Building Regulations - not enforced

eirbear1989

Hi All,

I am trying to think of building regulations that havn't been enforced and so have been in the news in recent years, such as Priory Hall and the Pyrite case. My mind is just gone blank. It is namely on buildings that may have gone into Nama so will be coming up for sale in the next while.

If anyone could help me that would be great!!!

Our country has gone from being under regulated and now with the new regulations it is going to be over regulated...but sure that's the Irish government, cant get anything right! :P

4Sticks

Priory Hall is one notorious example of building regulations being enforced.
Late in the day , yes , but enforcement all the same.

You can take it as default that no NAMA property has had building regulations enforced. Only Local authorities can enforce building regulations. .

So if you have a particular NAMA property in mind check with the local authority to confirm what enforcement actions were (not) taken.

4Sticks

In fact - in my opinion - Priory Hall is one reason that we will see even less enforcement of building regulations. Out LA's are so scared of their own powers and the consequences for them in exercising them.
They got stuck with a nice bill for their belated actions.

The tragedy is that if they were only in the practice of regularly exercising their swingeing powers - thereby meaningfully influencing our building culture - then the likely hood of Priory Halls would greatly diminish.
As things stand we will have more. Only difference will be that it will be easier for the state not to carry the costs.

martinn123

4Sticks wrote: »

In fact - in my opinion - Priory Hall is one reason that we will see even less enforcement of building regulations. Out LA's are so scared of their own powers and the consequences for them in exercising them.
They got stuck with a nice bill for their belated actions.

The tragedy is that if they were only in the practice of regularly exercising their swingeing powers - thereby meaningfully influencing our building culture - then the likely hood of Priory Halls would greatly diminish.
As things stand we will have more. Only difference will be that it will be easier for the state not to carry the costs.

Not so sure " the state " footed the bill there.
OK DCC paid the accommodation costs following the High Court etc, but then the Banks wrote off the Mortgages, and agreed to issue new Mortgages for new apartments, the State took over the Buildings, and will pay for renovations, but that should be recovered from the eventual sale,
For the state, substitute the Banks, but hey, that's us. But then it always is.

DOCARCH

I'd love to know what financial contributios were levied/paid to DCC on Priory Hall? :rolleyes:

A couple of extra € per m.sq. would go a long way to funding a very effective LA building control system.

4Sticks

@Martin123 my point is that it cost DCC . As a result I believe they and all other LAs will be very very slow to take enforcement action now.

martinn123

4Sticks wrote: »

@Martin123 my point is that it cost DCC . As a result I believe they and all other LAs will be very very slow to take enforcement action now.

True, it did cost DCC, as I rember it, it was the High Court which insisted the tenants be put into temporary accom. DCC had an appeal in against the costs, but they lost, so it will go on the rates, or maybe this new Property Tax,

The main costs were picked up by the Mortgagee Banks.

I agree the LA's will not enforce these reg's

Interesting post on the Bregs Blog ( can't link ) advice from Law Socy, they want just one cert to hang everything on, no Ancillary Certs need apply,

BryanF

martinn123 wrote: »

True, it did cost DCC, as I rember it, it was the High Court which insisted the tenants be put into temporary accom. DCC had an appeal in against the costs, but they lost, so it will go on the rates, or maybe this new Property Tax,

The main costs were picked up by the Mortgagee Banks.

I agree the LA's will not enforce these reg's

Interesting post on the Bregs Blog ( can't link ) advice from Law Socy, they want just one cert to hang everything on, no Ancillary Certs need apply,

Hang...

martinn123

BryanF wrote: »

Hang...

Hang everything on......the only support........all relying on......main man.

BryanF

martinn123 wrote: »

Hang everything on......the only support........all relying on......main man.

What next Certifiers sitting in their own portocabons on one-off house jobs!

sydthebeat

martinn123 wrote: »

Interesting post on the Bregs Blog ( can't link ) advice from Law Socy, they want just one cert to hang everything on, no Ancillary Certs need apply,

you may read again, because thats not AT ALL what they said

Having considered these submissions carefully, the committee is persuaded that its original guideline is no longer appropriate and that, where an architect’s certificate of opinion on compliance confirms compliance with the Building Regulations and confirms that, in coming to this opinion on compliance, reliance has been placed by the architect on confirmations received from other professionals, it is not necessary for a purchaser’s solicitor to see such confirmations and the solicitor may rely on the architect’s certificate of compliance itself

what they basically say is "dont give us a load of paperwork guys, we're happy to accept the assigned certifers certification as proof of compliance, regardless of the fact its based on ancillary certification"

it most certainly does not say "no ancillary certs need apply"

martinn123

sydthebeat wrote: »

you may read again, because thats not AT ALL what they said




what they basically say is "dont give us a load of paperwork guys, we're happy to accept the assigned certifers certification as proof of compliance, regardless of the fact its based on ancillary certification"

it most certainly does not say "no ancillary certs need apply"

We are arguing over the use of words, but actually in agreement

I accept it did not use the words ''no ancillary cert need apply'' a humorous phrase to reflect the fact that the Law Soc'y don't want to see, the Ancillary Certs, they will rely on one.....The Certifyer

Similarly my use of the words'' hang it on '' was a loose reference to the same concept.

Looks like you can't make a grammatical error in this thread , like the previous, or the Grammar Gardai swoop.

sydthebeat

martinn123 wrote: »

We are arguing over the use of words, but actually in agreement

I accept it did not use the words ''no ancillary cert need apply'' a humorous phrase to reflect the fact that the Law Soc'y don't want to see, the Ancillary Certs, they will rely on one.....The Certifyer

Similarly my use of the words'' hang it on '' was a loose reference to the same concept.

Looks like you can't make a grammatical error in this thread , like the previous, or the Grammar Gardai swoop.

its ok to admit that you didnt understand what was being said.

Theres no grammatical difference here..... you misrepresented what was said in an attempt to further your well established agenda to paint professionals in a bad light.

you were caught out.

martinn123

sydthebeat wrote: »

its ok to admit that you didnt understand what was being said.

No I was reflecting on an article I read earlier, I posted that I did not have the link to hand

Theres no grammatical difference here..... you misrepresented what was said in an attempt to further your well established agenda to paint professionals in a bad light.

You are doing that job ok without any help from me

you were caught out.

Didn't know it is a game.

DOCARCH

Mod Note: Guys...lets take it down a notch and not get into pedantics (and personal comments!). Thanks.

sydthebeat

http://bregsforum.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/local-authorities-need-help-bcar-si-9/

have a read of this re enforcement



I had to laugh however at Laois Co Co's claim to have 100% of inspections. They must really be pulling the proverbial on that one. As a practitioner in Laois i can say without fear that i have NEVER see NOR heard of the local BCO inspecting any one off rural build. How they managed to visit 124 valid commencement notice builds with such stealth is beyond me.

4Sticks

Well re inspections. What do they constitute I'd love to know....

Corkblowin

sydthebeat wrote: »

How they managed to visit 124 valid commencement notice builds with such stealth is beyond me.

Id guess its drive-by inspections consisting of 'yep - looks like a house'.