Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2013

BryanF

can we leave the hogan abuse for the politics forum! Thank you

4Sticks

sydthebeat wrote: »

SI 80 first
SI 9 next
now
SI SI 105

That's the real "oversight group" right there

Drift

Just as a matter of interest. Does anyone know if positions on the "Oversight Group" were advertised publicly?

No6

Drift wrote: »

Just as a matter of interest. Does anyone know if positions on the "Oversight Group" were advertised publicly?

No I think it was "overlooked" :pac:

4Sticks

Maybe we will get weekly updates from this overwrought Dept.

martinn123

Drift wrote: »

Just as a matter of interest. Does anyone know if positions on the "Oversight Group" were advertised publicly?

Yes, and most of the regulars here, applied..........for some strange reason, they were all rejected.

sydthebeat

http://bregsforum.wordpress.com/2014/03/11/self-builders-demand-answers-from-declg-bcar-si-9/

this is simply flabbergasting

4Sticks

So how do you expect me to sign it? We do understand that there is a big issue regarding this sentence and we accept that by signing this you will be breaking the law but it is ok.

What, to break the law? In a way yes as we would not follow on with it.

All beware - our docile local authorities will not "be the problem" although they should be. They are behaving here like traffic cops habitually "letting you off" with speeding.
The real problems will bite hard when it comes to mortgages and re mortgages. Banks will "follow on with it".

4Sticks

Even the DOE are mangling the meaning of their own document

At commencement, they will notify the local authority that they themselves are the builder and sign the builder’s undertaking required for building control purposes.

At completion the Self-Builder and the Assigned Certifier will both certify the building in line with their responsibilities.

Source

mullingar

I see Shane McCloud posted a new page on his IASOB website where he posed as a possible self-builder to ask a few questions to his Local Authority on the new SI

I walked in through the doors as a self builder without any knowledge of how this Amendment could effect me and firstly came across the lady at the reception who knew about the Amendment but could not answer most of my questions as they were not informed. She finally gave up and asked the County Engineer to help me with this issue.

The following are my questions and his answers:

Can I Self Build? Yes
Can I use Direct Labour for my build? Only if they are competent and experienced
So, who decides if they are competent? You do
What else do I have to do? You have to choose a person to design and inspect the house for you and give you a certificate of commencement and completion.
Who else has to sign this? You as the building owner and the builder.
But I am the builder, so who signs the certificate? You do but if you are using the Direct Labour, they also have to sign the form.
But what is the procedure on that? On the commencement notice you have to name your labourers and we will be sending them an email telling them that you have chosen them as the contractors and they need to have all the necessary insurance and documentation.
Where do they sign? on the certificate of commencement and completion.
I have seen these certificates on line and in the place where the builder has to sign, it says (To be signed by Principal or Director of a Building Company Only) so where do I sign? Where it says to be signed.
But you are telling me to sign as someone who clearly I am not? Yes but it does not matter as we would not be questioning it.
Do you agree with me that by signing as the Principal or Director of a Company I would be breaking the law? Yes but that would be OK.
If I give you a legal document and ask you to sign as a Fireman even though you are clearly an Engineer, would you break the law and sign it? No way
So how do you expect me to sign it? We do understand that there is a big issue regarding this sentence and we accept that by signing this you will be breaking the law but it is ok.
What, to break the law? In a way yes as we would not follow on with it.
Can you please give me some paperwork with this information on it? No, everything is online. We have not been given anything to hand out. This is also knew to us and we have not got a lot of information on it.
So if someone who does not understand how to use a computer wants to know about this, what can they do? They have to ask for help from someone else.
If I write all that you mentioned above on a piece of paper, will you sign and stamp it for me? Ehhhh, yes

Further details here:

http://www.iaosb.com/letter_from_iaosb_to_mr_martin_vaughan_declg%20.html

mandy gall

mullingar wrote: »

I see Shane McCloud posted a new page on his IASOB website where he posed as a possible self-builder to ask a few ..

Sure the BCA officer told my husband they will accept the Compliance Certificates etc..with him signing himself as the builder FOR NOW!! What a mess we are in.

kkelliher

mandy gall wrote: »

mullingar wrote: »

I see Shane McCloud posted a new page on his IASOB website where he posed as a possible self-builder to ask a few ..

Sure the BCA officer told my husband they will accept the Compliance Certificates etc..with him signing himself as the builder FOR NOW!! What a mess we are in.

here's hoping you never have to sell. I can image the minefield solicitors for purchasers will cause with this.

hugo29

has anyone quoted for this work yet, have my first query today about quote for same (house has planning already)

fcuk what a mess, dont even know if i want it

mullingar

There is a new online petition against the new SI9 regs.

Details here:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057167540

mullingar

Finally, a little more clarification from DoELCG

Response from Mr Martin Vaughan, DECLG regarding S.I.9 - 13th March 2014

Dear Mr McCloud,

I wish to reply to your email of 26 February 2014 and 10 March 2014.

Firstly, I am happy to forward a PDF copy of Information Note issued on 26 February 2014 and now on headed paper as requested.

In relation to your understanding of the reply to Parliamentary Question No. 544 of 28 January 2014, I can confirm that your understanding accords with the Department’s position that a Self-Builder can nominate them-self as the Builder and sign the undertaking and the Certificate of Compliance on Completion (Part A). In nominating themselves as Builder and signing the Undertaking by the Builder, they are declaring that they are competent and undertaking to follow the certified design and to employ/engage competent persons, etc. and anyone signing these forms must of course be faithful to the undertakings so given.
In relation to the signature by a Self-Builder of the Undertaking by the Builder or Certificate of Compliance on Completion (Part A), the Department does not foresee a difficulty in a Self-Builder signing this form where they are clearly not a company.

To put things in their proper context, SI No. 9 of 2014 in introducing certificates of compliance must support and preserve the statutory responsibilities (on owners, designers and builders) that are already set out under the Building Control Act 1990 (the Act of 1990). The chain of responsibility begins with the owner. They must now sign the Commencement Notice and the notices of assignment of the Builder and of the Assigned Certifier (for present purposes we are only concerned with the Builder).

The Notice of Assignment of Builder requires the owner to declare they are satisfied that the assigned person is competent to undertake the works. This is the essential point - that the owner acts with responsibility. In practice this assigned person will be a sole trader, a company or a Self-Builder and their status is irrelevant once competence is assured. The Building Control Authority has no role in checking or verifying the builder's competence – it is the owner’s responsibility. If the building control authority does have concerns they have separate powers of inspection and enforcement under the Act of 1990 to deal with the situation as appropriate. The only limitation put on the assignment is that the owner satisfies themselves that the person assigned is competent to undertake the works. This Notice of Assignment is signed by the building owner and no one other than the building owner can make this assignment. You will note from the form that if the assigned person changes the building owner is legally obliged to inform the local authority and to assign and notify a new builder. The importance of this is that assigned builder (and no one other than the assigned Builder) can sign Part A of the relevant Certificate of Compliance on Completion.

The Assigned Builder is then required to sign their form of undertaking. The form must be signed by the person notified to the Building Control Authority as the Builder, thus preserving the chain of responsibility. In effect the owner controls who signs this form by making the notice of assignment. Where the person assigned is a firm, the signature must be signed by a Principal or Director i.e. it should not be signed by an employee. This qualification of the signatory is only necessary in the case of a company. Where a Self-Builder is acting on his or her own behalf, there are no agents or intermediaries involved, and the potential for confusion over legal responsibility does not therefore arise.

In relation to the signature by a Self-Builder of the Certificate of Compliance on Completion, the Department’s view would be as outlined above in relation to the form of undertaking. Part A of the Certificate of Compliance on Completion must be signed by the person assigned and notified by the owner at commencement. Again it is only where the assigned Builder is a corporate entity that the signature must be signed by a Principal or Director i.e. not by an employee.

From a building control perspective, if this certificate is signed by a person other that the person already assigned and notified, then a problem will arise in relation to validating and registering the certificate.

On this aspect of the matter you also asked why the signature line could not refer to the “building owner” – in this regard it is important to understand that the undertaking by the Builder and the Certificate of Compliance on Completion deal with the responsibilities of the Builder (not the owner) and it is important therefore that persons signing these forms know and understand that they are dealing with their responsibilities as Builder for the purposes of these forms.

In relation to the “Code of Practice for Inspecting and Certifying Buildings and Works” and the guidance in relation to use of competent persons, in your situation it is the Self-Builder who must be satisfy as to the competence of any person they engage for a particular task.

In relation to the Minister’s public comments on the likely cost of engaging an assigned certifier I attach for information a statement on the impact of the regulations which may be helpful in outlining the Department’ position in this regard.

I trust the above should finally clarify these matters for you.

Yours sincerely

Martin Vaughan
Assistant Principal
Architecture/Building Standards Section
Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government


Information Note on Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2014 (SI No. 9 of 2014) and the Self-Build Sector

Summary Statement on Regulatory Impact of the New Building Regulations (SI No. 9 of 2014)
Letter from Iaosb to Mr Martin Vaughan, Department of Environment, Community and Local Government

http://www.iaosb.com/response_from_mr_martin_vaughan,_declg_regarding_s.i.9_-_13th_march_2014.html


Very interesting interpretation.......

martinn123

In relation to your understanding of the reply to Parliamentary Question No. 544 of 28 January 2014, I can confirm that your understanding accords with the Department’s position that a Self-Builder can nominate them-self as the Builder and sign the undertaking and the Certificate of Compliance on Completion (Part A). In nominating themselves as Builder and signing the Undertaking by the Builder, they are declaring that they are competent and undertaking to follow the certified design and to employ/engage competent persons, etc. and anyone signing these forms must of course be faithful to the undertakings so given.
In relation to the signature by a Self-Builder of the Undertaking by the Builder or Certificate of Compliance on Completion (Part A), the Department does not foresee a difficulty in a Self-Builder signing this form where they are clearly not a company.

That's the clarification needed, so Self-Builders ....go ahead.

sydthebeat

If it is that clear cut, why don't they just remove the offending line from the cert?

That response means nothing once the cert stays the same.

mullingar

After re-reading the response, I do agree that the wording in the legislation needs to be corrected to reflect the DoECLG's actual signatory requirements needed.

The main problem now for self-builders is the Certified Designer and Building Assigned Certifier remains required and these must be registered with the Institute if Civil Engineers. I am fine with this in theory, but there is plenty of other professionals well able to do this job which are now not permitted which include AT's which is a shame.

4Sticks

martinn123 wrote: »

That's the clarification needed, so Self-Builders ....go ahead.

That is not clarification. The department simply don't understand their own legislation.

BryanF

mullingar wrote: »

these must be registered with the Institute if Civil Engineers

Not true.

mandy gall

The Dept just want the 'stupid' self builder to fall asleep by the second paragraph and hopefully never wake up. The Dept understand this legislation very well - thats the problem

mullingar

BryanF wrote: »

Not true.

Humble pie eaten.

As the building owner, I have assigned the following person as Assigned Certifier, being a person named on a register maintained pursuant to Part 3 or Part 5 of the Building Control Act 2007 or Section 7 of the Institution of Civil Engineers of Ireland (Charter Amendment) Act 1969. I am satisfied having regard to the Code of Practice for Inspecting and Certifying Buildings and Works that the person so assigned is competent to inspect the building or works and to coordinate the inspection work undertaken by others, and to certify the works for compliance with the requirements of the Second Schedule to the Building Regulations in so far as they apply to the building or works concerned

I missed that "or" (A few beers on board)

Edit:

For those who want to know the list, here is the legislation. See page 17 for Part 3 and page 45 for part 5

Building control Act 2007

martinn123

4Sticks wrote: »

That is not clarification. The department simply don't understand their own legislation.

Well | can understand that some contributors will never be happy, unless the Legislation is withdrawn, ( that's not gonna happen ), the wording of Mr Vaughan, who is

Martin Vaughan
Assistant Principal
Architecture/Building Standards Section
Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government

seems clear enough to me.

I am not a legal person however,
can I suggest you refer this letter to your Thread on the ''Legal Forum'' and get some unbiased advice from that source.

4Sticks

Response from Mr Martin Vaughan, DECLG regarding S.I.9 - 13th March 2014

Dear Mr McCloud,

I wish to reply to your email of 26 February 2014 and 10 March 2014.

Firstly, I am happy to forward a PDF copy of Information Note issued on 26 February 2014 and now on headed paper as requested.

In relation to your understanding of the reply to Parliamentary Question No. 544 of 28 January 2014, I can confirm that your understanding accords with the Department’s position that a Self-Builder can nominate them-self as the Builder and sign the undertaking and the Certificate of Compliance on Completion (Part A). In nominating themselves as Builder and signing the Undertaking by the Builder, they are declaring that they are competent and undertaking to follow the certified design and to employ/engage competent persons, etc. and anyone signing these forms must of course be faithful to the undertakings so given.
In relation to the signature by a Self-Builder of the Undertaking by the Builder or Certificate of Compliance on Completion (Part A), the Department does not foresee a difficulty in a Self-Builder signing this form where they are clearly not a company.

To put things in their proper context, SI No. 9 of 2014 in introducing certificates of compliance must support and preserve the statutory responsibilities (on owners, designers and builders) that are already set out under the Building Control Act 1990 (the Act of 1990). The chain of responsibility begins with the owner. They must now sign the Commencement Notice and the notices of assignment of the Builder and of the Assigned Certifier (for present purposes we are only concerned with the Builder).

The Notice of Assignment of Builder requires the owner to declare they are satisfied that the assigned person is competent to undertake the works. This is the essential point - that the owner acts with responsibility. In practice this assigned person will be a sole trader, a company or a Self-Builder and their status is irrelevant once competence is assured. The Building Control Authority has no role in checking or verifying the builder's competence – it is the owner’s responsibility. If the building control authority does have concerns they have separate powers of inspection and enforcement under the Act of 1990 to deal with the situation as appropriate. The only limitation put on the assignment is that the owner satisfies themselves that the person assigned is competent to undertake the works. This Notice of Assignment is signed by the building owner and no one other than the building owner can make this assignment. You will note from the form that if the assigned person changes the building owner is legally obliged to inform the local authority and to assign and notify a new builder. The importance of this is that assigned builder (and no one other than the assigned Builder) can sign Part A of the relevant Certificate of Compliance on Completion.

The Assigned Builder is then required to sign their form of undertaking. The form must be signed by the person notified to the Building Control Authority as the Builder, thus preserving the chain of responsibility. In effect the owner controls who signs this form by making the notice of assignment. Where the person assigned is a firm, the signature must be signed by a Principal or Director i.e. it should not be signed by an employee. This qualification of the signatory is only necessary in the case of a company. Where a Self-Builder is acting on his or her own behalf, there are no agents or intermediaries involved, and the potential for confusion over legal responsibility does not therefore arise.

In relation to the signature by a Self-Builder of the Certificate of Compliance on Completion, the Department’s view would be as outlined above in relation to the form of undertaking. Part A of the Certificate of Compliance on Completion must be signed by the person assigned and notified by the owner at commencement. Again it is only where the assigned Builder is a corporate entity that the signature must be signed by a Principal or Director i.e. not by an employee.

From a building control perspective, if this certificate is signed by a person other that the person already assigned and notified, then a problem will arise in relation to validating and registering the certificate.

On this aspect of the matter you also asked why the signature line could not refer to the “building owner” – in this regard it is important to understand that the undertaking by the Builder and the Certificate of Compliance on Completion deal with the responsibilities of the Builder (not the owner) and it is important therefore that persons signing these forms know and understand that they are dealing with their responsibilities as Builder for the purposes of these forms.

In relation to the “Code of Practice for Inspecting and Certifying Buildings and Works” and the guidance in relation to use of competent persons, in your situation it is the Self-Builder who must be satisfy as to the competence of any person they engage for a particular task.

In relation to the Minister’s public comments on the likely cost of engaging an assigned certifier I attach for information a statement on the impact of the regulations which may be helpful in outlining the Department’ position in this regard.

I trust the above should finally clarify these matters for you.

Yours sincerely

Martin Vaughan
Assistant Principal
Architecture/Building Standards Section
Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government


Information Note on Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2014 (SI No. 9 of 2014) and the Self-Build Sector

Summary Statement on Regulatory Impact of the New Building Regulations (SI No. 9 of 2014)
Letter from Iaosb to Mr Martin Vaughan, Department of Environment, Community and Local Government

This man is expressing "a view" of his text just like this pet shop owner is expressing a view on a parrot he sold

4Sticks

martinn123 wrote: »

can I suggest you refer this letter to your Thread on the ''Legal Forum'' and get some unbiased advice from that source.

Why don't you - I tire of arguing black is not white.

Thread on legal forum is here

martinn123

4Sticks wrote: »

Why don't you - I tire of arguing black is not white.

Thread on legal forum is here

Don't want to be seen as hijacking your thread:)

While you, and others see this in Black/White terms, can I suggest ''It's a Grey Area''

As to the Pet Shop, and the Parrott,

The Legislation was Drafted and introduced by this Department, concerns were expressed to this Department, and this Department states it does not forsee a difficulty, The Minister also has stated the same,
what more do you want,
a High Court Judge,

If so,
get a Judicial Review.

mickdw

martinn123 wrote: »

Don't want to be seen as hijacking your thread:)

While you, and others see this in Black/White terms, can I suggest ''It's a Grey Area''

As to the Pet Shop, and the Parrott,

The Legislation was Drafted and introduced by this Department, concerns were expressed to this Department, and this Department states it does not forsee a difficulty, The Minister also has stated the same,
what more do you want,
a High Court Judge,

If so,
get a Judicial Review.

Well I don't see why any professional would get involved with a self build based on these 'clarifications' while the wordings remain unchanged. While this latest opinion makes sense, it really needs to be reflected in the regulations.

martinn123

4Sticks wrote: »

Why don't you - I tire of arguing black is not white.

Thread on legal forum is here

Done......had some spare time on my hands.

4Sticks

martinn123 wrote: »

can I suggest ''It's a Grey Area''

Do you think that advances , or undermines , your argument ?

martinn123 wrote: »

The Legislation was Drafted and introduced by this Department, concerns were expressed to this Department, and this Department states it does not forsee a difficulty, The Minister also has stated the same,

these people foresaw no difficulty with insurances - and had to issue SI 9 2014 after SI 80 of 2013

these people foresaw no difficulty with SI 9 2014 even when the RIAI were urging deferral - and yet had to issue SI 105 2014 ( a deferal for govt works only - the rest of us can .....:rolleyes:) less than a wet week after the effective date of SI 9 2014

Truly there are none so blind and those who "do not foresee"

4Sticks

martinn123 wrote: »

what more do you want

If I was a self builder I would like a further SI to amend the builders certificates to read

(where the assigned builder is a company , to be signed by a Principal or Director of a that Building Company only)

I find it interesting and surprising that the IAOSB "has the ear" of the DOE now and can only conclude this is out of the ministers fear of the political back lash in May. If I am right about that then self builders take action now whilst you are still pushing an open door. In June it will lock again.