditto
Legal system/certificates/Mortgages ditto.

We paid off the Mortgages on Priory Hall, buy the Apartments and will pay to rectify, ( well deserved as the residents were not responsible ) at Tax-payers expense.

So from now on ........you build and f''k up you pay
You Certify a bad build.... you pay.

I like the principle, maybe not the method exactly.

Do you think the BCO's will be less susceptible to a ''Fee'', if they get caught as Civil servants they will have their Service enhanced, Pension Boosted, and take early retirement, then get a job as a Consultant, maybe as an Assigned Certifyer.

4Sticks

How cynical.

I can only recall year after year of experiences in the UK of its effective building control system.

So "no".

martinn123

4Sticks wrote: »

How cynical.

I can only recall year after year of experiences in the UK of its effective building control system.

So "no".

Ah the UK,

where MP is confirmed as having lied to Parliament..........Resigns

where MP is found to have cheated on his expenses........Jailed

sorry, this is Eire..........we don't do things like that.

Brown Envelope Rules........not Britannia.

BryanF

martinn123 wrote: »

Do you think the BCO's will be less susceptible to a ''Fee'', if they get caught as Civil servants they will have their Service enhanced, Pension Boosted, and take early retirement, then get a job as a Consultant, maybe as an Assigned Certifyer.

Martin, can we keep the discussion going with out the references to brown envelopes, thanks

martinn123

BryanF wrote: »

? Wha?

Ah come'on BryanF, Even D'Paper must be up to date on Civil Servant Retirement Packages.

BryanF

martinn123 wrote: »

Ah come'on BryanF, Even D'Paper must be up to date on Civil Servant Retirement Packages.

And now, Back to building control..

4Sticks

more from horsey Hogan

Question No. 140 – Clare Daly.

Chun an Aire Comhshaoil, Pobail agus Rialtais Áitiúil:
To the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government:

To ask the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government if he will revoke statutory instrument no. 9 in relation to building regulations, due to come into effect on 1 March 2014 , as the mandatory certification by an architect or similar professional will increase costs and will not improve standards, and instead to revert to the system of oversight by local authorities as enforcement action is the only way to avoid some of the appalling breaches of regulations that took place over the past number of years..

For WRITTEN answer on Thursday, 30th January, 2014.

Ref No: 4673/14

REPLY

Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government (Mr. P. Hogan)

Local authorities have extensive powers of inspection and enforcement under the Fire Services Act 1981, the Building Control Act 1990 and the Planning and Development Acts and they have used such powers on a number of occasions in recent times in order to address instances of serious non-compliance with fire and safety requirements in homes and buildings.

These powers of inspection and enforcement are separate and distinct from the requirements of the Building Control Regulations which put in place the administrative arrangement by which owners, designers and builders are required to demonstrate their approach to achieving compliance with the Building Regulations.

The Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2014 and I am satisfied that these will greatly strengthen the arrangements currently in place for the control of building activity, by requiring greater accountability in relation to compliance with Building Regulations in the form of statutory certification of design and construction, lodgement of compliance documentation, mandatory inspections during construction and validation and registration of certificates.

The new regulations are necessary following the widespread instances of failure by owners, designers and builders to comply with their statutory obligations under the Building Control Act 1990 to design and construct buildings in accordance with the building regulations.

The regulations will be administered electronically through a new online Building Control Management System which will enable building control authorities to undertake a risk analysis on each commencement notice received and to target their available resources towards building projects where the risk of failure to comply is highest.

Again if you buy a pyritic mess or firetrap apartment under Hogans new rules - do not approach the state. Just hope that a collection 3 of private individuals ( developer / architect/contractor)
have respected the law and have maintained adequate PI cover* Or that they or solvent / not forced to Oz by recesion / still in business when you assemble your legal team to take action against them

( IF they can even obtain that *)

martinn123

4Sticks wrote: »

more from horsey Hogan



Again if you buy a pyritic mess or firetrap apartment under Hogans new rules - do not approach the state. Just hope that a collection 3 of private individuals ( developer / architect/contractor)
have respected the law and have maintained adequate PI cover* Or that they or solvent / not forced to Oz by recesion / still in business when you assemble your legal team to take action against them

( IF they can even obtain that *)

I note there is no mention of Insurances in Mr Hogans reply as posted above.

Could someone please clarify an aspect of PI cover that I find confusing.

Say an individual, Insured, issues a Cert in 2014.
Then say in 2016 they retire/ emigrate, allow their cover to lapse as it's no longer required
So in 2017 a problem arises, leading to a claim.

Is the action taken under the Insurance which existed at the time the Cert issued, 2014, or the Policy, not in existence in 2017, so the claim is now potentially against the assets, of the Retired Individual.

If this is the case, who on earth would issue a Cert, knowing a liability could potentially follow them to the grave.

4Sticks

The penny drops ?

archtech

Have a look at this case

One is advised to maintain run off PI insurance, if one creases trading/retires. Many don't but as demonstrated in the case. Most employed professionals doen't but there is cause to do so in that the professional who signs the Cert can been held personally responsible.

Normally one has to maintain the run off for 6 year after completion of the last project, to correspond with the Statue of Limitations period, unless of course the project was under seal or otherwise agreed eg a Collateral Warranty which can have a whole lot of other red tape.

4Sticks

And sorry to labour the point but look again at the wording of the various documents that are to be signed - wording that cannot be altered . Individuals will named as owner , designer , certifier , builder. Those who suffer serious building defects will be chasing a grand total of 3 - perhaps 4 ( if designer and certifier are not the same ) persons. not companies , not state bodies , not corporations.

One hopes they will be honest / diligent / capable of meeting their duties...

DOCARCH

As I said way back in this thread, the employer/client will also be signing a documnet, and lodging that documnet with Building Control, stating that they have appointed a competant contractor.

If something goes wrong, and in fact the builder turns out not to be competant...the employer/client, in theory, has no one to blame except themselves!

Will be interesting to see how that one pans out!

Gumbo

martinn123 wrote: »

Ah come'on BryanF, Even D'Paper must be up to date on Civil Servant Retirement Packages.

Good thing there are no Civil Servants within the Building Control Authority then.

con1982

Just wondering what arrangements people have made in private architectural and engineering consultancies, regarding who signs the certs.

Will it be only a company director? Will non management/associates be signing certs? If so, what happens when they move company? Does the risk follow the individual or the company? I'd imagine that it stays with the company, as they are the insured party.

Under the current system, i sign my name and registration number on behalf of the consultancy. I wouldn't be comfortable signing a cert under the new regs, as an employee, given the litigative nature of irish society. Potentially, I could be the 'last man standing'