Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Wednesday, 5 April 2017

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government

Review of Building Regulations, Building Controls and Consumer Protection: Discussion

5:00 pm

Ms Deirdre Ní Fhloinn:

I will go back to the first point made by Deputy Ó Broin around whether or not we have had enough time, since 2014, to assess the performance of the building control regulations. The building control regulations are part of the regulatory regime that operates for construction in Ireland. There are different elements to this regime. The planning process is another part of it. It is part of a regulatory regime. Any process like this needs to be assessed for its effectiveness and needs to be tested and monitored. As Mr. O'Boyle has said, it needs to be kept under review. I believe that three years is certainly enough time to be able to find out from the building control authorities their view on how the building control regulations are working in practice. There are a number of procedures referred to in the code of practice for inspecting and certifying buildings from September of last year. These involve the building control authorities interacting with the building control management system, which is the online system for submission of documentation around building control. Procedures are referred to in the code of practice whereby building control authorities, for example, can use the system to assess whether or not the assigned certifier has resigned from their role on a project. This might indicate if there are difficulties on a project and it might prompt an inspection. Part of what we should be looking at in building control is whether or not the regulatory model is fit for purpose. Consider the model for the regulation of food safety - which is one model I like to refer to - and which operates in a relatively similar way to building control. There are inspections happening all over the State on a regular basis and these are fed into a regulatory system that involves an audit and review of how effective the system is. If one looks at the annual reports of local authorities from 2015, most of which are available online, one will find virtually no reference whatsoever to enforcement activities by building control authorities. Usually there is quite a lot of detail about other types of enforcement activities, for example in relation to planning. There is, however, very little information on building control.

I will make this general point, which is also referred to in the report of the UK's all-party parliamentary group for new housing in England, published in July last year. The report consisted, essentially, of a review similar to the one being carried out by this committee. That group heard evidence that many consumers do not really understand the roles of their local authority or building control. From my research and from people I have spoken to I believe there is a lack of understanding about the limit of what the building control authority is able to do and how frequently building control inspections are carried out. If we look at the annual reports of the local authorities some building control authorities are inspecting 12% to 15% , which is the target set in the code of practice. Some are inspecting 50% of new buildings. That information needs to be captured, aggregated on a national level and analysed. The BCAR was such a substantial change in practice that it should absolutely be possible to assess performance, even though it may well be there are not defects or claims yet coming out from the system it set up.

I also wish to address Deputy Ó Broin's question about what happens to owners who find defects. Again I refer back to one of the observations of the UK all-party parliamentary group report that builders need to put consumers first. Their primary focus should be on the consumer. The report found there is a huge gap between what people think they are getting and in what they actually receive in practice in respect of warranties and the finish of their homes. Consumer education is very important. The point around effective redress is made several times in that UK report and is also referred to in my submission along with timely, effective and cost effective dispute resolution to avoid arbitration and litigation.

My final point is on defects insurance, which has an essential role to play. I believe that a warranty from a builder should transfer with a new housing unit. There was a case before the High Court, decided in 2016, with respect to a seriously defective house in Donegal. It was a one-off build and I use it as an example of precisely the problem identified by Mr. Fitzpatrick where one-off houses were exempted from the requirements of building control in 2015. This was a decision I disagreed with at the time and I still disagree with it. One-off houses are just as likely, and no less likely, to have defects. Much of our litigation has been in regard to one-off houses. The house in Donegal had defects and in order to fix it the estimate put on the claim by the plaintiff's surveyor was €277,000. Even with the policy that might be in place today for that unit and if €200,000 is the limit of the policy, who would pay the €77,000? There must be a remedy in contract, alongside the defects policy.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.