Assigned certifier.

Josbeara

Hi, we have a building contractor hired for our new build and an assigned certifier hired also. We opted in for the new regs. I have queried a few things recently with the assigned certifier and asked to see a copy of the site inspection reports. He said he doesn't have to share this information with me as it is between him and the builder. Is this correct?

Metric Tensor

He works for you - not the builder. Assuming you separately employed each one I can't think of anything that passes between the two to which you shouldn't have access.

Having said that I've never once had a client look for my site visit notes. They've often queried various things on site and I have answered them based on my notes. I wouldn't have a problem giving them a copy but to a lay person my short hand notes won't mean a whole lot. The fact that you are looking for them seems to indicate some sort of a breakdown between you and your certifier.

If you have opted in to statutory certification there will be formal completed site inspection reports which should be very readable to most but limited in terms of content.

What's the context of your request?

Calahonda52

Very interesting potential set up here!

Sound like the builder and AC are cheek to cheek, or similar, in the scratcher and that the AC is not independent, really, of the builder.

Never a good idea: however you can always ask the builder for them, but the lack of independence is a big no-no for me.

Question is, if you subsequently have to sue for some reason, with no contract with the AC, but only the builder and the builder is bust as per usual in these cases, can you get at the AC's PI?

I would ask them both for their C2 forms.

Whatstage are you at?

Josbeara

Yes we employed each separately but they did know each other previously. We are eight months in now and we are unhappy that the spec isn't being followed and I have many examples of sloppy workmanship. When I queried this with the builder I got "this is how we always do it and never an issue". When I asked the assigned certifier, i got "my job is to check that work meets regs. My job is not to check that spec is followed and I don't carry spec around with me". I asked AC who's job is it to ensure spec is followed and he said you need a clerk of works for that.
When the foundation was poured seven months ago, I got a text that evening from builder to enform me that AC requested extra concrete (€600) and extra steel (€800) as the ground was poor. I rang the AC next day and he said extra concrete only was needed but then cut me off. The following week when he sent the cert for the first stage payment, it said extra concrete and steel. We left it go at the time but it made us suspicious and I started taking photographs of everything possible from then on. Now, after a few more disappointments which I won't mention at the moment, I would like to see the site visit reports if I am entitled to see them. Any advice folks?

sydthebeat

Josbeara wrote: »

When I queried this with the builder I got "this is how we always do it and never an issue".

:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

it absolutely maddens me to hear this from a builder.

Many parts of the building regulations have changed since 2007 when building was at its height, and even then builders were fcuking up all over the place not knowing how to comply with previous regs.

It is absolutely not good enough to get this response from your builder.

As youve gone down teh assigned certifier route, the builder is legally responsible to produce a certificate at the end of the build to state they "constructed in accordance with plans and particulars supplied" and its sounds like they are deviating whenever they feel like it.

and unfortunately it sounds like you have no one on site working on your behalf because....

Josbeara wrote: »

When I asked the assigned certifier, i got "my job is to check that work meets regs. My job is not to check that spec is followed and I don't carry spec around with me"?

is technically correct.
Thats essentially what the assigned certifier role is .. its to indemnify the local authorithy from doing their responsibility of enforcing building regs... nothing more... and its a sham thats being sold from a "insurance comeback" point of view.

unless you specifically engaged the AC to act as your representative and to "oversee" the work on your behalf.. then their only responsibility on site is to ensure building regulations are met, but dont care in what manner they are met. Even doing so, they will try to get as much of the construction work on site covered by "ancillary certifiers" so that what they actually take responsibility for is lessened and diluted as much as possible. (imagine how that would affect any future court case!)


sorry to say this OP, but you woudl have been much better off 'opting out' of the assigned certifer role... and getting who ever prepared the construction drawings to do you mortgage sign off and work on your behalf on site.

Fayre

If it smells dodge it usually is, I would not rest til I had answers on every one of your concerns.
I would have no problem with paying extra for something that's required for the house to be sound though. The AC should be your watchdog that the builder is not cutting corners (I'm not talking about the spec but about the house being structurally sound, safe, ventilated etc)
The builder following spec is your responsibility, you need to keep a constant eye on them. Even when I had a builder I also had a Project manager employed to keep an eye on the builder and thank god I did coz they tried to take short cuts in critical things like the DPC and the deadwork.
I have to laugh actually when I see people asking on Forums do I really need a PM when I go the direct labour route? In my experience you need a PM (or else do it yourself) when you go the Builder route, not to mind direct labour!!
But back to your original question, I don't see how the official site inspection reports that are done as part of your contract with the AC aren't available for you to see? That's outrageous. I would suspend any further payment to the AC until this crucial issue is resolved.
One thing I learned in the whole process is that the only thing that talks, is money and with-holding it.

Johnnyhpipe

I have never heard of an AC "requesting extr concrete and steel" because the ground is poor. That is a job for the design engineer.

I'm sorry to say that it sounds to me like you're too far in, on your own, and out of your depth. I'm assuming there's no design team involved (eng/arch) at this stage and you're trying to manage this yourself without adequate knowledge or experience. Sorry if it sounds harsh. But it sounds to me like you're being taken for a ride by this builder and "AC".

As to where you go from here, I'm not sure if any engineer/architect would take on a half built house which they did not design and have concerns over the builder/AC. I certainly wouldn't personally, but you might ask some guys nicely if they'll act on your behalf. Firstly however you need to get the delivery dockets for the "extra concrete and steel."

Again, sorry if the above sounds harsh, but it really is a sh1t situation now that you're 8 months in.

Incidentally, if this AC has the ability to call for extra steel and concrete on site (presumably without design calculation by the sounds of it) then has he also got the ability/and necessary professional indemnity insurance to provide the structural engineers ancillary certs?

Metric Tensor

I agree with everything Syd said apart from to supplement the last paragraph to say that there are some Assigned Certifiers who are happy to prepare construction drawings and act as client's representative alongside their AC role. It's not uncommon in my experience.

Also just to point out that the AC may also be the project structural engineer and the foundation "upgrades" could have been specified when acting in that role (which would also be for certifying compliance with Part A of the regs). It's possible - not saying it's the case here.

None of this of course excuses poor performance or bad manners!

sydthebeat

Metric Tensor wrote: »

I agree with everything Syd said apart from to supplement the last paragraph to say that there are some Assigned Certifiers who are happy to prepare construction drawings and act as client's representative alongside their AC role. It's not uncommon in my experience.

Also just to point out that the AC may also be the project structural engineer and the foundation "upgrades" could have been specified when acting in that role (which would also be for certifying compliance with Part A of the regs). It's possible - not saying it's the case here.

None of this of course excuses poor performance or bad manners!

Thanks for the addition MT

hope my post didn't read too much like a rant.... but it's frustrating that the op is 8 months into a project and these quite significant engagement issues are only coming to light now... very unprofessional from your AC

Josbeara

Firstly, thanks to each of you who have replied, much appreciated.
Our AC is an engineer. We hired him to do the construction drawings, help with the tender process, appoint a builder, send in commencement notice.....and in our ignorance, we thought part of the AC's job was to "oversee" the build. He also does the mortgage sign off. We didn't realise that we needed to hire a third party as well as AC and building contractor. Our understanding from the AC at our first meeting was that he would oversee everything but now it looks like we screwed up, not because we were trying to cut corners but because we didn't fully understand. Are we the only ones out there to get caught up like this?

Metric Tensor

To be honest - most Engineers who offer this type of service offer predominantly the service that you "thought" you were buying.

No professional who is carrying out periodic inspection is going to see everything that happens, so (assuming you visit the site most days) you should also be keeping an eye on things and telling the builder if you see anything wrong. The builder should be rectifying the wrongs. If he says that he is not fixing it then you can call your engineer who will tell you whether you are being unreasonable or not in your requests for the builder to fix things. Obviously, included in this is that any major problems will be spotted during the periodic site visits by client's representative who will instruct the builder to rectify these. Most major problems would make the building non-compliant from an Assigned Certifiers point of view at any rate so there's large overlap of duties there.

This process, although common for house builds in Ireland, is ill defined and a little ad-hoc and relies on all parties having a good working relationship. It also relies on any two of the three parties not colluding to exclude the third. If you want to add a fourth party who is there every day watching the builder like a hawk then a clerk of works is the correct professional ... BUT the number of house builders who can afford to be €40k-€50k per annum for a full time clerk of works is ULTRA low .. so you end up back with needing a good builder and a good professional - both working for you (their boss!).

I absolutely DETEST the "This is how I've always done it" builders. Could the same reasoning be used for people who drive without a seat-belt? It's the last (and first) resort of someone who is too thick or too lazy to attempt to understand what they are being asked. There is no problem with a builder saying - "This is how I've always done it and I think it's the best way because x, y and z but the decision is yours"

Likewise - professionals who give you a blank "that's not part of my job" answer are as bad. It may well not be part of their job but there is no good reason for them not to explain why it is not part of their job. The good ones will discuss the scope of their remit at the start so everyone knows where they stand.



So to be fair to you - I think you're assumption was not unreasonable based on how you describe your initial talks with the engineer but now you're in a position where you are essentially at loggerheads with both your builder and your engineer and something needs to be done to stop the whole project ending up in the crapper!

I'm going to ask politely - how you have interacted with both of them - is there a possibility they saw/see you as a "problem client." The asking for the site reports thing for example could be seen as questioning the engineer's ability to do the job he thinks he was engaged to do. Everyone encounters such people in their jobs and rightly or wrongly if someone starts out on that footing (perceptually or accurately!) it takes a lot of will power not to dread dealing with them. No insult intended here btw, just giving a little perspective from the other side! Even if it was the case it wouldn't justify what you've described.

I think you need to try to re-establish some sort of relationship with both of them. I don't know if this can be done by yourself or if you need someone to assist. Sorry I don't have any easy answers.

A lot of these one off builds are next to other family members - could one of them help you out by calling over to builder every now and then for a "chat"?

Josbeara

Thanks again metric tensor.
Firstly, thank god, we haven't fallen out with either builder or engineer. We still have a "good" relationship with them but it does require biting down hard on my bottom lip from time to time.
I don't think the builder is cutting corners to save money but he is careless, sloppy workmanship and ignoring the spec at times.
Our engineer/AC is not the package that we expected. I contacted another engineer last month (whom I trusted), I explained my situation and gave him examples. He said it sounds like I have an "opt out" engineer and asked if I get regular site visit reports. I told him that I don't and that was why I asked our engineer for them.
I feel that I need to hire a second engineer, especially as we get closer to snag list time but I don't want to end up throwing good money after bad.
Any more advice is greatly appreciated.

Fayre

Josbeara can you copy and paste the content of the contract you signed with engineer or the email where he listed what was included in the quote?

sydthebeat

Josbeara wrote: »

Thanks again metric tensor.
Firstly, thank god, we haven't fallen out with either builder or engineer. We still have a "good" relationship with them but it does require biting down hard on my bottom lip from time to time.
I don't think the builder is cutting corners to save money but he is careless, sloppy workmanship and ignoring the spec at times.
Our engineer/AC is not the package that we expected. I contacted another engineer last month (whom I trusted), I explained my situation and gave him examples. He said it sounds like I have an "opt out" engineer and asked if I get regular site visit reports. I told him that I don't and that was why I asked our engineer for them.
I feel that I need to hire a second engineer, especially as we get closer to snag list time but I don't want to end up throwing good money after bad.
Any more advice is greatly appreciated.

did you sign any 'opt out' at commencement notice stage???

this is getting more worrying the more i read

it appears your engineer hasnt explained anything at all to you about BCARS building control, assigned certifier role, mortgage sign offs, etc

kieran.

if you know when your commencement notice was lodged this list will tell you if your opt in or out https://www.localgov.ie/en/link-type/bcms

Metric Tensor

I know it's important but considering the state of things at the moment the I don't think the most vital thing to the OP is whether they have opted in or out.

The main concern at the moment is who is acting in the role of "Employer's Representative" and in some form "keeping an eye" on quality control of the build - not just for compliance reasons but for spotting the sh1te arsing that isn't strictly against the building regulations but you wouldn't want in your house all the same! - Untidy blocklaying, poor insulation installation, lack of "plumbness" and squareness, etc. etc.

I think we all know that there's precious few house construction projects in Ireland where this is taken as seriously as it should be but the OP seems to be in a particularly "perfect storm" situation of a sloppy builder and laissez faire "periodic supervisor".

The "did he opt in or out" question is very important - but the answer to that question either way won't fix the OP's current problem of untidiness combined with lack of "quality control."

How often do you visit the site OP? Can you get there more often yourself?

Josbeara

Definitely opt in, I checked the register (thanks Kieran).
I visit the site every second day, sometimes everyday depending what time I get home from work. I drive out there with excitement and usually drive home depressed.

This is a list of what is covered by our engineer/AC;
Construction Phase. Includes Preparation of Tender, getting prices from Contractors, appointing a Contractor, Site Inspections: Foundation, Floor, Blockwork x2 Roof, Plastering, 1st. Fix Plumbing, Carpentry and Electrics., 2ND Fix of Services, Internal Plastering, Finishes, Siteworks, Snag List, Completion of Contract, Certificate of Compliance with Planning Permission, Design: Foundations, Structural Steel, Roof.
Assigned Certifier, Design Certifier, Commencement Notice, Compliance with Building Regulation, BER Cert. Inspections re compliance with Building Regulations, Preparation of Specification, Inspection Schedule, As Constructed Drawings, Certificate of Compliance with Building Regulations.

BryanF

Is There a list of the non-conformities?
Foundation extras should be explained by the structural engineer

Josbeara

Sorry BryanF, I don't understand your question.

BryanF

Josbeara wrote: »

.... extra concrete and steel. We left it go at the time but it made us suspicious .... Now, after a few more disappointments which I won't mention at the moment, I would like to see the site visit reports if I am entitled to see them. Any advice folks?

i was just curious what the other non-compliance/disappointments were.

There is so little info, but we're getting a really bad impression of the structural engineer and separately of the builder, may I ask:

Who picked the builder?
Was there a contract signed by all parties?
Was this the lowest bid?
Has there been any extras since commencement?

the_syco

Josbeara wrote: »

When the foundation was poured seven months ago, I got a text that evening from builder to enform me that AC requested extra concrete (€600) and extra steel (€800) as the ground was poor. I rang the AC next day and he said extra concrete only was needed but then cut me off. The following week when he sent the cert for the first stage payment, it said extra concrete and steel.

I'm not a builder, but would getting a 3rd party (perhaps the architecture who originally did the plans) to look at what has been done be of benefit to the OP? I quoted the above, as they seem to be forgetting the lies they told the OP, and I'd wonder what else regarding the structure that they lied about? And how this may become an issue a year or two down the line?

Josbeara

BryanF, I sent you a private message.

Thanks "the syco". I think a 3rd party is my only option at present but getting the correct 3rd party is difficult. I'm not sure exactly what kind of professional I require. As I said, I don't want to end up throwing good money after bad. Unfortunately, the architect we used is no longer available.

Metric Tensor

It sounds like a hybrid employer's representative / resident engineer / clerk of works you want. Ideally there might be a way of going about it that would allow this guy/gal to arrive on scene without it being directly obvious that their job will be to keep an eye on the two chancers already on scene!

I'd say any engineer would be wary about going in as a second engineer on the project ... maybe a building surveyor? (As their role could/would be different to the engineer)

Having said that the qualifications and job title of this person wouldn't be important as their experience and knowledge of building .. they won't necessarily be signing off on anything so they may not need a qualification at all ... just a very good knowledge of building so they can do regular visits and point out things that you might miss yourself.

RORY O CONNOR

I don't see how extra steel might have been needed. Typically foundations will have one layer of steel mesh installed. Extra concrete might have been required if the foundations were a little wider than required or there may have been soft spots to be dug out. Ideally your should have gotten someone to act as AC, supervisor of the works on site at key parts of the construction, final sign off for compliance with the Planning permission and compliance with regs and do your first registration mapping, all in the same price!

Bigyear2017

Josbeara wrote: »

Thanks again metric tensor.
Firstly, thank god, we haven't fallen out with either builder or engineer. We still have a "good" relationship with them but it does require biting down hard on my bottom lip from time to time.
I don't think the builder is cutting corners to save money but he is careless, sloppy workmanship and ignoring the spec at times.
Our engineer/AC is not the package that we expected. I contacted another engineer last month (whom I trusted), I explained my situation and gave him examples. He said it sounds like I have an "opt out" engineer and asked if I get regular site visit reports. I told him that I don't and that was why I asked our engineer for them.
I feel that I need to hire a second engineer, especially as we get closer to snag list time but I don't want to end up throwing good money after bad.
Any more advice is greatly appreciated.

Hi.
Unfortunately I know exactly how your feel. We are opt-in first time building, started April last year, assigned designer / certifier for bank and assigned builder. Builder was cutting corners and not following the spec. Assigned certifier was not monitoring the building and specification being complete to be able to sign off the house met the regs. i.e. insulation spec was being diluted, builder was doing one thing. Assigned certifier was unclear and certified stages which we have detected issues. e.g. no allowances for correct floor inculation spec. all doors and windows installed at reduced height, so builder saves on insulation. we have had to raise doors, lintols etc. to be able to get a less than spec insulation in but compromises A3. And yet the assigned certifier was going to sign off on it.
NO relationship with assigned certifier or builder. But the assigned certifier has to stand over the work he certified to date. Trying to get new engineer in is exhausting and I'm failing miserably. We are now going direct labour.