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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

New Building Control Regs

12357…14

Comments

  • #202
    RITwing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 246 ✭✭RITwing


    I don't know how many readers will remember Esther Rantzen , BBC late 70's consumer show That's Life. Back then if one bought a defective TV , washing machine , lawn mower etc consumer law was so poor that shopkeepers could and did refer purchasers onto the manfucturer of the goods in question. Thanks to the efforts of ER and others like her we today have better protections in place for the retail shopper. Today the shop takes back the defective item from the customer , what happens after that does not concern him/her it is between the retailer and supplier/ manufacturer to resolve.

    A similar principle pertainss now with SI 9. The consumer sues the architect .
    For everything and anything.
    End of story.

    Especially if the architect is too vitiated to take the matter up afterwards with the fire stopper.
    Or BER Assessor.
    Or pyritic block supplier.
    Or radon man.
    Or solar panel man.
    Or the roofer who used galv nails not copper as specified .
    Or the German suplier of triple glazing panels which fog up.

    Who should care for the architect in all this . No one particularly. Who should care that the architect cannot be this all catching buffer between you and the construction industry ? Everyone.
    .


  • #203
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,863 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Carbonnet wrote: »
    Take fire stopping on the infamous 'Hall' - to rectify the mess new fire stops were to be installed in accordance with regulations, the manufacturer specified would not stand over their system unless it was carried out by their approved installers under the manufacturers inspection (Continuous) - they then issued an 'Ancillary Cert' - Is the AC responsible if there is a failure?

    I'd say not, the responsibility would find it's way back to the manufacturer and his PI would be called upon - most reputable manufacturers of building materials have been around for a long time, they are not going to disappear to avoid liabilities.

    this does not deal with the issue of the insurers settling out of court, which in my experience is vastly the norm rather than the exception.

    therefore there would be no recourse against the ancillary certifier


  • #204
    Drift
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,395 ✭✭✭Drift


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    this does not deal with the issue of the insurers settling out of court, which in my experience is vastly the norm rather than the exception.

    therefore there would be no recourse against the ancillary certifier

    I don't know if this will be the case but one would imagine that a clever insurer would spread the load by suing the Ancillary Certifier's insurance prior to the settlement agreement taking place. In the one or two cases I've seen previously everyone who could possibly be dragged in has been and then when there's no-one left to sue a settlement agreement is made.

    I haven't seen too many cases though so this may be an exception.


  • #205
    fash
    Registered Users Posts: 2,275 ✭✭✭fash


    Drift wrote: »
    In the one or two cases I've seen previously everyone who could possibly be dragged in has been and then when there's no-one left to sue a settlement agreement is made.

    I haven't seen too many cases though so this may be an exception.
    Nope- this is the way it is done and had always been done. Which is why the difference between opinion and certificate is not as strong as some people think.


  • #206
    DOCARCH
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭DOCARCH


    fash wrote: »
    Which is why the difference between opinion and certificate is not as strong as some people think.

    Indeed. One of the discussions at the recent RIAI EGM was that the DoE are going to have to define what to 'certify' actually is/means in relation to the BC(A)R.

    On one hand you the AC 'certifying' the works in compliance with the Building Regulations (i.e. to certify = to be certain) and then on the other hand you have the DoE Code of Practice stating that it is accepted that the AC cannot inspect all works to which the Building Regulations apply...is it a Certificate or an Opinion???


  • #207
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,863 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    fash wrote: »
    Nope- this is the way it is done and had always been done. Which is why the difference between opinion and certificate is not as strong as some people think.

    It is impossible for you to say this as there has not yet been a case brought against an assigned certifier.


  • #208
    RITwing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 246 ✭✭RITwing


    Indeed. I have no legal training and so I ask all to consider for themselves how the liabilites imposed on a certifier under SI9 would withstand this challenge - the 3rd and 4th stages in particular


    In European Union law there generally acknowledged to be four stages to a proportionality test, namely

    there must be a legitimate aim for a measure
    the measure must be suitable to achieve the aim (potentially with a requirement of evidence to show it will have that effect)
    the measure must be necessary to achieve the aim, that there cannot be any less onerous way of doing it
    the measure must be reasonable, considering the competing interests of different groups at hand


  • #209
    galwaytt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,794 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    Have you read the new certs? ?

    Actually, I was wondering if, now that we're 6 months in, has anyone actually done one yet ?

    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” 



  • #210
    RITwing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 246 ✭✭RITwing


    From B Regs Forum fadeebook page June 25th

    The Building Register now records a figure of 945 as the total number of validated Commencement Notices received over the past four months (16.5 weeks) since the introduction of the BCMS on 1st March 2014. This figure equates with an average of approximately 57 Commencement Notices per week. Of the 945 Commencement Notices received, 359 (38%) appear to be ‘Short Form’ notices (where an Assigned Certifier is not required).

    The average weekly number of commencement notices lodged nationwide in 2013 was 143 per week.

    Dublin City Council, with a total of 190, has the highest number of validated Commencement Notices. The Dublin City Council figure continues to demonstrate a very high percentage of ‘Short Form’ notices at 118, or 62%, of the ‘Short Form’ type. Interestingly the figures for Louth County Council have no ‘Short Form’ notices.

    Varying figures and statistics are being quoted in relation to the numbers of Commencement Notices by different stakeholders. Continuing problems with the BCMS system for lodgement of Commencement Notices have contributed to these discrepancies. At present it is not possible to lodge ‘short form’, 7-day notices or Completion Certificates on the BCMS system. In addition as Commencement Notices are being validated individually by the 34 Building Control Authorities differences have arisen between the numbers of Commencement Notices started online or hand-delivered and those that are being assessed, have been validated and/or invalidated. The above figures are based on the official BCMS record of validated Commencement Notices.

    We have been unable to establish the frequency with which the BCMS intend to publish the Building Register statistics at this time. We will continue to monitor the figures closely as and when they are published. We are currently reviewing the impact of the above figures as indicators of activity in the construction industry and will report on this in a future post.


  • Advertisement
  • #211
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    Who does the buck actually stop with now under these new regs ?

    Does it really stop with anyone or can they find an excuse to pass the parcel ?

    In other words, when something goes wrong with the house in a few years, will it be the usual pass the parcel between the contractor, the architect, and the quarry etc ?


  • #212
    RITwing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 246 ✭✭RITwing


    The Certifier - in most cases will be the architect

    Edit

    The Certifiers PI provider


  • #213
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    RITwing wrote: »
    The Certifier - in most cases will be the architect

    But who does the buck stop with, as he'll just find a way to blame the contractor or the quarry when something goes wrong. Insurance companies might charge a lot of money, but they don't pay out for the craic.


  • #214
    RITwing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 246 ✭✭RITwing


    With respect you need to read back through this thread.
    In short - no he cannot.


  • #215
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    RITwing wrote: »
    With respect you need to read back through this thread.
    In short - no he cannot.

    So because you can't answer why or how in your post, I must read 15 pages ?
    I don't think so.


  • #216
    galwaytt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,794 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    So because you can't answer why or how in your post, I must read 15 pages ?
    I don't think so.

    With respect, RITwing has distilled the 15 pages into post #212 and again in #214.

    The answer you're looking for is this: The Certifier.

    Unless they change the law that came in in March, it's that simple.

    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” 



  • Advertisement
  • #217
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    galwaytt wrote: »
    With respect, RITwing has distilled the 15 pages into post #212 and again in #214.

    The answer you're looking for is this: The Certifier.

    Unless they change the law that came in in March, it's that simple.

    He has not "distilled" anything, that's the whole point. People are not stupid.
    The fob off answer doesn't really do it for me. A simple paragraph would do.

    Why is it the certifier and what prevents him from saying can "it's the contractor, he didn't do x" or its the quarry "they didn't test for pyrite" or its the engineer "he didn't spot y"


  • #218
    galwaytt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,794 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    He has not "distilled" anything, that's the whole point. People are not stupid.
    The fob off answer doesn't really do it for me. A simple paragraph would do.

    Why is it the certifier and what prevents him from saying can "it's the contractor, he didn't do x" or its the quarry "they didn't test for pyrite" or its the engineer "he didn't spot y"

    It's not a fob off: it is The Answer. Which is, that the law doesn't allow him to "fob it off" as you say. The new law makes him - and is PI - wholly responsible. For everything.

    ....and that's why there's 15 pages in this thread, and 100's in others on the same subject: it's a mess.

    Meantime, the law stands as-is.

    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” 



  • #219
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    galwaytt wrote: »
    It's not a fob off: it is The Answer. Which is, that the law doesn't allow him to "fob it off" as you say. The new law makes him - and is PI - wholly responsible. For everything.

    ....and that's why there's 15 pages in this thread, and 100's in others on the same subject: it's a mess.

    Meantime, the law stands as-is.

    I'm afraid it is, my first post and question is what's to stop them, you've already admitted its a mess.

    We were also led to believe in the past the certifier was wholly responsible, and fobbed off the same way.

    If it's only the certifier that is "wholly responsible", why are all the other parties required to sign undertakings ? PI insurance companies are not stupid.


  • #220
    RITwing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 246 ✭✭RITwing


    See post 190.


  • #221
    galwaytt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,794 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    I'm afraid it is, my first post and question is what's to stop them, you've already admitted its a mess. S.I. 9 commits the Certifier to whole responsibility

    We were also led to believe in the past the certifier was wholly responsible, and fobbed off the same way. No you weren't - show me an example. I believe the key word you'll find is 'substantially' (in compliance...)

    If it's only the certifier that is "wholly responsible", why are all the other parties required to sign undertakings ? PI insurance companies are not stupid. It doesn't commit them to be responsible, merely that the Certifier satisfies himself (via Certs)

    In red.

    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” 



  • Advertisement
  • #222
    RITwing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 246 ✭✭RITwing


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    I'm afraid it is, my first post and question is what's to stop them

    SI 9 2014


  • #223
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    RITwing wrote: »
    See post 190.

    So in otherwords the AC just folds his ltd. company and everyone can swing.


  • #224
    RITwing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 246 ✭✭RITwing


    You got it in one , in essence.
    Consumers are not protected Minister Hogan lied to you.


  • #225
    miss no stars
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,957 ✭✭✭miss no stars


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    So in otherwords the AC just folds his ltd. company and everyone can swing.

    AC is unlikely to BE a limited company.


  • #226
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    RITwing wrote: »
    You got it in one , in essence.
    Consumers are not protected Minister Hogan lied to you.

    So now we're starting to get the real answers


  • #227
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    miss no stars wrote: »
    AC is unlikely to BE a limited company.

    Most of the ones I've seen certainly are. They'd be a bit stupid not to be in this day and age.


  • #228
    RITwing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 246 ✭✭RITwing


    miss no stars wrote: »
    AC is unlikely to BE a limited company.

    This is where architects are so wrong in the handling of SI 9.
    If architects were were being hung every hour on the hour they (consumers) would not care.
    Consumers , naturally , are self interested.

    The RIAI have dined with the devil in the person of Hogan to gain "an advantage" shafting AT's in the process.

    They will reap a whirlwind.


  • #229
    RITwing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 246 ✭✭RITwing


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    Most of the ones I've seen certainly are. They'd be a bit stupid not to be in this day and age.

    SI 9 2014 again - a Certifier can not be.


  • #230
    miss no stars
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,957 ✭✭✭miss no stars


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    Most of the ones I've seen certainly are. They'd be a bit stupid not to be in this day and age.

    I disagree entirely. A professional - to keep their status - must show continuity of practice. Not so immune as builders who will just fold.


  • #231
    RITwing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 246 ✭✭RITwing


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    So now we're starting to get the real answers

    Ask better questions ;)


  • Advertisement
  • #232
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    RITwing wrote: »
    Ask better questions ;)

    I already did, the fob off's don't work.


  • #233
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    miss no stars wrote: »
    I disagree entirely. A professional - to keep their status - must show continuity of practice. Not so immune as builders who will just fold.

    A professional and their status ? don't make me laugh


  • #234
    miss no stars
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,957 ✭✭✭miss no stars


    So what are you still confused about?


  • #235
    miss no stars
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,957 ✭✭✭miss no stars


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    A professional and their status ? don't make me laugh

    Eh, yes actually. An engineer who's acting as AC will do so under the EI number. Not under a limited company. If they want to keep their chartership they kinda have to... Keep their chartership :eek:


  • #236
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    miss no stars wrote: »
    Eh, yes actually. An engineer who's acting as AC will do so under the EI number. Not under a limited company. If they want to keep their chartership they kinda have to... Keep their chartership :eek:

    Rubbish, they can become employees of their ltd. company which is the legal entity. You might as well claim people can go after an individual builder, even if it's a limited company.


  • #237
    miss no stars
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,957 ✭✭✭miss no stars


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    Rubbish, they can become employees of their ltd. company which is the legal entity. You might as well claim people can go after an individual builder, even if it's a limited company.

    Yes, but the company doesn't have an engineer's ireland number, which is what is required on the CN, assignment of AC and undertaking by the AC. Making it quite clear that it's the individual that is acting as the AC.


  • #238
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    miss no stars wrote: »
    Yes, but the company doesn't have an engineer's ireland number, which is what is required on the CN, assignment of AC and undertaking by the AC. Making it quite clear that it's the individual that is acting as the AC.

    An ID number is just that.
    An employee cannot be held liable for a ltd. company's liabilty. This is very basic stuff.


  • #239
    miss no stars
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,957 ✭✭✭miss no stars


    Have a look at the assignment of certifier and the language used:
    As the building owner, I have assigned the following person as Assigned Certifier, being a
    person named     on a register maintained pursuant to Part 3 or Part 5 of the Building Control
    Act 2007 or Section 7 of the Institution of Civil Engineers of Ireland (Charter Amendment)
    Act 1969

    Now, that they fcuked up on the ICEI bit is a touch embarrassing for them, but the language is quite clear that the AC is acting as a person, not as an organization.


  • #240
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    miss no stars wrote: »
    Have a look at the assignment of certifier and the language used:

    Now, that they fcuked up on the ICEI bit is a touch embarrassing for them, but the language is quite clear that the AC is acting as a person, not as an organization.

    A ltd. company is a legal person, again this is basic stuff.

    At any rate, what you're all really claiming is that the engineer is now responsible, no matter what mistakes or cover ups the quarry, architect, designer and contractor make.
    That fantasy is not going to stand up in real life anywhere I'm afraid.

    Basically we're back to the situation where the lads that will sign anything will get work, and the lads that won't, won't. This has hardly been a recipe for success in the Irish 'construction' industry.


  • Advertisement
  • #241
    RITwing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 246 ✭✭RITwing


    Ralph you are technically wrong whilst being essentially correct. A certifier faces financial ruin and career over if sucessfully sued - with the complainant being not necesarily protected. The impact on the consumer being the same - no protection.


  • #242
    RITwing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 246 ✭✭RITwing


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    At any rate, what you're all really claiming is that the engineer is now responsible, no matter what mistakes or cover ups the quarry, architect, designer and contractor make. That fantasy is not going to stand up in real life anywhere I'm afraid.

    Agreed. See post 202.


  • #243
    miss no stars
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,957 ✭✭✭miss no stars


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    At any rate, what you're all really claiming is that the engineer is now responsible, no matter what mistakes or cover ups the quarry, architect, designer and contractor make.
    That fantasy is not going to stand up in real life anywhere I'm afraid.

    That is exactly the problem.

    Someone, somewhere, is going to call halt to the shenanigans. The legislation is trying to hold the AC responsible for the boiler blowing up, or the electrics short circuiting. That's not possible. And as with the "no retrospective commencement notices, tear it down and start again" business they're carrying on with, it will be challenged, however, it will probably bring absolute ruin onto people before it makes it to the HC. What will actually happen is senior counsel will start employing junior counsel, a second home in the south of France will be purchased by the barrister raking it in, the AC will be sued and will sue an ancillary certifier who will sue their suppliers and they'll chase each other around, raking the money in for the legal eagles until such a time as someone screams stop and settles; or the cost of the proceedings bankrupts everyone and the building owner is 50k further in the hole with no redress to show for it. It's a mess and some transfer of responsibility onto ancillary certifiers needs to be made.


  • #244
    RITwing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 246 ✭✭RITwing


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    Basically we're back to the situation where the lads that will sign anything will get work, and the lads that won't, won't. This has hardly been a recipe for success in the Irish 'construction' industry.

    Yes we are.
    No it wasn't / isn't.
    Tell everyone you know.


  • #245
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    Ah well. Fiasco Phil and incompetence strikes again.

    Thanks for the straight answers folks. That's all people want.

    How ye work in an industry like that I'll never know.


  • #246
    galwaytt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,794 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    miss no stars wrote: »
    That is exactly the problem.

    Someone, somewhere, is going to call halt to the shenanigans. The legislation is trying to hold the AC responsible for the boiler blowing up, or the electrics short circuiting. That's not possible. And as with the "no retrospective commencement notices, tear it down and start again" business they're carrying on with, it will be challenged, however, it will probably bring absolute ruin onto people before it makes it to the HC. What will actually happen is senior counsel will start employing junior counsel, a second home in the south of France will be purchased by the barrister raking it in, the AC will be sued and will sue an ancillary certifier who will sue their suppliers and they'll chase each other around, raking the money in for the legal eagles until such a time as someone screams stop and settles; or the cost of the proceedings bankrupts everyone and the building owner is 50k further in the hole with no redress to show for it. It's a mess and some transfer of responsibility onto ancillary certifiers needs to be made.

    And in the meantime what ??

    10's of thousands of us in the industry have nowhere else to go in the a.m.

    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” 



  • Advertisement
  • #247
    RITwing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 246 ✭✭RITwing


    SI 9 is feeding into that too. A massive spike in commencement notices happened in Jan/Feb follwed by a cliff fall after


  • #248
    Sarah3
    Registered Users Posts: 95 ✭✭Sarah3


    Couple of questions on new regs:

    I am about to renovate a 1960s house and put on a significant extension. As part of this I plan to demolish an ugly single storey extension, so:

    Q1: Will the assigned certifiier be my engineer who will supervise and sign off on all works or the building contractor

    Q2: Does the assigned certifier only apply to the new build or also to the renovation and the demolition. The reason I am asking this is I have had my first quote back and demolition costs and ground work price is ridiculus so am wondering would it be possible under new regs to get a separate contractor to do the demolition and groundwork and then a separate contractor for all else


  • #249
    Sarah3
    Registered Users Posts: 95 ✭✭Sarah3


    Sarah3 wrote: »
    Couple of questions on new regs:

    I am about to renovate a 1960s house and put on a significant extension. As part of this I plan to demolish an ugly single storey extension, so:

    Q1: Will the assigned certifiier be my engineer who will supervise and sign off on all works or the building contractor

    Q2: Does the assigned certifier only apply to the new build or also to the renovation and the demolition. The reason I am asking this is I have had my first quote back and demolition costs and ground work price is ridiculus so am wondering would it be possible under new regs to get a separate contractor to do the demolition and groundwork and then a separate contractor for all else

    Also meant to ask:

    Do I need a design certifier as my planning application was lodged in February before the new regs came into play?


  • #250
    DOCARCH
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭DOCARCH


    Sarah3 wrote: »
    ....put on a significant extension. As part of this I plan to demolish an ugly single storey extension...

    What size is the extension?
    Sarah3 wrote: »
    Will the assigned certifiier be my engineer who will supervise and sign off on all works...

    The Design and Assigned certifier has to be either a registered architect, chartered engineer or chartered building surveyor.

    If your engineer is chartered, then yes, s/he can undertake the role...but do not assume automatically...you need to discuss/confirm with them.

    The builder cannot undertake this role.
    Sarah3 wrote: »
    Does the assigned certifier only apply to the new build or also to the renovation and the demolition...

    Makes no difference how you split up the contract, there will be one Commencement Notice for the entire job...splitting up the job between different contractors may make things more difficult for the Assigned Certifier.
    Sarah3 wrote: »
    Do I need a design certifier as my planning application was lodged in February before the new regs came into play?

    Yes, once the building work starts after March 1st, you need a Design and Assigned Certifier...assuming your extension is bigger than 40m.sq.?

    Also bear in mind Health & Safety...have you appointed a PSDP? Also see here: http://www.hsa.ie/eng/Publications_and_Forms/Publications/Construction/homeowners_guidance.pdf


  • #251
    Sarah3
    Registered Users Posts: 95 ✭✭Sarah3


    QUOTE=DOCARCH;91877952]What size is the extension?

    Thanks DocArch for making things a bit clearer. The extension is approx. 90sq. metres.

    My engineer was the person who designed the project for us so I assume he will act as design and assigned certifier but I need to check he is a Chartered Engineer qualified to do so.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement