New changes to regulations from 1st Sep dilemma

cmd12

BryanF wrote: »

Another 44 pages to read. With no resolution at the end😖

Ah here for #%¥ sake!
Emm I'll let ye get onto that one and ya might come back with just the nuts and bolts of it for us ; )
I think personally for the first while it's just a matter of firing all the stuff at them and then they will come back to you with what is wrong .

Sparkyp1981

A two tier market? What about all the houses built pre certification? Are they going to be categorised as poorly built also?

Strolling Bones

Sparkyp1981 wrote: »

A two tier market? What about all the houses built pre certification? Are they going to be categorised as poorly built also?

Houses will continue to be bought and sold just as before. People will want what they want and they will get what they want depending on the the contemporary attitude of the lenders. When banks don't really want to lend certs will be an issue and when they really do want to lend - they won't.

mickdw

To be quite honest, I've been supervising house builds commenced prior to si9 that are far more compliant with the regs in general than many that are being built now with AC.
I don't think the banks will give a damn tbh.
Certainly, in the last 6 months I commenced mortgage drawdown on a house commenced in Feb 14 and was quite worried that someone in the bank might be insisting on AC for no other reason than they may have been issued new forms or internal memo etc.
They dont seem to be concerned or even aware. Once they have an engineer with insurance certifying that he will issue opinion on compliance, all seems to be good.

Some of the work I see going on is shocking and these are commenced under si9.
Engineers from larger businesses not visiting site at all. No detailing of important construction joints, No client awareness of Part L requirements on self builds yet they are plastering out the build. Not so much as a nod towards airtightness etc
imo these engineers are leaving themselves wide open.

Sparkyp1981

I have spoken to some people in the banking/mortgage sector and they have indicated that there bank will be lending without the requirements of certification in the near future

Chemical Byrne

Im wondering if a chartered engineer turned developer is building a scheme of houses, or even his own house, would there be any conflict of interest clause barring him from certifying houses which he has designed and is overseeing the construction of?

stickybookmark

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

Im wondering if a chartered engineer turned developer is building a scheme of houses, or even his own house, would there be any conflict of interest clause barring him from certifying houses which he has designed and is overseeing the construction of?

I doubt it considering the BCMS system which was in place between March 2014 and Sept 2015 when you were filling in who the Assigned Certifier was there was a box you could tick called ''Nominate myself for this role'' just like there was for the Builder role as well.

Chemical Byrne

Sweet.

Strolling Bones

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

Sweet.

Not when you are the punter.
and
Not when the stated political aim was to avoid another Priory Hall.

stickybookmark

I should add - that box was there if you were applying for a single dwelling. Not sure about a scheme of houses

galwaytt

Strolling Bones wrote: »

..Not when the stated political aim was to avoid another Priory Hall.

...that may be the stated aim. The actual aim was to avoid the State getting caught for millions of € in the future - it actually had nothing to do with Standards one way or the other.....