Astrid Madsen
**This Q&A appeared in the Winter 2014 edition of Selfbuild magazine.
If the certificate of compliance is not lodged and validated in time, homeowners won’t be able to move in – will there be a way to claim for expenses incurred during this time (e.g. rent) against the assigned certifier and builder? Or the professional body to whom they belong?
This would be a potential disaster area for any property owner. The legal process is very unwieldy for taking action in these cases and while a claim for expenses may arise, that can often be a long hard road. Every effort should be taken to ensure that this does not happen.
The Code of Practice says those listed on the statutory registers (architects/engineers/building surveyors as outlined above) “may be appointed [as design certifier and/or assigned certifier] provided they are competent in relation to the particular works involved.” Legally speaking, can an owner appoint someone that is competent but not on these registers, such as an architectural technologist?
Unless and until architectural technologists are formally recognised I do not see how anyone could recommend appointing someone, no matter how competent, with such a qualification in any important role in connection with a building project to which these Regulations apply.
Design certifiers
Do you foresee any difficulty for designers in certifying designs, including self-builds?
I expect it will be business as usual for the designers and I do not see any additional risk for them in relation to a self-build project, unless the design certifier is also acting as assigned certifier. In my considerable experience in domestic housing, design faults have not been a problem area.
Assigned Certifiers
The really new addition to these regulations is the role of assigned certifier. What will they actually do, will they become de-facto project managers?
They are unlikely to take on the full role of a project manager because of the expense. The legal requirement is for them to design and implement an inspection plan, collect the ancillary certificates from subcontractors, be the main point of contact for the Building Control Authority and last but not least, to sign and file the certificate (co-signed by the builder) that the project has been completed in accordance with the Building Regulations. These obligations are quite onerous.
The assigned certifier will rely on subcontractors’ certificates to certify the specialist stages and they need to make sure they get these signed promptly. I have had experience on commercial buildings where a sub-contractor company had become insolvent before they had completed their documentation. The best advice is to never pay the sub-contractor their final payment until you get all the paperwork needed.
An assigned certifier is not responsible for supervising or overseeing the builder’s work, he is to monitor it in accordance with the inspection plan and see that when inspected, the work was being carried out in accordance with the design and the building regulations. The assigned certifier must diligently make all the inspections under the inspection plan in place to make sure all of the important elements are checked, if not s/he can be held accountable in court. However s/he can’t be held responsible if something goes wrong between inspections unless they should have been obvious at a later inspection but were missed.
Indeed, the main risk is that amateurs or inexperienced people may be involved who may unknowingly cut corners due to never having been shown the correct way of doing things.
Some years ago I was consulted about a case where a self-builder felt sure he could deal with the block work himself and duly did so. He did not know that the walls need to be tied at the corners and as a result the entirety of the block work had to be knocked down and rebuilt properly by a professional tradesman.
Will the representative bodies issue templates for the inspection plans?
They may but it will take time to do so; in the meantime assigned certifiers are likely to rely on their experience to determine which stages are key. Their experience will enable them to assess what inspections are needed and most crucially, at what time. I expect that an assigned certifier will gauge the amount of monitoring required in the inspection plan according to the complication of the project and to the proven experience of the builder and the sub-contractors carrying out their modules of the project. In other words they will use their experience to analyse the risks.
For example I expect that an inspection of the foundations before the concrete is poured would be on every inspection plan. Architects and engineers have complained to me that builders often do not give them adequate notice on when a particular stage of construction will be reached so that an inspection can be scheduled. They say that if the builder is ahead of schedule, they are quite likely to keep going with the work so when the architect or engineer shows up what he came to see is under six inches of concrete. I have rarely heard of a builder being asked to prove that something covered in concrete had been completed correctly, which would involve opening it up, unless an issue were to arise, and this would normally only become apparent at a much later stage.
As assigned certifiers are now taking on a legal obligation, in such scenarios, builders would be foolish to proceed without the assigned certifier seeing for example the open foundations before the concrete was poured, to satisfy themselves that the soil should be able to take the load. If they take a chance they may be asked to dig up the work they have done so the assigned certifier can inspect the element that needs to be signed off on. It will require builders and assigned certifiers working closely together and ideally establishing a good relationship.
**This Q&A appeared in the Winter 2014 edition of Selfbuild magazine.
English