New Building Control Regs

lawlorboy

Got planning in 2011 then made an amendment which we got planning march 19th 2014 with the conditions attached to the original planning permission but no one knows do we build to to 2013 regs or 2014 regs...anyone know the answer???

Penn

You're subject to the new 2014 regulations. It's not when you submit or receive planning that matters, it's when you submit your Commencement Notice (which you couldn't have done before March 1st when the new regulations came into effect).

So yes, your project comes under the new regulations.

sydthebeat

lawlorboy wrote: »

Got planning in 2011 then made an amendment which we got planning march 19th 2014 with the conditions attached to the original planning permission but no one knows do we build to to 2013 regs or 2014 regs...anyone know the answer???

are you talking about building regulations....

or building control regulations?
ie the one where you have to engage an architect/ engineer / surveyor....

there is a huge difference.

lawlorboy

That's great that ive finally gotten an answer in relation to hopefully starting the building,would you know how the new regs affect the self builder?

sydthebeat

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057104385

and can i request a mod to change the title of the thread i linked to, and others, to reflect
building "control" regulations apart from building regulations?....

miss no stars

lawlorboy wrote: »

That's great that ive finally gotten an answer in relation to hopefully starting the building,would you know how the new regs affect the self builder?

They've fairly much gotten rid of the self builder. You'll need the commencement notice done properly. The local authorities cannot and WILL not issue them retrospectively. Until someone finds they can't sell their house due to no commencement notice and challenges it in court, I would be talking to an engineer or architect about striking a deal on doing the minimum to make it comply.

Penn

lawlorboy wrote: »

That's great that ive finally gotten an answer in relation to hopefully starting the building,would you know how the new regs affect the self builder?

You need to engage a competent professional (Registered Architect, Registered Building Surveyor or Chartered Engineer) to act as the Assigned Certifier. As a self-build project, this may be difficult. Many professionals were advised by various parties not to act as the AC for self-build projects, and some were advised not to act as the AC at all. It could be difficult (and expensive) to find a professional who will be willing to take on this role for a self-build project. You also can't start your build without one, so your first step would be to find and hire one, and they'll be able to advise you on all the rest as it largely boils down to what they want in order to make them comfortable with signing it off.

Another point to note would be that you have to sign documents saying that you are competent to undertake the works, and that you are the "Principal or Director of a building company only". The second part of that won't be true, and it is therefore illegal to sign it knowing it isn't true, though the Minister has said they won't come after any self-builders who signs this. This is at your own discretion whether or not to take the risk legally, and again should be discussed with the professional you hire.

lawlorboy

That is a huge help to me,been putting off the build for months due to uncertainty.Thanks everyone for putting it in simple terms to help me move forward.

Rackle

Can anyone help.. We are planning. 39SqM kitchen extension.. We had to go for planning as we have to demolish a wrap around conservatory that faces to the front of the property and replacing it as part of the extension. PP granted December 2013, with a commencement notice attached.. I'm now worried that submission of the CN will throw us under the new Bldg Ctrl Act.. Even thought he extn is clearly under the stated allowed 40 SqM.. Does anyone know.. We really cannot take the financial hit or all of the difficulty that goes with the new act???... Help!

Penn

A commencement notice is required because your works required planning permission. However, as your works are under 40sqm, it's a shorter version of the commencement notice and one which doesn't fall under the new building control regulation requirements.

If there's an architect or similar involved in the project, speak with them to make sure.

Rackle

Penn wrote: »

A commencement notice is required because your works required planning permission. However, as your works are under 40sqm, it's a shorter version of the commencement notice and one which doesn't fall under the new building control regulation requirements.

If there's an architect or similar involved in the project, speak with them to make sure.

Hi Penn
Thank you so much for your response.. Logic did seem to me that that would be the case, I was just concerned about the front aspect of the house Etc etc... We are also self building, my husband is a qualified (all be it not employed) carpenter, what details do we include in the CN as the 'builder'?? Do we have to est a Co. as suggested for bigger self build projects above?? Thanks again!

Gumbo

Rackle wrote: »

Hi Penn
Thank you so much for your response.. Logic did seem to me that that would be the case, I was just concerned about the front aspect of the house Etc etc... We are also self building, my husband is a qualified (all be it not employed) carpenter, what details do we include in the CN as the 'builder'?? Do we have to est a Co. as suggested for bigger self build projects above?? Thanks again!

On the short form, you can just put your husbands name as the builder iirc.

Shooter_galway

There's an amendment to the reg that family homes can use direct or self build I have a copy of this pm if you need details and I can forward it on

sydthebeat

Shooter_galway wrote: »

There's an amendment to the reg that family homes can use direct or self build I have a copy of this pm if you need details and I can forward it on

Pm sent

sydthebeat

Shooter_galway wrote: »

There's an amendment to the reg that family homes can use direct or self build I have a copy of this pm if you need details and I can forward it on

thanks shooter, i had a look at what you sent me.

its available to view here

http://www.iaosb.com/information%20note%20on%20building%20control%20(amendment)%20regulations%202014%20(si%20no.%209%20of%202014)%20and%20the%20self-build%20sector.html


first off, its not an "amendment" to the regulations. Its an information note from the department.
while its a help to the self build argument, it still does not supersede the fundamental issue of having to legally state that the self builder is "a principle or director of a building company".

im flabbergasted that the minister simply does not remove that statement from the certificates, if its such a red herring that he claims it
is.....

we have already seen this week that having legal advice to state you can break a law... is not in itself a viable excuse to break a law.

galwaytt

sydthebeat wrote: »

we have already seen this week that having legal advice to state you can break a law... is not in itself a viable excuse to break a law.

... Indeed - but said people got off anyway, so what does that tell us ?

Rackle

galwaytt wrote: »

... Indeed - but said people got off anyway, so what does that tell us ?

Just on my original query, am I correct to assume that these issues will not apply to us as the extn is under 40SqM?? Albeit we did have to apply for planning and Fi need to submit the 'short' commencement notice??.. R

sydthebeat

galwaytt wrote: »

... Indeed - but said people got off anyway, so what does that tell us ?

dont want to be pedantic... but they didnt "get off" they were still found guilty.

who here wants to be the guinea pig case to test the departments letter?

sydthebeat

Rackle wrote: »

Just on my original query, am I correct to assume that these issues will not apply to us as the extn is under 40SqM?? Albeit we did have to apply for planning and Fi need to submit the 'short' commencement notice??.. R

yes you are correct.. only extensions OVER 40 sq m are applicable.

and yes, short form commencement notice must be sent in.

saucyleopard

<snip> I also saw something about this a couple of weeks ago on the scsi website.

mandy gall

Can we self build in ireland or not? We are so confused...

Shooter_galway

In 2014 you can self build but there has to be a person nominated to the engineer that has previous experience or extensive knowledge of the building trade. That's what our engineer told me Wednesday evening but theres a lot more that has to be submitted with commencement notice so make sure all is in order.

We were advised not to start until council have everything as they can revoke planning permission if you start and all drawings etc ain't submitted.

mandy gall

We are waiting until self building is made legal again...its probably the safest option.

Shooter_galway

That's if it will be made legal these regulations are there for safety can't see them being relaxed when in place

mandy gall

Sure, we all want safe, sound buildings, but regulations must include everybody in society, including people that want to self build..ireland the only country now to ban self building - shocking & scandalous...

BryanF

mandy gall wrote: »

Sure, we all want safe, sound buildings, but regulations must include everybody in society, including people that want to self build..ireland the only country now to ban self building - shocking & scandalous...

local elections are coming up. are you making your voice heard?

sydthebeat

Shooter_galway wrote: »

We were advised not to start until council have everything as they can revoke planning permission if you start and all drawings etc ain't submitted.

They cannot revoke your planning permission.

They can invalidate your commencement notice.

Huge difference.

mandy gall

BryanF wrote: »

local elections are coming up. are you making your voice heard?

Very much so. .you know every single candidate including FG had ni idea how serious SI9 is on self builders..

galwaytt

mandy gall wrote: »

We are waiting until self building is made legal again...its probably the safest option.

Shooter_galway wrote: »

That's if it will be made legal these regulations are there for safety can't see them being relaxed when in place

mandy gall wrote: »

Sure, we all want safe, sound buildings, but regulations must include everybody in society, including people that want to self build..ireland the only country now to ban self building - shocking & scandalous...

Where on earth are you getting that self-build is 'illegal'. Such stuff'n'nonsense, frankly. Self build is legal and possible. Just do your homework.

As for waiting, well............it's like buying a PC. if you wait for the 'perfect' one to come along.....you'll be permanently prevaricating. There comes a time when a commitment must be made, one way or the other.

Penn

galwaytt wrote: »

Where on earth are you getting that self-build is 'illegal'. Such stuff'n'nonsense, frankly. Self build is legal and possible. Just do your homework.

Technically it's not. The builder must sign the form which states that they are the "principal or director of a building company only". If you're not one of them, it's illegal to sign the document saying you are. It's just a case that the Minister has said that it is okay to sign it because they won't come after anyone for doing it. Doesn't change the fact that it is technically illegal. Legal advice should always be sought in these cases.

martinn123

Penn wrote: »

Technically it's not. The builder must sign the form which states that they are the "principal or director of a building company only". If you're not one of them, it's illegal to sign the document saying you are. It's just a case that the Minister has said that it is okay to sign it because they won't come after anyone for doing it. Doesn't change the fact that it is technically illegal. Legal advice should always be sought in these cases.

That's a lot of " Legal Advice" in that post.
As opposed to an Opinion.

This has not been tested in any Court, as far as I am aware, and the Minister, and Department, have stated it's still possible to self-build.
As Syd said in a previous post, no-one wants to be the Guinea Pig, but nevertheless, issuing such a stark opinion, based on such a lack of clarity, is misleading, in my opinion.

It's like saying you won't get an Assigned Certfyer, and you can't build, has Construction ground to a halt, in the past month or so....no.....

Lots of Professionals were posting here, that they would be out of work, when these Regs came into force, anyone closed yet......I hope not.

Penn

martinn123 wrote: »

That's a lot of " Legal Advice" in that post.
As opposed to an Opinion.

This has not been tested in any Court, as far as I am aware, and the Minister, and Department, have stated it's still possible to self-build.
As Syd said in a previous post, no-one wants to be the Guinea Pig, but nevertheless, issuing such a stark opinion, based on such a lack of clarity, is misleading, in my opinion.

Hence why I ended with "Legal advice should always be sought in these cases". Legal advice can neither be sought nor given on this forum. I am not giving legal advice. I am pointing out the inconsistencies and contradictions, and saying that neither galwaytt or myself are correct, because we don't know. Legal advice should always be sought in these cases. But I accept my post was worded unclearly so I'm happy to clarify what I meant. However, I would ask that you report posts you feel break the Legal Advice section of the charter in future rather than bringing it up on thread.

mandy gall

galwaytt wrote: »

Where on earth are you getting that self-build is 'illegal'. Such stuff'n'nonsense, frankly. Self build is legal and possible. Just do your homework.

As for waiting, well............it's like buying a PC. if you wait for the 'perfect' one to come along.....you'll be permanently prevaricating. There comes a time when a commitment must be made, one way or the other.

Aah now - I think you should do your homework - self building is 100% illegal now in Ireland...to go ahead at this time with an illegal build is akin to playing Russian Roulette - YOU JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN NEXT...btw absolutely nothing like buying a PC. fyi Minister & Dept are lunatics...:)

martinn123

Penn wrote: »

Hence why I ended with "Legal advice should always be sought in these cases". Legal advice can neither be sought nor given on this forum. I am not giving legal advice. I am pointing out the inconsistencies and contradictions, and saying that neither galwaytt or myself are correct, because we don't know. Legal advice should always be sought in these cases. But I accept my post was worded unclearly so I'm happy to clarify what I meant. However, I would ask that you report posts you feel break the Legal Advice section of the charter in future rather than bringing it up on thread.

I think you mis-read, or mis-interpreted the reasons behind my post.
It was not to criticise any opinions you might give, but to point out that, throughout the debate on this topic, in various threads, opinions have been posted as Statments of Fact.
This document to be signed by a Co Director, or Principal, in the view of the Minister and Department, " Should" not pose a problem, are they right, I do not know, but my opinion, is "proceed if the Bank are happy to release Funds"

Conveyancing issues may arise in the future, that's a risk, but is is worth stalling all Self-Building in the Country......that's a decision each builder will have to weigh up......with Legal Advice, I agree.

Poor Uncle Tom

martinn123 wrote: »

This document to be signed by a Co Director, or Principal, in the view of the Minister and Department, " Should" not pose a problem, are they right, I do not know, but my opinion, is "proceed if the Bank are happy to release Funds"

Conveyancing issues may arise in the future, that's a risk, but is is worth stalling all Self-Building in the Country......that's a decision each builder will have to weigh up......with Legal Advice, I agree.

I think you are not viewing this issue from the correct perspective. It isn't the minister or the bank or the builder who will have to provide professional indemnity insurance cover and sign on the dotted line as Assigned Certifyer.

Any of the paid for legal advice I have read (about 6 different firms at this stage) on this very issue are stating the same thing. While nobody is stopping any Assigned Certifyer from signing off on a self build, from an insurance point of view they are being advised not to.

martinn123

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

I think you are not viewing this issue from the correct perspective. It isn't the minister or the bank or the builder who will have to provide professional indemnity insurance cover and sign on the dotted line as Assigned Certifyer.

Any of the paid for legal advice I have read (about 6 different firms at this stage) on this very issue are stating the same thing. While nobody is stopping any Assigned Certifyer from signing off on a self build, from an insurance point of view they are being advised not to.

That's a fair comment, but can you clarify, you seem to be saying Legal Advice says not to sign, for Insurance reasons,
what do the Insurance Co say, after all they are carrying the risk, not the Legal Firms

Poor Uncle Tom

martinn123 wrote: »

That's a fair comment, but can you clarify, you seem to be saying Legal Advice says not to sign, for Insurance reasons,
what do the Insurance Co say, after all they are carrying the risk, not the Legal Firms

They have been unusually silent on this issue to date, that I am aware of, I know there are talks underway at present between the representative bodies and the insurance underwriters/providers but nothing has been finalised yet, that I am aware of and whether self builds specifically are being discussed I do not know.

martinn123

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

They have been unusually silent on this issue to date, that I am aware of, I know there are talks underway at present between the representative bodies and the insurance underwriters/providers but nothing has been finalised yet, that I am aware of and whether self builds specifically are being discussed I do not know.

So until you get a call from your Insurance Co, stating, you are no longer covered, for Certyfing, on a self build, what do you propose.

The consensus here seems to be to turn away the work, but someone is doing it.

Seems those willing to take on this work, will be busy, while everyone else, waits, for clarification which will perhaps take years to sort out.

mandy gall

What about this scenario - we proceed with the build, everything goes well, completion cert issued etc.. we insure new house and move in.. Six years later the house burns down.. insurance company wants all documents etc.. they have an immediate get out clause because a 'housewife' signed herself off as a principal or director of a building company only...this is just 1 scenario.. the S.I. 9 is awful..

Poor Uncle Tom

martinn123 wrote: »

So until you get a call from your Insurance Co, stating, you are no longer covered, for Certyfing, on a self build, what do you propose.

The consensus here seems to be to turn away the work, but someone is doing it.

Seems those willing to take on this work, will be busy, while everyone else, waits, for clarification which will perhaps take years to sort out.

Personally, I will not sign any self build under the current building regulations in their present state regardless of insurances.

We've had this conversation before about the charges needed to adequately supervise a build under those regulations. Nobody I know of would be willing to pay what it actually costs to provide adequate and proper supervision to sign off under the current building regulations with any degree of comfort knowing that you have done all possible to protect your client, yourself and your insurance.

martinn123

mandy gall wrote: »

What about this scenario - we proceed with the build, everything goes well, completion cert issued etc.. we insure new house and move in.. Six years later the house burns down.. insurance company wants all documents etc.. they have an immediate get out clause because a 'housewife' signed herself off as a principal or director of a building company only...this is just 1 scenario.. the S.I. 9 is awful..

Well with that attitude, it's a wonder you leave the house of a morning, what if I get hit by a Bus.

In your unfortunate circumstance of the house burning down, I would say, Completion Cert Issued, Assagned Certfyer Cert Issued, Bank release Funds, as advised by Their Solicitor, no issue.

ryan101

As usual, this country is a joke.

martinn123

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

Personally, I will not sign any self build under the current building regulations in their present state regardless of insurances.

OK you are out, that's your decision to make, and I respect that.

We've had this conversation before about the charges needed to adequately supervise a build under those regulations. Nobody I know of would be willing to pay what it actually costs to provide adequate and proper supervision to sign off under the current building regulations with any degree of comfort knowing that you have done all possible to protect your client, yourself and your insurance.

Yes and I accept that Fees need to reflect the input, in time, and expertise,
I started to post tonight on the Topic of the " Document " causing an issue, Co Director,/Principal, etc. Not to regurgitate previous conversations on Fees.
The issue of Insurance was then introduced, but I now know the Insurance Co's are silent on this issue,

Anyone out there, actually building a house under these Reg's......if so please let us know the secret.

mandy gall

martinn123 wrote: »

Well with that attitude, it's a wonder you leave the house of a morning, what if I get hit by a Bus.

In your unfortunate circumstance of the house burning down, I would say, Completion Cert Issued, Assagned Certfyer Cert Issued, Bank release Funds, as advised by Their Solicitor, no issue.

This isn't a 'what if' situation - it is still legal I think to walk across the road and get hit by a bus! - you don't seem to understand what I mean regarding S.I.9 - How on earth can one proceed with a self build when it is now illegal to do so? Please I am being serious...would you sign a legal document which states to be signed by a High or Supreme Court Judge ONLY?

mandy gall

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

Personally, I will not sign any self build under the current building regulations in their present state regardless of insurances.

We've had this conversation before about the charges needed to adequately supervise a build under those regulations. Nobody I know of would be willing to pay what it actually costs to provide adequate and proper supervision to sign off under the current building regulations with any degree of comfort knowing that you have done all possible to protect your client, yourself and your insurance.

You should change your name to Wise Uncle Tom...;)

martinn123

mandy gall wrote: »

This isn't a 'what if' situation - it is still legal I think to walk across the road and get hit by a bus! - you don't seem to understand what I mean regarding S.I.9 - How on earth can one proceed with a self build when it is now illegal to do so? Please I am being serious...would you sign a legal document which states to be signed by a High or Supreme Court Judge ONLY?

You keep using the word "illegal "

It's illegal to drive without Insurance, punishable by a fine or prison
It's illegal to rob a bank, punishable by prison

Do tell me under what statute is Self-building " illegal " and does it involve Prison, or just a Fine.

mandy gall

martinn123 wrote: »

You keep using the word "illegal "

It's illegal to drive without Insurance, punishable by a fine or prison
It's illegal to rob a bank, punishable by prison

Do tell me under what statute is Self-building " illegal " and does it involve Prison, or just a Fine.

Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2014 - Statutory Instrument No. 9

Failure to comply with these regulations is punishable by two years imprisonment of €50,000 fine - whichever the Judge of the Day wants to dish out...Mr Conor Taaffe of Homebond was given great pleasure in informing us of this fact..

miss no stars

mandy gall wrote: »

Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2014 - Statutory Instrument No. 9

Failure to comply with these regulations is punishable by two years imprisonment of €50,000 fine - whichever the Judge of the Day wants to dish out...Mr Conor Taaffe of Homebond was given great pleasure in informing us of this fact..

Jesus, you'd swear it was the worst thing in the world to require people to have people who know what they're doing involved.

Self builders seem to hear all the great stories about how much money other self builders saved and how wonderful it all is. The problem is, you don't hear about the guy who self built and brought in a sub contractor to do the basement but the sub contractor never supplied reinforcement drawings or schedules or construction drawings and details and the paperwork trail was a mess and now the whole thing's leaking like crazy and there's absolutely no recourse and it's entirely the fault of the self-builder for being so arrogant as to think that they (with reading a homebond manual) can do what qualified people - i.e. people who spent years going to college for, training as apprentices for and working for years for - can do.

I'm not having a go at you but the new regs are actually decent enough for savvy self-builders. It gives you recourse. You can't sue yourself if it all goes wrong...

Approach a builder. Appoint them to be the assigned builder. In their letter of appointment, contract only their oversight. You will notify them at key stages of construction, they come and inspect before allowing you on to the next stage. You're still self-building, you're still within the law, you're basically acting as labour for a builder who's supervising.

If you're so indignant that you don't want any professional oversight of your project well then, you're welcome to the construction faults any day.

The people this really sucks for are assigned certifiers. How in the name of god should a structural engineer be held responsible for the plumbing?!

martinn123

mandy gall wrote: »

Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2014 - Statutory Instrument No. 9

Failure to comply with these regulations is punishable by two years imprisonment of €50,000 fine - whichever the Judge of the Day wants to dish out...Mr Conor Taaffe of Homebond was given great pleasure in informing us of this fact..

Ah yes Homebond, an excellent source of information, as attested to by Pyrite Sufferers.

While the Department, and the Minister, say build away,

martinn123

miss no stars wrote: »

Jesus, you'd swear it was the worst thing in the world to require people to have people who know what they're doing involved.

Self builders seem to hear all the great stories about how much money other self builders saved and how wonderful it all is. The problem is, you don't hear about the guy who self built and brought in a sub contractor to do the basement but the sub contractor never supplied reinforcement drawings or schedules or construction drawings and details and the paperwork trail was a mess and now the whole thing's leaking like crazy and there's absolutely no recourse and it's entirely the fault of the self-builder for being so arrogant as to think that they (with reading a homebond manual) can do what qualified people - i.e. people who spent years going to college for, training as apprentices for and working for years for - can do.

I'm not having a go at you but the new regs are actually decent enough for savvy self-builders. It gives you recourse. You can't sue yourself if it all goes wrong...

Approach a builder. Appoint them to be the assigned builder. In their letter of appointment, contract only their oversight. You will notify them at key stages of construction, they come and inspect before allowing you on to the next stage. You're still self-building, you're still within the law, you're basically acting as labour for a builder who's supervising.

If you're so indignant that you don't want any professional oversight of your project well then, you're welcome to the construction faults any day.

The people this really sucks for are assigned certifiers. How in the name of god should a structural engineer be held responsible for the plumbing?!

Congratulations, in the months, or is it years, we have been debating this issue, that is the most reasoned, sensible, and well thought out, potential solution to this issue, I have seen on Boards.
It cuts through all the hype, hysteria, and overreaction so often reflected here.

Well apart from the final sentence which reverts to type.

mandy gall

miss no stars wrote: »

Jesus, you'd swear it was the worst thing in the world to require people to have people who know what they're doing involved.

Self builders seem to hear all the great stories about how much money other self builders saved and how wonderful it all is. The problem is, you don't hear about the guy who self built and brought in a sub contractor to do the basement but the sub contractor never supplied reinforcement drawings or schedules or construction drawings and details and the paperwork trail was a mess and now the whole thing's leaking like crazy and there's absolutely no recourse and it's entirely the fault of the self-builder for being so arrogant as to think that they (with reading a homebond manual) can do what qualified people - i.e. people who spent years going to college for, training as apprentices for and working for years for - can do.

I'm not having a go at you but the new regs are actually decent enough for savvy self-builders. It gives you recourse. You can't sue yourself if it all goes wrong...

Approach a builder. Appoint them to be the assigned builder. In their letter of appointment, contract only their oversight. You will notify them at key stages of construction, they come and inspect before allowing you on to the next stage. You're still self-building, you're still within the law, you're basically acting as labour for a builder who's supervising.

If you're so indignant that you don't want any professional oversight of your project well then, you're welcome to the construction faults any day.

The people this really sucks for are assigned certifiers. How in the name of god should a structural engineer be held responsible for the plumbing?!

I agree with you on one point - Assigned Certifiers are in a terrible position - but I disagree with you on the rest. There is no way in the world that self builders should be forced to even pick up the phone to call a building contractor - he may not know a hammer from a nail - he was probably a butcher before he decided to call himself a 'builder - the S.I. 9 is 'codswallop', formulated by CIF cowboys and anyone who thinks they are 'decent enough' regs needs to think seriously as how they can justify banning self building.
At no stage did I ever say we didn't want professional insight - in fact professional insight is essential. I cannot wait until, S.I.9 are in the shredder...:rolleyes: