Are the building regs changing for one off builds

Gumbo

Treepole wrote: »

Looks like I was proven right here :cool:

And I said I'd be the first to admit if I was wrong. Still waiting on an official release from the DOE mind you.

Disappointed with how they have handled this tbh.

tails_naf

RORY O CONNOR wrote: »

I am somewhat aghast at Planning and Housing Minister Paudie Coffey. He has gone against the best industry and local authority advice and chose to remove the need for an assigned certifier for one off housing projects on the grounds that people were being held to ransom, the cost of inspecting a property was too expensive, with suggestions that complying with the regulations costs up to €16,000, and was adding considerably to building costs. I am aware of an assigned certifier whose fees have typically been one quarter of this.

He has of course conveniently forgotten the ridiculously high development levies charged by local authorities once planning permission is granted and the house gets constructed-these fees can exceed €12000. This is dead money and of no benefit to the householders. At least with the assigned certifier in place the fees being charged were ultimately of benefit to the home builder and the cowboy builders got scared off. Perhaps it is the local authorities actually holding self-builders to ransom rather than the assigned certifiers.

He states that self-builders will be subject to inspection from local authorities. Given that local authorities are understaffed anyway and in my experience show scant regard for undertaking any kind of regular site inspections-where were they during the construction of Priory hall- his decision will in fact not save self-builders money but put them at the mercy of cowboy builders and they will ultimately end up out of pocket.

If he is to do anything positive perhaps he might introduce a separate legislation and create a proper building control organisation away from local authority mismanagement. This organisation could be overseen by combined input from Engineers Ireland, the RIAI and the RICS. This would take the system out of vested interests and continue to keep building standards up to the required levels. There is a suggestion that “people” could be trained to be assigned certifiers! Are these people to be any Joe Soaps or will the system be confined to properly registered construction professionals.

This is a retrograde decision and the minister has shown no vision or competence in his decision making. We are back to where we were during the boom time-Shoddy works in breach of building regulations and who is going to suffer: The public as usual.

I'm delighted to see this to be honest. Priory hall et al were the reason for this extreme legislation, which of course it would do little to prevent again. So it was pointless in that regard.

Also there were indeed people charging the 16 grand, I've seen a few quotes recently and very very few were on the 4k end, with the average closer to 8k. One off houses already have a vested interest in being built to a quality that the owner wants, and must also have an engineer sign off it meets regs for the mortgage.

Almost all of the slap dash construction I've seen in the past decade were developments and estates, with one off houses generally being to a higher standard. So I'm very glad to see this money back in the pocket of the consumer and not wasted on red tape that contributed nothing the the end result.

Strolling Bones

tails_naf wrote: »

I'm delighted to see One off houses being built to a quality that the owner wants

compliant with regs ?

tails_naf wrote: »

So I'm very glad to see this money back in the pocket of the consumer and not wasted on red tape that contributed nothing the the end result.

well the money was being used to pay for a rigourous inspection regime by an experienced profesional to certify compliance with building regulations.

But many think as you do and you are far from alone. If you can't kick it don't want to pay for it.

siubhannc

If the assigned certifier is a choice for one off builds the banks may insist on people employing them before approving the mortgage

mickdw

siubhannc wrote: »

If the assigned certifier is a choice for one off builds the banks may insist on people employing them before approving the mortgage

Well at the minute, I'm signing off a couple of houses commenced under old building control regs and certainly the banks are not looking for anything new.
I had a fear that the banks would issue new certs to be signed by AC for mortgage drawdown and that there would be a bit of a nightmare trying to explain that these houses were not infact under those rules. What I've seen is that there are happy out once they see PI insurance.

tails_naf

Strolling Bones wrote: »

compliant with regs ?



well the money was being used to pay for a rigourous inspection regime by an experienced profesional to certify compliance with building regulations.

But many think as you do and you are far from alone. If you can't kick it don't want to pay for it.

Quote me, but at the same time re-word what I said? That's fairly petty, and "unprofessional", ironic given the rest of you post going on about professionalism.

Mortgage approval previously was contingent on the building meeting the regs and being signed off by an engineer. Banks ensured this and it was a lot less red tape and cost. I was saying that in addition to that, the consumer was building for themselves so didn't usually cut corners. At least not to the extent the developers would be willing to.

Calahonda52

siubhannc wrote: »

If the assigned certifier is a choice for one off builds the banks may insist on people employing them before approving the mortgage

Never in a million years, they need to fuel the next boom so anything that gets in the way of that will be blown away

RORY O CONNOR

Mr tails_naf

I see you make no mention of the very large development levies charged by the local authorities-up to €30k in some local authorities for a three bed semi/semi detached. house. As I said in my comment perhaps its the local authorities who are holding self builders to ransom rather than the construction professional. If you think hiring a professional is expensive wait till you hire an amateur!

Strolling Bones

tails_naf wrote: »

Quote me, but at the same time re-word what I said? That's fair.

Strolling Bones

tails_naf wrote: »

Mortgage approval previously was contingent on the building meeting the regs and being signed off by an engineer. Banks ensured this

they did not as

tails_naf wrote: »

it was a lot less red tape and cost.

Pure tokenism . The banks make money by lending money and they are not concerned with anything like build qualty or compliance to frustrate that.

the consumer was building for themselves so didn't usually cut corners.

They build typically to the arbitrary metric of what they deem sensible or affordbable. Not certifiably complaint with building regaulations.

tails_naf

RORY O CONNOR wrote: »

Mr tails_naf

I see you make no mention of the very large development levies charged by the local authorities-up to €30k in some local authorities for a three bed semi/semi detached. house. As I said in my comment perhaps its the local authorities who are holding self builders to ransom rather than the construction professional. If you think hiring a professional is expensive wait till you hire an amateur!

I agree, we should get more for our local athority fees. 30k sounds high though. I paid 6k. I suppose last week my house could have been 6k la + 8k assigned certifier, in September it would be just the 6k, so better for sure. But it would be nice for the 6k to actually buy me something.

The way I see it, this is still a good step. The 8k bought next to nothing except reams of red tape.

tails_naf

Strolling Bones wrote: »

They build typically to the arbitrary metric of what they deem sensible or affordbable. Not certifiably complaint with building regaulations.

I built a one off house. It was signed off by an engineer for my mortgage. Nothing arbitrary about it. My house meets and exceeds the regs. My engineer saw to it. In additon I saw to it too. Where is the problem? Do you question the engineers that are approved by banks to sign off houses?

Gumbo

tails_naf wrote: »

I agree, we should get more for our local athority fees. 30k sounds high though. I paid 6k. I suppose last week my house could have been 6k la + 8k assigned certifier, in September it would be just the 6k, so better for sure. But it would be nice for the 6k to actually buy me something.

The way I see it, this is still a good step. The 8k bought next to nothing except reams of red tape.

Wouldn't this plan increase contributions?
The current contribution is for planning and development in the area and gets apportioned to various projects and area offices for this purpose.

Building Control get €30, that's it.

hotrodder

There will still be need for an assigned certifier on once off houses even though the title may not be used.
Prior to SI9 certs of substantial compliance were issued by an eng / arch. These certs were not worth the paper that they were issued on as were based on a visual inspection only. Most of the critical elements were excluded as they could not be checked within 3-5 site inspections. SI9 provided for a full clean cert and to provide this a lot of inspections were required.
In my opinion the ministers are just looking for votes and not fully aware of implications. Majority of couses constructed prior to si9 do not fully comply amd this will come to light when selling on.

Calahonda52

Re
In my opinion the ministers are just looking for votes
I agree with the sentiment but
are there really that number of votes in one off houses and extensions

Strolling Bones

Calahonda52 wrote: »

Re
In my opinion the ministers are just looking for votes
I agree with the sentiment but
are there really that number of votes in one off houses and extensions

Probably not. But house building is at an historic low and for the sake of the banks and merchants we can't have that.

No strategy to provide housing or ensure building quality though.

RORY O CONNOR

Given that there are still a lot of cowboys out there waiting to prey on self builders some sort of professional supervision should be considered. If the same level of site attendance is undertaken and instead of submitting the completion documents which include the site inspection records and the ancillary certification to the local Authority the same documents could be submitted to the self builder. That at least would provide some sort of comeback should things be found to be incorrect at later time and there will then be some redress. As things stood before March 1st last year there was no one to go to.

mickdw

RORY O CONNOR wrote: »

Given that there are still a lot of cowboys out there waiting to prey on self builders some sort of professional supervision should be considered. If the same level of site attendance is undertaken and instead of submitting the completion documents which include the site inspection records and the ancillary certification to the local Authority the same documents could be submitted to the self builder. That at least would provide some sort of comeback should things be found to be incorrect at later time and there will then be some redress. As things stood before March 1st last year there was no one to go to.

Ancillary certs are going to be worthless down the line.
I've said it before but if they don't want to go the route of having public building inspector, why not introduce a requirement for a bond paid up front attached to each project independently.
At least that way, professionals could price work based on time involved. Under current system of having indemnity insurance as primary cover, it is impossible to price work as that insurance might have gone ten fold more expensive in 5 years and we are bound to retain it to cover against jobs completed in the past.