New building code

[awa355]

Apparently, from the 1st March, any alterations, around the house that requires a building permit has to be carried out by a bonified builder.

Currently I'm putting up a decent lean to along side the garden shed for the firewood. Was told it would need to be put up by a builder if done after the 1st. because it will be a permanent structure.

The local Gestapo can get fucked, if they think I'm getting a builder in to put up a bloody cover for the firewood.

Any body else aware of the implications of the new rules? from a FIY perspective?

[JimO]

doesn't worry me seeing as im a LBP

[Padmei]

I'm a sparky & get round a lot of renos & new houses.
I have learnt enough by now to ignore the complaints about 'bloody council inspectors' wanting to inspect everything & bloody paperwork.
At the end of the day if someone I cared about was buying a house less than a few years old I would feel reassured it was done by the book.

[Scuba_Steve]

Yea, (I have to check to confirm) but my understanding is this law is utter shit, anything other than cosmetic need to be done by a qualified builder or you must have a qualified builder watching over you the whole time. Which to me is excessive especially since you still need to pay for building inspectors & the whole reason for this law to supposedly to stop dodgy building, the same dodgy building that was done by the qualified builders
Like I said I'll have to actually look for myself sometime to confirm but this is what I've heard about the law.

Oh also now you need to recheck your land for chemicals regardless of previous checks at a LARGE cost to you if you want to build (anything requiring permit) if your property has previously had chemicals on it or been checked before

[Zedder]

Apparently, from the 1st March, any alterations, around the house that requires a building permit has to be carried out by a bonified builder.

Currently I'm putting up a decent lean to along side the garden shed for the firewood. Was told it would need to be put up by a builder if done after the 1st. because it will be a permanent structure.

The local Gestapo can get fucked, if they think I'm getting a builder in to put up a bloody cover for the firewood.

Any body else aware of the implications of the new rules? from a FIY perspective?

Check out the info on here:http://www.dbh.govt.nz/builditright?...FQVLpgodqTfbQA

[Swoop]

the whole reason for this law to supposedly to stop dodgy building, the same dodgy building that was done by the qualified builders

You might be surprised to learn that there are a large amount of unqualified "cowboys" out there. Hopefully this "licence" may cut out a few, however I have heard of quite a few good builders who are hanging up the toolbelt as they do not want more "paperwork bullshit" to deal with.

[Scuba_Steve]

You might be surprised to learn that there are a large amount of unqualified "cowboys" out there. Hopefully this "licence" may cut out a few, however I have heard of quite a few good builders who are hanging up the toolbelt as they do not want more "paperwork bullshit" to deal with.

I know about the cowboys that they've previously tried to stop with the law stating you are responsible for your work for 10yrs, this law I cannot see doing anything other than forcing up costs. the conspiracist in me thinks this might be a master builders brought law.

[ellipsis]

....and now there are a bunch of 'qualified 'cowboys out there...i'm one of the experienced, tradesmen builders who will not be paying any 'tax', which is what it will become, to be lumped into what is nothing more than a way for a bunch of arseholes , (fletchers, carter-holt-harvey...) to have the complete monopoly on the building game in NZ...coming up for thirty eight years in the trade as a self employed and very experienced builder and to be replaced by anyone that pays the money to be registered...there are a lot of very good builders who are now LBP's and a whole lot of liars and cheats...nothing changes, just more bullshit to suck more money from joe public who generally wouldn't know they were being fucked 'til they coughed, but they will know they are being ripped off and dealt to by 'qualified thieves'....time for me to leave the sinking ship...anyone who thinks this is going to improve the building industry, has their head stuck up their own arse....but this is good ole NZ...nothing changes...when joe public cottons on, way down the track, it will be far too late...sad but true...if joe public have been sucked into the fantasy that the building game just got 'safer' for them, then they have a bit of a surprise waiting for them down the road a bit....an expensive and disappointing surprise...looks like i'm semi retired and on the heap next week...oh well...

[Drew]

Permits required, for anything over $5000, or any structural changes. Been like that for years now.

Where the new law differs however, is it makes the chippie responsible, rather than the architect. This is a fuckin crock!

We aren't allowed to do anything that won't comply, but they can fuckin draw it. We can't do fuck all that's not on the plans, because that's what has been consented. Anyone see the problem in that?

Architects get paid very fuckin well to do what they do, and I think you'd be surprised at how useless they can be. I have gone to build things that have nothing shown as to how they're held up. I've built walls that have very differnt finish details, that are supposed to come together, leaving holes you could fit a finger through.

Get the architect in to sort it, and I swear to god, they stand there looking at it untill the builder gives them a solution, and they fuck off and draw it our way.

There is an issue in need of attention, what with the leaky buildings that are all over the country. But riddle me this, who designed it? Builders and project managers for the most part, don't cut corners when it comes to claddings. How can so many buildings leak if they were consented to be built as per NZ standards?

[Scuba_Steve]

Fuck this is longer than the Road User Rule... But can anyone confirm this is the law concerned here??? "Building Act 2004 No 72 (as at 01 January 2011), Public Act"

[bogan]

Apparently, from the 1st March, any alterations, around the house that requires a building permit has to be carried out by a bonified builder.

Currently I'm putting up a decent lean to along side the garden shed for the firewood. Was told it would need to be put up by a builder if done after the 1st. because it will be a permanent structure.

The local Gestapo can get fucked, if they think I'm getting a builder in to put up a bloody cover for the firewood.

Any body else aware of the implications of the new rules? from a FIY perspective?

We do a bit of 'moveable' shedding, keep it under 10 square meter floor area and no permit required. Just make everthing moveable so if some bastard kicks up a fuss about it being < its height from a boundary we just drag it somewhere else paint it camo, and move it back

Did our firewood lean-to shed like that; not too sure what the go is with carport style covers though, I thought they were exempt from permits for some reason.

Building permits for little stuff is such a crock of shit anyway, be ok if they charged wof-like amounts instead of some stupid amount. If a hurricane came through here, the 'permitted' garage would be gone, but my over-engineered firewood shed wouldn't have moved an inch.

[Zedder]

Permits required, for anything over $5000, or any structural changes. Been like that for years now.

Where the new law differs however, is it makes the chippie responsible, rather than the architect. This is a fuckin crock!

We aren't allowed to do anything that won't comply, but they can fuckin draw it. We can't do fuck all that's not on the plans, because that's what has been consented. Anyone see the problem in that?

Architects get paid very fuckin well to do what they do, and I think you'd be surprised at how useless they can be. I have gone to build things that have nothing shown as to how they're held up. I've built walls that have very differnt finish details, that are supposed to come together, leaving holes you could fit a finger through.

Get the architect in to sort it, and I swear to god, they stand there looking at it untill the builder gives them a solution, and they fuck off and draw it our way.

There is an issue in need of attention, what with the leaky buildings that are all over the country. But riddle me this, who designed it? Builders and project managers for the most part, don't cut corners when it comes to claddings. How can so many buildings leak if they were consented to be built as per NZ standards?

Reasons for leaky buildings: Bad design, using untreated kiln dried timber, unqualified and inexperienced builders etc.

[jellywrestler]

Apparently, from the 1st March, any alterations, around the house that requires a building permit has to be carried out by a bonified builder.

Currently I'm putting up a decent lean to along side the garden shed for the firewood. Was told it would need to be put up by a builder if done after the 1st. because it will be a permanent structure.

The local Gestapo can get fucked, if they think I'm getting a builder in to put up a bloody cover for the firewood.

Any body else aware of the implications of the new rules? from a FIY perspective?

get a heat pump

[Swoop]

Get the architect in to sort it, and I swear to god, they stand there looking at it untill the builder gives them a solution, and they fuck off and draw it our way.

Then note the drawing "as fitted"... then send in another exhorbitant bill for their "expert services".

[Lelitu]

Get the architect in to sort it, and I swear to god, they stand there looking at it untill the builder gives them a solution, and they fuck off and draw it our way.

There is an issue in need of attention, what with the leaky buildings that are all over the country. But riddle me this, who designed it? Builders and project managers for the most part, don't cut corners when it comes to claddings. How can so many buildings leak if they were consented to be built as per NZ standards?

From what I've heard about the leaky building crisis, a huge part of that was a governmental fuckup of monumental proportions. sadly not uncommon.
My grandfather is the man that wrote the report on the techniques they wanted to write into the code. in his words "it will leak" their response - go ahead anyway.

basically, the standards were wrong.