This will be painful

4Sticks

The recent reforms of the arrangements in place for the oversight of building activity will mean that all those along the supply chain, including small quarries and joinery shops, can now expect certification to be sought in relation to the products they carry.

source

This is not an industry tempered by the discipline of knowledge of or respect for regulations.

One may seek but not find ....

martinn123

4Sticks wrote: »

source

This is not an industry tempered by the discipline of knowledge of or respect for regulations.

One may seek but not find ....

this is not new, and I think unrelated to these New reg's

The responsibility of the manufacturers of construction products to provide robust and reliable information in relation to the performance characteristics of such products arises fromRegulation (EU) No 305/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products and repealing Council Directive 89/106/EEC.In addition, the National Standards Authority of Ireland has also produced additional guidance in respect of some harmonised standards in the form of National Annexes or Standard Recommendations which set out appropriate minimum performance levels for specific intended uses of certain products in Ireland.The key effect of the EU Construction Products Regulations is that since 1July 2013, manufacturers of any construction product which is covered by a harmonised European product standard (known collectively as hENs) are required, when placing a product on the market, to make a Declaration of Performance for the product, and to affix the product’s CE mark.

Same Source.

As I understand CE marks, or in UK , BS marks have been required for some time.

sydthebeat

martinn123 wrote: »

this is not new, and I think unrelated to these New reg's

.

incorrect

CPR 2013 and TGD D are very closely intertwined.

Compliance with TGD D means compliance with CPR 2013
ergo means documented evidence of statutory certification for every material used in a construction project.

see page 4 here

martinn123

sydthebeat wrote: »

incorrect

CPR 2013 and TGD D are very closely intertwined.

Compliance with TGD D means compliance with CPR 2013
ergo means documented evidence of statutory certification for every material used in a construction project.

see page 4 here

So is it that, the New Reg's reinforce, or make compulsory, the need for all materials on site to have a CE Mark, or BS, and supporting documentation, where as perhaps previously it was optional??

If so, is that not good, if perhaps onerous on the Certifyer.

I appreciate you are viewing this from a Certifyer's position, but it must be better for the Home Occupier, that the materials meet a EU Standard.

Corkblowin

Not just the certifier - more paperwork for contractors too. Had a long discussion today with a builder who was trying to say that invoices and delivery dockets would be enough to prove what was put into the build:

Cert of hardcore testing - sure isn't the delivery docket grand
Windows of specified u-value - invoice be fine sure
Radon barrier as specified - sure won't you see it (probably true this one actually!)

But its a total culture shock for some contractors too. I dread being involved in an adversarial contract situation under this new regime

sydthebeat

martinn123 wrote: »

So is it that, the New Reg's reinforce, or make compulsory, the need for all materials on site to have a CE Mark, or BS, and supporting documentation, where as perhaps previously it was optional??

If so, is that not good, if perhaps onerous on the Certifyer.

I appreciate you are viewing this from a Certifyer's position, but it must be better for the Home Occupier, that the materials meet a EU Standard.

absolutely its good....

the point 4sticks was making in the OP was that the small (non certified) producer was, more often than not, cheaper than the larger (certified) producer therefore the knock effect will be felt in the pockets of the those that build.

Our industry has been accepting of 'blind eyes' and outright contempt for regulations in its history. That will have to stop and it will a harsh lesson to those builders who use these non certified producers.

im sure we all know guys who make up pvc windows in the back of their sheds as nixers.... they are going to be the ones who have to 'put up or shut up'

martinn123

sydthebeat wrote: »

absolutely its good....

the point 4sticks was making in the OP was that the small (non certified) producer was, more often than not, cheaper than the larger (certified) producer therefore the knock effect will be felt in the pockets of the those that build.

Our industry has been accepting of 'blind eyes' and outright contempt for regulations in its history. That will have to stop and it will a harsh lesson to those builders who use these non certified producers.

That is and has been a false assumption.

Co's Who produce a quality and certified product, in large scale, should be cheaper, and certainly more reliable, in terms of Warranty etc. than a back street merchant, ( except for the VAT cheats ).

i'm sure we all know guys who make up pvc windows in the back of their sheds as nixers.... they are going to be the ones who have to 'put up or shut up'

Hopefully they will be out of business.

sydthebeat

martinn123 wrote: »

That is and has been a false assumption.

Co's Who produce a quality and certified product, in large scale, should be cheaper, and certainly more reliable, in terms of Warranty etc. than a back street merchant, ( except for the VAT cheats ).

.

should be... yes... but the playing field isnt always level


the non certified producer can in a lot of instances:
not be paying rates,
Not have proper planning permission,
hasnt paid development contributions,
hasnt paid for testing,
hasnt proper licences,
may be using inferior raw materials,

etc etc

if the field was level.. the mass producer should enjoy the economies of sale.
hopefully full adherence to TGD D will level this playing field.

4Sticks

My point is that is that so much (not all) of our construction industry has a very casual approach to documenting construction. And that will change. Slowly. Painfully.

4Sticks

A particularly painful aspect for builders will be finding that if they they do not produce " those stupid pieces of paper " then they will not receive another "piece of paper".

And uncertified components will be torn out and replaced. Either by the contractor at his expense or by another contractor whose costs will be back charged to the original contractor who may even also be found to be in breach of contract if he insists on being a slow learner.

There are events afoot in Drogheda that will set the background to all of this.

Drift

4Sticks wrote: »

There are events afoot in Drogheda that will set the background to all of this.

Any chance you could enlighten us (even by pm)?

I'm quite worried about how difficult it will be to ensure that even the most conscientious of contractors will be able to get certification for every single product used. I fully realise that they should have been doing this all along but it's going to be a seachange for them.

Quick query for those that know the ins and outs of the system better. If there is no hEN for a particular building product does an Agrement Cert still count as sufficient certification?

Edit to include quotes for TGD

Where a construction product is not covered or not fully covered by a hEN, the CPR provides a voluntary route to CE Marking. By obtaining a European Technical Assessment (ETA) for the product, from a Technical Assessment Body, on the basis of a European Assessment Document (EAD), a manufacturer can make a DoP and affix a CE Marking to the product.

but then also:

The process of Agrément certification applies to those products and processes which do not fall within the scope of existing construction standards, either because they are innovative or because they deviate from established norms. NSAI Agrément assesses, specifies testing, and where appropriate, issues Agrément certificates confirming that new building products, materials, techniques and equipment are safe and fit for purpose in accordance with the Irish Building Regulations and with the terms of the certificate. Such certificates may be in addition to, but not conflict with, CE marking.

P.S. - Sorry if this is a little OT. Can a mod move it to a new thread if deemed appropriate.

martinn123

4Sticks wrote: »

A particularly painful aspect for builders will be finding that if they they do produce " those stupid pieces of paper " then they will not receive another "piece of paper".

And uncertified components will be torn out and replaced. Either by the contractor at his expense or by another contractor whose costs will be back charged to the original contractor who may even also be found to be in breach of contract if he insists on being a slow learner.

There are events afoot in Drogheda that will set the background to all of this.

I'm not sure if the Drogheda incident is a good example to cite here.

I heard the contractor on TV the other night who stated the defects, and the demolition costs, etc was covered by Insurance carried by the Block Supplier.

It sounded while its a total mess, financially he should not suffer too much.

My limited understanding of Pyrite is that it is a naturally occurring substance, which produces a chemical reaction which in turn results in swelling and breakdown of the concrete blocks. Is it a test that was ever carried out before?

So a piece of paper in this case may not be much help, except if its an Insurance Policy.

I agree with your point that Contractors and Suppliers are on a learning curve, and the layse faire attitude has to change, and fast, but is that a bad thing?

Drift

Now I know which Drogheda incident!!!

4Sticks

Contractors who don't develop good paper trails fast will suffer. They will find payments stopped. And expose themselves needlessly should legal actions arise. Even in cases where perhaps morally they could have expected better from a supplier.

Builder - here is my claim for progress payment.
Architect - do have the CE marks and DoPs for all materiels contained in your claim
Builder - whats that?
Architect- you will get the paperwork you are looking for ( certificate for payment ) when you provide me with the paper which EU law compels you to provide.

Judge - do have or did you seek the CE mark and DoP
Builder - whats that?

Big trouble.

martinn123

4Sticks wrote: »

Contractors who don't develop good paper trails fast will suffer. They will find payments stopped. And expose themselves needlessly should legal actions arise. Even in cases where perhaps morally they could have expected better from a supplier.

Builder - here is my claim for progress payment.
Architect - do have the CE marks and DoPs for all materiels contained in your claim
Builder - whats that?
Architect- you will get the paperwork you are looking for ( certificate for payment ) when you provide me with the paper which EU law compels you to provide.

Judge - do have or did you seek the CE mark and DoP
Builder - whats that?

Big trouble.

I think you paint an overly pessimistic picture here

While the scenario outlined will no doubt happen, what about a little forward planning.

So the Architect says to Builder, before anything happens on site, that when an application for payment is made, it should be accompanied by the following items......

Clarity is achieved and all go about their tasks clearly understanding what the other requires.
These Reg's will take a little time to bed in, but if Architects, ( and others ) clarify what is expected, to enable them to do their job, I don't see an issue.

sydthebeat

the 'worst case scenarios' are the ones that get all the headlines.....

4Sticks

<snip>


Corkblowin post no 5 is more typical of what to expect - even with crystal clear instructions at the start.

4Sticks

sydthebeat wrote: »

the 'worst case scenarios' are the ones that get all the headlines.....

And influence PI providers....

martinn123

4Sticks wrote: »

Corkblowin post no 5 is more typical of what to expect - even with crystal clear instructions at the start.

It's not just at the start, what is required is ongoing and clear communication between all the parties from outset to conclusion.
So.
Suppliers will learn what documentation to include with a delivery docket.

Contractors will learn, what documentation is required to get paid.

Architects will liase more closely with regard to the documentation they require to enable Certs to issue.

In the picture you are painting, no one communicates, each party is working in glorious isolation.

It will happen, as Corkblowin illustrates, and syd is right, the cases that do go 'tits up'' will grab the headlines, but that should not be ''typical of what to expect'',

4Sticks

Our expectations differ.

jayat3

Hi guys, I work in an architectural practice! I am looking for a list/schedule/checklist of CE marks and DoP's that would be required for domestic works i.e one off dwellings, extensions etc! I know every house differs but I'm looking for a more generic one! Does anyone know where I would find information or if someone already has this done up? I dont have to spend days trying to put together a list! I cant find anything online? Your help is much appreciated! Thanks
Jay

BryanF

jayat3 wrote: »

Hi guys, I work in an architectural practice! I am looking for a list/schedule/checklist of CE marks and DoP's that would be required for domestic works i.e one off dwellings, extensions etc! I know every house differs but I'm looking for a more generic one! Does anyone know where I would find information or if someone already has this done up? I dont have to spend days trying to put together a list! I cant find anything online? Your help is much appreciated! Thanks
Jay

Don't spam posts

jayat3

what do you mean?

Gumbo

jayat3 wrote: »

what do you mean?

Your asking the same question across multiple threads.
The DoP will come from the supplier of the item you use at the time.

No point people here giving you one for an item they used.