you actually dont need an LBP to do restricted building work as their is a clause which states this as long as you are the owner .
does this not make a mockery of the LBP scheme!
mm12345,
Feb 20, 10:29am
No. There's a clause limiting the owner-builder to do only one home in 3 years, aimed at preventing shysters buying unsafe dumps with the express purpose of doing a quick and dirty patch and paint and flicking them off for a quick profit. The statutory declaration you sign establishes a paper trail. Don't forget that the major disasters (leaky homes etc) weren't the result of home-builders, but mainly larger building companies, material suppliers, and government acting under industry "expert" advice. Any (normally) "restricted" aspect of the work still requires a permit/consent and/or other regulation (electrical/plumbers and gasfitters etc) restricts what you can and cannot do. Sadly, there are probably still plenty of nanny statists, busy-bodying do-gooders, control-freaks, and other riff-raff who'd like to transform what's left of NZ into the world's first complete "can't do" society.Some of them post here.
trade4us2,
Feb 20, 10:53am
And any political party that tries to change this may as well give up being elected, as a million DIYers will tell them so.
p.monro,
Feb 20, 4:52pm
And the rot still continues. I recently had an addition to my property where the council consenting authority failed to require a foundation support under a girder truss, the master builder and inspector also. I ended up puting it in myself. But then I am a retiredprofessional electrical engineer without licence to prepare consents or do any building or electrical work. I think we should just sit down and wait to be told when we need to have a bath. These bright new managers know it all
tezw1,
Feb 21, 12:31am
Concrete floor or timber floor! What design loads had been allowed by the truss designer! This where the fault lies if it were required as none of the poeple you have mentioned are designers or engineers. Designers and Engineers design, builders build and inspectors ensure that the building is built as per consented plan. Why would the last two parties want to extend their liability to more than it is now!
dmjbuild1,
Feb 21, 7:23am
i don't think it's makes a mockery of it, you still have to advise the council your a DIY "home builder" which gets flagged on the LIM for people to view when it's time to sell. I'd be pretty weary of buying a house done by a DIYer in regards to future resale.
accroul,
Feb 21, 8:15am
If a LBP's work falls short of the mark somewhere in the furture after the work is passed by council, the work can be traced back to the builder & restitution be demanded. If a homeowner decides to do work without registering his/her intent with council & that work turns out shoddy then sells, what restitution does the new homeowner get!
mm12345,
Feb 21, 9:25am
That's actually not a valid question - as the reverse may apply. (you're comparing an LBP builder who follows the rules in your example, to an owner-builder who doesn't).
Anyway, once upon a time we used to have something called "caveat emptor" where there was some onus of responsibility on the buyer to check things out (and some protection in that "caveat emptor" does not apply in the case where a seller deliberately hides faults). It's still a good idea to get a home checked out thoroughly - regardless of who built it. By the time you find you need to claim against your LBP, he'll be retired and living the high life in Rio.
stevo2,
Mar 17, 4:13pm
You will have already saved enough to put the job right again because you will have paid a lot less for the house at purchase time, or at least I would have.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.