Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2013

BryanF

sydthebeat wrote: »

CIF bryan

was just correcting my post ! to quick for me syd:D

DOCARCH

martinn123 wrote: »

Hm, someone has not been following this thread.

All I am trying to get across, in connection with the proposed regs, is that builders need to have the same standing and take the same resposibilities (and liabilities) as everybody else in the process...

...afterall its builders who build. Nobody else.

sydthebeat

BryanF wrote: »

was just correcting my post ! to quick for me syd:D

it would throw it way of course if insulated concrete formwork was the bastion for builders :P

sydthebeat

DOCARCH wrote: »

All I am trying to get across, in connection with the proposed regs, is that builders need to have the same standing and take the same resposibilities (and liabilities) as everybody else in the process...

...afterall its builders who build. Nobody else.

maybe there are some builders out there are so used to having their hand held through a build that their scared to stand on their own feet? surely not though?

wirehairmax

sydthebeat wrote: »

maybe there are some builders out there are so used to having their hand held through a build that their scared to stand on their own feet? surely not though?

It's not builders who are bitching and moaning about the proposed amendments to the regs though. It's the architects who are worried now that they can't wriggle out of responsibility any more by stating that a certificate of compliance is useless as it's only their "opinion".
It's also architects who are making sure to highlight and flag the expected increase in fees that will surely ensue due to the extra "responsibility" placed upon them

sydthebeat

wirehairmax wrote: »

It's not builders who are bitching and moaning about the proposed amendments to the regs though.

did you miss the out cry earlier where some people think its their human right to build their own home? or the self builders who complain about having to engage a contractor? Its not just architects complaining.

edit: also.. most building contractors out there havent a bloody clue whats coming down the tracks.

wirehairmax wrote: »

It's the architects who are worried now that they can't wriggle out of responsibility any more by stating that a certificate of compliance is useless as it's only their "opinion".

but is it the architects (and lets not forget engineers and surveyors here) responsibility to ensure a building is built in accordance with regulations? why isnt it the builders responsibility? Architects design, they do not build.
yet they are expected to accept responsibility for ALL those that provide materials and services for building........ can you argue that thats fair and equitable?


oh and yes, of course extra services will incur extra costs. Thats basic economics. These extra services are being forced upon the consumer by a government abdicating their responsibility for inspection. So any ire over increased fees should be aimed squarely at minister Hogan.

4Sticks

wirehairmax wrote: »

It's not builders who are bitching and moaning about the proposed amendments to the regs though.

You would be happy to certify another persons works then i.e. be held soley legally responsible ?

4Sticks

sydthebeat wrote: »

some people think its their human right to build their own home?

I wonder do these same persons not realize that rights and responsibilities go hand in glove i.e. if one "asserts this right" In the context of the up coming regs

- this meaning the owner hiring direct labour is "the builder" and is then legally and indefinitely having "the builders" legally enforceable responsibilities and liabilities to all who may use and who may own the building.

Dwell on that .

martinn123

4Sticks wrote: »

I wonder do these same persons not realize that rights and responsibilities go hand in glove i.e. if one "asserts this right" In the context of the up coming regs

- this meaning the owner hiring direct labour is "the builder" and is then legally and indefinitely having "the builders" legally enforceable responsibilities and liabilities to all who may use and who may own the building.

Dwell on that .

As opposed to the Current Position, where no one holds any responsibility, especially the so called ''Issuer of a Cert'' who is only expressing an opinion.

sydthebeat

martinn123 wrote: »

As opposed to the Current Position, where no one holds any responsibility, especially the so called ''Issuer of a Cert'' who is only expressing an opinion.

Everybody agrees the current status quo is not acceptable and is a reminant of a bygone era. Youre going over old ground there.

martinn123

sydthebeat wrote: »

Everybody agrees the current status quo is not acceptable and is a reminant of a bygone era. Youre going over old ground there.

You have made one or two points, on this thread, multiple times and then some.

4Sticks

not helpful or relevant

4Sticks

martinn123 wrote: »

You have made one or two points, on this thread, multiple times and then some.

shame about a once good thread

agreed! but we don't need video

sydthebeat

martinn123 wrote: »

You have made one or two points, on this thread, multiple times and then some.

some things are worth repeating, other things not so much.....

BryanF

Gents that's enough!
Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2013

martinn123

sydthebeat wrote: »

some things are worth repeating, other things not so much.....

Some things may be worth repeating, others require Legislation..............Buiding Control ( Amendement) Regulations 2013.

sydthebeat

ok then

Can those who are arguing that these regulations are fair, equitable and to be welcomed please present their points in a concise manner to be debated?

At the moment it appears that those in favour are only in favour because it is causing strife to professionals, and obviously thats not a valid reason to be in favour of these regulations.

4Sticks

Indeed. I too would welcome regs which obliged others to certify my works.

Martin , maxie , why not lobby for your "right" to certify your own works. I won't hold my breath.

Penn

Enough of the petty snipes and personalising the discussion. Discuss the topic civilly or don't post, and if you have an issue with a post, report it and allow the mods to deal with it.

Back on topic, please.

martinn123

sydthebeat wrote: »

ok then

Can those who are arguing that these regulations are fair, equitable and to be welcomed please present their points in a concise manner to be debated?

At the moment it appears that those in favour are only in favour because it is causing strife to professionals, and obviously thats not a valid reason to be in favour of these regulations.

I doubt, given the tone and synical comments prevelant in this thread, since it's inseption, it would allow for a debate.
You only have to look at the post after your own, for evidence of this.
In view of the Mod Warning I will say no more.

sydthebeat

Is there ANYONE who can argue in favour of the regs?

Anyone at all?

4Sticks

I think the RIAI at Merrion Sq for the most part welcome it believing it funnels the market place almost exclusively to their members.

Self builders take note that your options for selecting your certifier will narrow.

4Sticks

Can anyone find a public statement by the CIF or any building company that uses words to the effect that " we are the ones who physically build buildings after all and therefore we should certify what is our own work."

martinn123

4Sticks wrote: »

Can anyone find a public statement by the CIF or any building company that uses words to the effect that " we are the ones who physically build buildings after all and therefore we should certify what is our own work."

Perhaps in the light of your comments, you could explain the numerous calls, from Architectural Professionals, for the extensive involvement of Building Control types from the Local Authorities to provide Inspection and Certification.

Do they build anything ?.

sydthebeat

martinn123 wrote: »

Perhaps in the light of your comments, you could explain the numerous calls, from Architectural Professionals, for the extensive involvement of Building Control types from the Local Authorities to provide Inspection and Certification.

Do they build anything ?.

Erh, because that's the very successful system that's implemented in other countries which offers 100% inspections to ensure defects DO NOT happen.

All that is happening here with the regs is the Government abdicating any responsibility to ensure defects do not happen, but solely to have one target for litigation AFTER a defect happens.

We do not need to reinvent the wheel here.

Either we go fully local authority inspectIon scheme or we go full self certificatIon where all parties certify their input. At the moment we have a bastardised version of the latter.

Please do not get these two distinct separate schemes mixed up.

4Sticks

I let others speak for themselves. Have you seen then no builders wanting to stand over their works then - in the form of certification. Why no aspirations from that group do you think ?

DOCARCH

martinn123 wrote: »

Do they build anything ?.

No.

+1 to Syd's reply to that...and 'they' are (in theory) independent. Plus, nobody has every suggested that 'they' certify anything.

A degree of independent oversight is required (and more than there is now!) to keep builders and certifiers in check.

Ever wonder why people driving in the middle of the night, when there is nobody else/no other cars around, stop at red traffic lights?

martinn123

sydthebeat wrote: »

Erh, because that's the very successful system that's implemented in other countries which offers 100% inspections to ensure defects DO NOT happen.

I'll ignore the Erh, in the light of Moderation instruction to avoid petty snipes, maybe you will give me the same courtesy,

I have been watching with interest programmes such as Coyboy Builders on Channel 5 which definitely dispels your myth of 100% inspections and defects not happening.

All that is happening here with the regs is the Government abdicating any responsibility to ensure defects do not happen, but solely to have one target for litigation AFTER a defect happens.

We do not need to reinvent the wheel here.

Either we go fully local authority inspectIon scheme or we go full self certificatIon where all parties certify their input. At the moment we have a bastardised version of the latter.

Please do not get these two distinct separate schemes mixed up.

sydthebeat

martinn123 wrote: »

I'll ignore the Erh, in the light of Moderation instruction to avoid petty snipes, maybe you will give me the same courtesy,

I have been watching with interest programmes such as Coyboy Builders on Channel 5 which definitely dispels your myth of 100% inspections and defects not happening.

Have a fun time buildIng your straw man and come back to us when you want to debate the topic at hand.

martinn123

sydthebeat wrote: »

Have a fun time buildIng your straw man and come back to us when you want to debate the topic at hand.

So countesy is not your thing , OK I'm out of here, enjoy the one sided discussion between Architects, and enjoy the consequences when the Legislation is enacted as currently drafted.Or with amendments from vested interests, Associations o f which you are not a member of.

sydthebeat

You have shown by your posts that you are unable to argue the topic. You pervert the opposing view by suggesting it saying something entirely different.

Adieu, you won't be missed.

mfceiling

I'm following this topic with interest.

I do a fair bit of work for self builders and for builders also.

This week alone i have taken 6 calls for ceilings (all looking done before xmas) from self builders who are under the impression that the sh*t will hit the fan on jan 1. Another called me tonight to ask me if i could do his house tomorrow (haven't seen a plan, drawing, idea of square meterage). Unfortunately i've a prior appointment with santa in castlecomer!!

I wonder if/when the regs change and only certain builders make the grade or become certified, will their prices increase due to the fact that the labour pool might diminish?

Penn

martinn123 and sydthebeat both banned for one week for ignoring mod instruction.

wirehairmax

sydthebeat wrote: »

edit: also.. most building contractors out there havent a bloody clue whats coming down the tracks.

QUOTE]

Neither do most architects

rodzer

Back on topic. Again...
BER Assessors are currently watched like a hawk by the government (SEAI). You are expected to provide truthful accurate Certs, i.e. Not an opinion.
If you step out of line you get penalty points or banned.
Isn't this Building Control?
A similar procedure should be set up for general building.
Why should audits be given to one sector and not others?
It is the "Building Control" regulations after all !

archtech

rodzer wrote: »

Back on topic. Again...
BER Assessors are currently watched like a hawk by the government (SEAI). You are expected to provide truthful accurate Certs, i.e. Not an opinion.
If you step out of line you get penalty points or banned.
Isn't this Building Control?
A similar procedure should be set up for general building.
Why should audits be given to one sector and not others?
It is the "Building Control" regulations after all !

technically not as BERs fall under different legislation. That said DEAP is the tool stipulated within The building regulation demonstrate compliance with Part L of the regulations for new dwellings.

Selfbuilder14

hi all

I would appreciate a little help. We are currently planning on building an extension our plans are still in the planning process. I knew nothing of the new building regs until a couple of weeks ago and our budget was determined with us doing much of the build. We should get full planning permission in February but we will have to start after the 1st march. If we start after the 1st of March we cannot afford to build our extension as we planned for my husband to do the detailed design as he is a civil engineer but have now found out he cannot do this anymore and we will have to continue with our architect which we can't afford. Can you put your notice to build in before full planning issued with a date after which we should have revived planning so we can start before the 1st m,arch. We would only start the build if we received full planning.

This is causing me and my husband so much stress we can't afford to buy a bigger house and our existing house is too small. I am using all my savings for this and now to find we might not be able I feel very depressed. We have three small children and only want what's best for them.

Is there any chance the building regs will be postponed sounds like they have not been fully thought out and have so many holes.

Thanks

DOCARCH

Selfbuilder14 wrote: »

We are currently planning on building an extension our plans are still in the planning process.

Hi SB14

First of all, how big is the proposed extension (in terms of the floor area of the proposed extension), secondly, when do expect to recieve planning permission/a decision...early/mid/late February (or when was your planning application lodged)?

If your proposed extension is less than 40.0 m.sq., then you have nothing to worry about, these proposed regs do not apply.

Selfbuilder14

DOCARCH wrote: »

Hi SB14

First of all, how big is the proposed extension (in terms of the floor area of the proposed extension), secondly, when do expect to recieve planning permission/a decision...early/mid/late February (or when was your planning application lodged)?

If your proposed extension is less than 40.0 m.sq., then you have nothing to worry about, these proposed regs do not apply.

Hi docarch

Thanks for your reply. In answer to your question our extension is too large not to go for planning. We submitted our application on the 28th November and have been given a date of the 31st Jan when we should know the intent. A further 4 weeks has to follow taking us to the end of February. As the notice to build has to give a further 2 weeks before we can build this takes us into March. We have no time to spare. Planning can take anything from 5 to 8 weeks but I think normally takes about 6 if everything in order. What I want to know is when we get the councils conditional planning offer sometime in Jan could we theoretically go to give our notice of intent to build? We would then start end of February missing the new building regs? We would only start when full planning received. I am sure there will be no problems but can't be sure.

Is this a possibility ? We are hopefully if planning deal with quickly we may just about have time. Problem is Christmas adds an extra 9 days to the process.

DOCARCH

Selfbuilder14 wrote: »

Hi docarch

Thanks for your reply. In answer to your question our extension is too large not to go for planning. We submitted our application on the 28th November and have been given a date of the 31st Jan when we should know the intent.

That would be about right for an application submitted on November 28th. Cutting it fine!

As far as I am aware, in theory, you can submit a commencement notice 2 weeks prior to the final grant of planning permission (assuming there are no thrid party objections to the application and once you do not intend to appeal the decision).

Note, that I have never done this and I am open to correction on this...but, I read it somewhere. Maybe others can clarify/comment?

kkelliher

letter from mr hogan in sunday business post today on this issue and his intention to conti ue with it

Supertech

Selfbuilder14 wrote: »

Hi docarch Thanks for your reply. In answer to your question our extension is too large not to go for planning.

Can you clarify the actual area ?
It may require planning permission but still be exempt from the new Regulations. 40 sq.m is a sizeable footprint.

Selfbuilder14

1500 square foot 2 storey barn shaped roof. To compliment our bungalow.

Supertech

Jaysus !!

That's a big extension.

Thanks for the clarification. I think the timescale is really tight. As you've identified, the days lost over Christmas are a problem.
I'm not sure about lodging before the final grant issues either. Again I've heard of it being done, but never actually done it. I think there's a section on the commencement notice which requires the date of grant of permission to be filled in.

DOCARCH

Supertech wrote: »

Jaysus !!
Again I've heard of it being done, but never actually done it.

+1 on this...just to highlight again!

DOCARCH

kkelliher wrote: »

letter from mr hogan in sunday business post today on this issue and his intention to conti ue with it

I read the article...all sounds rosey!

Amongst other things, he talks about/mentions latent defects insurance (...not in the current legislation), registration of building contractors (...not due until 2105 at the earliest), and, the role of Building Control in the process (...the majority of which [if not all] will not have the necessary proceedures/software in place in time)...

....but still he proposes to push ahead with a March 1st kick off!

Daft!

4Sticks

In a practical sense now is the moment the regs start to bite.The minister has published a letter in the SBP today stating full steam ahead and no changes.

My best estimate of how many professionals we have in Ireland to offer the services required by the now - in practical terms - effective regulations , is

1200 architects ( no of practices x 2 )
153 Building Surveyors
200 Chartered Consulting Engineers

Not all of the above will be willing/inclined to service the domestic market as they will be only experienced or dedicated only to other , non domestic sectors.

So it appears there is a massive mis match of workload vs manpower. A workload for which , rightly or wrongly , architects are running scared of the ( possibly un insurable)* risks they face under the effectively current regulations.

From here I obtained the data on the attached Excel file. Last year 2012 - the worst for decades saw 3070 commencement notices lodged for single house. I have not got stats on domestic extensions ( If anyone can assist me with that - pleased do)

So as gaybo would say there was one for everyone. In fact almost 3 new houses for each architect by my ( approximate and rough ) calculations. I have no idea how many extensions greater than 40m2 were commenced.

For the consumer it looks very very bad. You are being forced to do business with a small number of professionals that are sacred of their new responsibilities. This will reflected in the price .

But don't blame the minister. Blame the architects.


* this is vital - if you are getting a price for architectural services only accept it when you first see a clear and un ambiguous statement written by the architects PI provider to you that this architect is covered to provide the services required by the new regulations. Otherwise you will be in receipt of certification which is not backed up by insurances.

Selfbuilder14

Supertech wrote: »

Jaysus !!

That's a big extension.

Thanks for the clarification. I think the timescale is really tight. As you've identified, the days lost over Christmas are a problem.
I'm not sure about lodging before the final grant issues either. Again I've heard of it being done, but never actually done it. I think there's a section on the commencement notice which requires the date of grant of permission to be filled in.

Thanks

That is what we will do and hopefully it will go through no hitches. If it works we will have a bottle of champagne if not we will have to rethink.

Open A

I think it is really unfair that there hasn't been any public awareness on this: the final wording of the regs has not been agreed, yet you are expected to change your plans mid way through your project. Pressure is beginning to build on the minister to postpone the implementation date. I would advise everyone negatively affected by this to write to ministers raising their concerns. The more voices, the more likely deferral will happen. Deferral would buy a little time to amend to a system that actually works. Here are the email addresses of ministers

Here is why the new regs do not work: http://bregsforum.wordpress.com/2013/11/29/home-owners-will-be-no-better-off-at-the-next-priory-hall-priory-hall-bregs/
Here is how self-builders will be phased out under the proposed regs: http://bregsforum.wordpress.com/2013/12/04/self-builders-to-be-phased-out-under-s-i-80-bregs/
Here is how a hiatus in the industry is coming in March, putting 100,000 jobs and a €10billion industry (2014) at risk: http://bregsforum.wordpress.com/2013/11/27/a-hiatus-in-the-construction-industry/

If everyone could take 10mins to write to a few ministers, it could make all the difference. The handy thing is no one is surprised when they hear Phil Hogan is making a mess of this...

strongback

4Sticks wrote: »

In a practical sense now is the moment the regs start to bite.The minister has published a letter in the SBP today stating full steam ahead and no changes.

My best estimate of how many professionals we have in Ireland to offer the services required by the now - in practical terms - effective regulations , is

1200 architects ( no of practices x 2 )
153 Building Surveyors
200 Chartered Consulting Engineers

Not all of the above will be willing/inclined to service the domestic market as they will be only experienced or dedicated only to other , non domestic sectors.

So it appears there is a massive mis match of workload vs manpower. A workload for which , rightly or wrongly , architects are running scared of the ( possibly un insurable)* risks they face under the effectively current regulations.

From here I obtained the data on the attached Excel file. Last year 2012 - the worst for decades saw 3070 commencement notices lodged for single house. I have not got stats on domestic extensions ( If anyone can assist me with that - pleased do)

So as gaybo would say there was one for everyone. In fact almost 3 new houses for each architect by my ( approximate and rough ) calculations. I have no idea how many extensions greater than 40m2 were commenced.

For the consumer it looks very very bad. You are being forced to do business with a small number of professionals that are sacred of their new responsibilities. This will reflected in the price .

But don't blame the minister. Blame the architects.


* this is vital - if you are getting a price for architectural services only accept it when you first see a clear and un ambiguous statement written by the architects PI provider to you that this architect is covered to provide the services required by the new regulations. Otherwise you will be in receipt of certification which is not backed up by insurances.

I would estimate that there are as many if not more chartered civil and structural engineers as there are fully qualified architects. There are just more graduating with civil and structural engineering degrees than architecture and healthy numbers of engineers becoming chartered every year.

Many more engineers have also gotten involved with house extensions and one off houses than would have in the past, There just isn't a lot of engineering in a house so now engineers get involved in designing, planning and the project management side. It adds more competition to an already squeezed market.

Architects and engineers need to make money so I can't see how the legislation won't be adopted. It's a simple case of work or starve. It's a gun to people's heads and a very negative punitive way of implementing policy. That's nothing new from this and the previous government. 'Do what we say or find another job'.



On another point is there any update on where the wording of the compliance statements is at? Is it true the insurance companies are softening their stance and are coming in line with what the legislation requires?