Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2013

Options
1…3637394142…53

Comments

  • Options
    #1142
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,329 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    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.

    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.

    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.


  • Options
    #1143
    Villain
    Registered Users Posts: 15,944 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    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.

    The code states
    “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;

    I don't see how you can say that owners cannot be builders??


  • Options
    #1144
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,129 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Villain wrote: »
    The code states



    I don't see how you can say that owners cannot be builders??

    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"?


  • Options
    #1145
    Corkblowin
    Registered Users Posts: 622 ✭✭✭Corkblowin


    Interesting query this morning - a client of mine is a developer / builder for some years - building estates for sale. He started out life however as an engineer and is in the process of getting himself chartered.

    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).

    When I suggested that purchasers mortgage providers may have an issue he pointed out that all he'll have to do is provide the completion cert from Building Control which won't (he thinks) have the individuals named on it.

    I guess he'll only have problems if some issue arises - but it could be that the legislation in this guys case has actually increased level of the self-certification possible!!


  • Options
    #1146
    Villain
    Registered Users Posts: 15,944 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    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"?

    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?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1147
    DOCARCH
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 17,772 Mod ✭✭✭✭DOCARCH


    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).

    :pac:

    That pretty much takes the biscuit!

    That is one (other) reason why the legislation is flawed and why mistakes of the past will re-occur!

    No, as far as I can see, in theory, under SI 9, the design/assigned certifier, builder and (initial) owner could be one single person...

    ...develop a large housing estate/apartment scheme, or a number of them in a relatively short period of time...and then sail off into the wind (south of Spain would be nice?).

    I think the Minister confirmed, under his breath, in the past, that there would be nothing stopping a developer having his own in-house certifiers, as employees, so no reason why this could not all be wrapped up into one person.

    This is another reason why we need independent/third party building control.


  • Options
    #1148
    4Sticks
    Registered Users Posts: 1,155 ✭✭✭4Sticks


    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?

    I would - yes. But the novice - no .


  • Options
    #1149
    martinn123
    Registered Users Posts: 2,300 ✭✭✭martinn123


    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.

    I agree and it's a pity it has come down to this.
    considering
    This
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=84045721&postcount=2
    posted almost a year ago, the Amendment has been in discussion here, and elsewhere since then, and the thread has descended into, no you can't, yes I can, no you can't
    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.

    Bingo.


  • Options
    #1150
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,129 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    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?

    do you accept that a novice self builder cannot appoint themselves as builder?


  • Options
    #1151
    Villain
    Registered Users Posts: 15,944 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    do you accept that a novice self builder cannot appoint themselves as builder?

    They could but they would be in breach of the code of practice


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1152
    4Sticks
    Registered Users Posts: 1,155 ✭✭✭4Sticks


    Villain wrote: »
    They could but they would be in breach of the code of practice

    Naughty , naughty :) - that means no then.


  • Options
    #1153
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,129 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Villain wrote: »
    They could but they would be in breach of the code of practice

    so are you saying that only persons who have shown prior experience, knowledge and training in construction should be appointed as builder?


  • Options
    #1154
    Villain
    Registered Users Posts: 15,944 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    so are you saying that only persons who have shown prior experience, knowledge and training in construction should be appointed as builder?

    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.


  • Options
    #1155
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,129 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    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.

    and how do you quantify that?


  • Options
    #1156
    Villain
    Registered Users Posts: 15,944 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    and how do you quantify that?

    That is up to the owner and the Engineer to decide as neither the Code of Practice or Legislation give any detailed requirements.


  • Options
    #1157
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,129 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    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.

    so it IS the professionals opinion that the ability to self build is based on?

    edit: the RIAI had a CPD course on this at the start of the week. Various speakers stated, with reference to legal documents, that 'self building' is no longer possible after 1st march.

    How do you think these professionals inform their opinions?


  • Options
    #1158
    Villain
    Registered Users Posts: 15,944 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    so it IS the professionals opinion that the ability to self build is based on?

    Its a joint decision and I'm sure money will play a part ;)


  • Options
    #1159
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,129 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Villain wrote: »
    Its a joint decision and I'm sure money will play a part ;)

    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?


  • Options
    #1160
    galwaytt
    Registered Users Posts: 12,761 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    ...today's local paper - the Connacht Tribune - with suitably attention-grabbing headline.......

    ..it has even prompted our local TD, Minister Ciaran Cannon, to put out a post on his FB page for people to email him over the issue....

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



  • Options
    #1161
    jiminho
    Registered Users Posts: 390 ✭✭jiminho


    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"?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1162
    DOCARCH
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 17,772 Mod ✭✭✭✭DOCARCH


    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"?

    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'.


  • Options
    #1163
    galwaytt
    Registered Users Posts: 12,761 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    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'.

    True, but he'd be certifying the Work - not the person - so that should be o.k.

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



  • Options
    #1164
    Villain
    Registered Users Posts: 15,944 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    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?

    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.


  • Options
    #1165
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,129 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    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.


    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....


  • Options
    #1166
    Villain
    Registered Users Posts: 15,944 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    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....

    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??


  • Options
    #1167
    4Sticks
    Registered Users Posts: 1,155 ✭✭✭4Sticks


    Assuming an engineer is "found" they have to then hope that
    1. the local authority will validate the commencement notice , with them named as builder and more importantly in due course the completion certificate with them named as builder.
    2. their lender ( yes I do assume there is one ) will allow this.


  • Options
    #1168
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,129 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    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??

    I've banged my head against this wall long enough. .......


  • Options
    #1169
    jiminho
    Registered Users Posts: 390 ✭✭jiminho


    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'.
    galwaytt wrote: »
    True, but he'd be certifying the Work - not the person - so that should be o.k.

    Apologies for re-jigging my question and adding a bit more detail.

    A person can "self build" whether in the literal sense of laying blocks or going the direct labour route provided they have the following criteria met:

    1. A Chartered Engineer stamps/signs and approves design drawings, monitors construction to an extent that confirms all major components have been built to regulation, and signs construction completion cert.
    2. A Certifier (which, provided they have the certification, could be the Char. Eng) signs and witnesses all of the necessary components.

    This is going by the revised FAG section on the localGov website and I guess not for the moment, but most probably a 'near' future amendment in the regulation.

    Would the above be considered correct?

    If the above is true, while a hard pill to swallow, could perhaps be in the rite direction but i agree with most that is probably too harsh. There should be a certain leniency such "Doesn't apply for one off builds" or "Applies for all builds but responsibility is on the owner for all regulations to be complied and if not could effectively prevent the owner from selling".


  • Options
    #1170
    4Sticks
    Registered Users Posts: 1,155 ✭✭✭4Sticks


    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.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1171
    jiminho
    Registered Users Posts: 390 ✭✭jiminho


    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.

    Haha fair enough. I'm confident if i went to my local authority and lender with my criteria and plan, they would except it. They may not.......but I'm quietly confident. Thank you, much appreciated.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement