[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.
martinn123 wrote: » I agree, however it's also devalued by certain contributors, having an interpretation, and refusing to accept that an alternative interpretation, may, exist, to the frustration of those who have a background in or upcoming interest in a Self Build.
Hairy mellon wrote: » the code of practice is clear- owners cannot be builders. there is not one reference to an owner occupying this role. the code has a pretty clear definition of what a competent person is.
“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; “Builder” means a competent builder appointed, for purposes of the Building Control Regulations, by the building owner, to build and supervise the works;
Villain wrote: » The code states I don't see how you can say that owners cannot be builders??
sydthebeat wrote: » if the owner is a "competent builder" then yes of course they can build their own home. However the cases that we are arguing about is novice self builders coming to the process for the first time, with no construction background or previous construction experience. How can they be considered "competent"?
Corkblowin wrote: » Hes asked me if theres any reason why he can't appoint himself as design certifier, assigned certifier and builder should he decide to do so. I can't see anything in the legislation to say that they are different people - simply different appointments (indeed the RIAI are saying the architect as design certifier should preferably hang onto the assigned certifier role too).
Villain wrote: » Ok so you accept a self builder who has the knowledge and experience required to manage a house build can appoint themselves as the builder and proceed as normal?
Penn wrote: » But this is ultimately the problem. It's legislation. It's a statutory requirement. There shouldn't be any interpretation. It's not a case of refusing to accept alternative interpretation, it's a case of things being left so open to interpretation or conflicting arguments or contradictory statements in a piece of legislation that potential legal trouble may arise. If someone can interpret it in one way, the professionals who will be legally responsible for certifying works will be leaving themselves open to legal action based on that possible interpretation.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=84045721&postcount=2
Penn wrote: We all want self-builds to be able to continue. Some self-build projects are among the finest you'll see. But the interpretations which exist give us conflicting information on whether self-builds will be able to continue, and whether assigned certifiers would be taking on too much risk legally by being involved in a self-build project. Lads, we're all on the same team here. This isn't a "professionals vs builders" scenario. But there are serious issues with the SI which need to be clarified or amended.
sydthebeat wrote: » do you accept that a novice self builder cannot appoint themselves as builder?
Villain wrote: » They could but they would be in breach of the code of practice
sydthebeat wrote: » so are you saying that only persons who have shown prior experience, knowledge and training in construction should be appointed as builder?
Villain wrote: » I'm saying any self builder who has the knowledge, skills and experience to manage their build can nominate themselves as the builder as long as they can get an engineer who will sign off for them. This is what I have been saying all along.
sydthebeat wrote: » and how do you quantify that?
Villain wrote: » That is up to the owner and the Engineer to decide as neither the Code of Practice or Legislation give any detailed requirements.
sydthebeat wrote: » so it IS the professionals opinion that the ability to self build is based on?
Villain wrote: » Its a joint decision and I'm sure money will play a part
jiminho wrote: » So am I correct in saying that if you're a Chartered Engineer and you manage to get yourself Certified, you can effectively "self build"?
DOCARCH wrote: » That does not = a competent builder. If you are a Chartered Engineer, and you happen to also be a Building Contractor, with a track record of building, then you could very legitimatley 'self build'.
sydthebeat wrote: » its not a joint decision, its a unilateral decison by the certifier, whose PI is at stake. If something goes wrong in the future the owner / builder isnt going to sue themselves, are they?
Villain wrote: » Of course it is a joint decision, the Self Builder has to decide he or she wants to appoint themselves as the builder first before trying to get an Engineer to agree to sign off. My point earlier in-case people misunderstood is an Engineer may decide he or she will sign off on a self builder but will want to visit far more often and thus will agree to if they are paid 2 or 3 times the normal rate.
sydthebeat wrote: » i cant tell if your actually serious.... the owner WANTS to be the builder..... he needs the certifier to accept this. the only DECISION that is to be made is made by the certifier, whether to accept or not. the owner has the "cap in hand" so to speak....
Villain wrote: » I'm not sure why you feel the need for the caps or what you are missing, a person decides they want to build a home, they look at the new legislation and they then have to decide will they declare themselves the builder and look for an engineer to sign off or will they appoint a builder??
galwaytt wrote: » True, but he'd be certifying the Work - not the person - so that should be o.k.
4Sticks wrote: » Close Very simplified now 1. A Desiger stamps/signs and approves design drawings,at commencement . 2. A Certifier inspects during works and certifies upon completion 1+2 could be the same person ( must be architect/engineer/surveyor ) who could also be the builder if a) the local authority accept this b) his/her lenders accept this. I agree this ought to be ok but may not be for a self builder It should not be ok - but is or could be - in the case of a spec builder. Take a bow Hogan.
