[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The Regulations will come into effect on March 1st 2014 and the Code of Practice to accompany them will, we understand be published by the Department in the coming months.
DOCARCH wrote: » But...the problem is, there is no definintion of competent (for builders)?
“Competent Person”: a person is deemed to be a competent person where, having regard to the task he or she is required to perform and taking account of the size and/or complexity of the building or works, the person possesses sufficient training, experience and knowledge appropriate to the nature of the work to be undertaken;
martinn123 wrote: » What about the Professional Integrity of the Certifyer, or is that just a myth
DOCARCH wrote: » But...the problem is, there is no definintion of competent (for builders)? .
Open A wrote: » It sounds like CIF want to restrict access to the register to those who have already completed three projects in Ireland.. so it would become like the old taxi plate system!
DOCARCH wrote: » With regard to consumer protection, and your average Joe building a house or sizeable extension, I wonder if they are taking much of the responsibility/liability back on themselves? In the 'Notice of Assignment of Builder', that the client/employer/house owner fills out and submis to Building Control, thay have to confirm they have appointed a 'competent builder'. ...if...something goes wrong...and the builder turns out, in fact, to be incompetent...where does that leave the client/employer/house owner? Maybe they sue themselves??? :P
sydthebeat wrote: » are you saying what if they nominate themselves as builder? or what if they hire a cowboy?
sydthebeat wrote: » heres an interesting one, what if the builder is given a full set of building regulation TGD's as part of the 'supporting drawings and documents' by the designer / assigned certifer?? Surely then the builder has no option but to read, become educated and construct full in accordance with the regs? and thus they cannot enact their getout clause should defects become apparent? just putting it out there..............
sydthebeat wrote: » ...what if the builder is given a full set of building regulation TGD's as part of the 'supporting drawings and documents' by the designer / assigned certifer??
DOCARCH wrote: » But...the problem is, there is no definintion of competent (for builders)? A builder building away on his own for the last 30 odd years might have lots of experience, but, is he competent? I came across one 'highly rated' builder recently - lots and lots of past experience and projects under his belt (in excess of 25 years) - I found him tying a cavity wall with 215 solid blocks across the cavity (tying the inner and outer leaf) at intervals. I basically said...WTF!...despite having a set of construction drawings to work to, he said that's the way he had always built cavity walls! The mind boggles! That's a guy with loads of experience at building, but, no understanding of what he is doing.
sydthebeat wrote: » there is still an element out there who think its their god given right to build their own home without a 'competent person' to over see.
newbie2013 wrote: » Dont believe you.
newbie2013 wrote: » IMO, its a basic human right to build ones own home.
BryanF wrote: » the Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2013 can we avoid going down the human rights angleif you feel the need to discuss this consider emailing the following
Poor Uncle Tom wrote: » It was just getting interesting as well......:rolleyes:
rodzer wrote: » Sticking to topic, I can believe the 25 year bit. My plasterer couldn't believe it when I told him I wanted a grey coat on the inner face of my cavity wall (for Airtightness) before we erected the insulated plasterboard. He is plastering for decades but never did this before.
sydthebeat wrote: » these are the problems with people thinking building is simple. Since 1997 there has been 13 different revisions to the TGDs. Since 1997 there has been 4 separate and severe revisions to Part L alone. Only 3 of the 12 TGDs remain as they were in 1997 and all three of these are at draft revision stage. So someone saying they have been building for 25 years is absolutely no guarantee that they are up to speed with current regulations. If there are still building as they did 20 years ago then they are seriously behind. edit: for the craic i just did this quick calculation 1997 TGD = 392 pages Current regulations = 658 pages + 308 pages of supplementary Part L documents. So from 392 to almost 1000 pages over 16 years, with 3 more sever revisions to come in the near future.
kkelliher wrote: » added to the technical issues are the clear fact that there is a clear culture issue in Ireland where everyone and anyone believes they can build something (clearly evident from a high number of posts in construction and planning forum) irrespective of any knowledge whatsoever in respect to the building procees.
4Sticks wrote: » It is a human right ! Apparently.
wirehairmax wrote: » Another problem I've seen is people putting faith in "architects" who are no more than cad monkeys...
wirehairmax wrote: » ....isn't that long after making some effort to distance themselves from some of the mess that a lot of architects left behind.
DOCARCH wrote: » All I was getting at with my posts is that builders need to be on the same footing/be registered on the same basis. Most posters on here are all too familiar with builders who 10 years behind in their basic knowledge of the Building Regulations.
martinn123 wrote: » Sure with Architects on site ''every day'' from now on what's the problem?
DOCARCH wrote: » builders need to be on the same footing/be registered on the same basis.
BryanF wrote: » so the ICF need to become more like the CIOB (maybe suck in the homebond bucks aswell) and then you enshrine into law their position like the RIAI, RICS & IEI the new ICF can charge builders handsome premiums, doing very little other than the odd over priced CPD, but critically they can exclude any group they do not deem qualified and every things hunky dory..
DOCARCH wrote: » I have enough babysitting to do as it is (after work/when I get home)!
sydthebeat wrote: therefore the certifier is left with the reponsibility to determine what the frequency should be and how often works need to be inspected. Most certifiers that you ask would say that that certification would require an inspection (conservatively) almost every - to every other working day ... with the risk of defects increasing with every day of no inspection. because, at the end of the day, its not the blocklayer, carpenter, plumber etc etc etc that is responsible for the quality of their work, its the certifier.
