[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.
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.
sydthebeat wrote: » I've banged my head against this wall long enough. .......
atech wrote: » Have they amended the S.I. to exclude the part about being a principal or director of a building company? or are ye all assuming the 'competent' self-builder will set up their own company so that they can sign the cert (and register with the CIRI if/when inclusion in that becomes mandatory)?
Villain wrote: » Hogan says there are wild exaggerations, people who build direct labour or self build can continue, no changes in statutory act. There you have it, case closed
hexosan wrote: » @Villain your going around in circles here and you still haven't countered the above statement. The legislation states that a cert has to be signed by a principal or director of a building company how does a self builder comply with this point. The minister can say whatever he wants it doesn't change the fact that it's the legislation you have to comply with not political spin. You live in a rose tinted, sugar coated world if you think for one second that you can believe anything that comes out of a politicians mouth. (Especially in the run up to an election)
Villain wrote: » If you believe Phil Hogan is saying what he says without legal advice from his department that's up to you, he couldn't have been any clearer. I have no love for any politician especially my Local Minister Phil but will I accept the word of the Minister with responsibility over the opinion of others here, absolutely.
sydthebeat wrote: » The minister has NO responsibility for certifying works. What makes you think he does?
DOCARCH wrote: » More spin and not the whole truth from Hogan on RTE Radio 1!
Happyman42 wrote: » Is it not time the 'professional' bodies got some counter arguments out there?
4Sticks wrote: » The minister is being disingenuous. Technically correct that self building can continue - for builders ! He knows whats is in his SI means self building as understood by most is over he and knows what the RIAI/IEI/CIF/SCSI/IAOSB have said on the matter. He wants to sit back and blame others for the problem he has created and I fully expect him to be using words to that affect in primtetime TV over the coming weeks and months. "Those damn consultants ! Never did their job prperly before and now look at them , Pat / Joe/ Miriam" Now I am getting off your merry go round Villain.
sydthebeat wrote: » This minister isn't the first minister to not understand the legislation he's signed
4Sticks wrote: » To be met with "whingers / moaners /never did you job properly before / you are part of the legacy problems" . Wait and see...
4Sticks wrote: » He is a little cleverer then most think. He manged the professions well as the 2012 Draft regs with words to the affected that " no matter the input of all/any others" , I alone now accept fill responsibility for this building" put them all onto the backfoot. Only in Jan 2014 were changes made to at least make liabilities insurable by providing for ancillary certifications. Cynical. Clever.
4Sticks wrote: With my crystal ball in hand in now predict a one line SI in the near future to remove the " to be signed by Principal or Director of building company only" form the standard form of builders certification. IAOSB and all they represent will breath a sigh of relief and under that circumstance will be very accepting of all the other rigours and costs the SI 9 imposes on them i.e. the imposition of Desiger and Certifier will not seem so bad after all.... Being hit with the small stick being less bad than being hit with the big stick.