Previous determinations

This determination arises from the authority's decision to refuse to issue a code compliance certificate for a 17-year-old dwelling. This determination considers whether there is sufficient compliance with clauses E2 and B2 of the New Zealand Building Code.

This determination considers whether the authority was correct to refuse to issue a code compliance certificate because it considers the stucco monolithic plaster applied to the external walls of an extension of an existing dwelling does not comply with clauses E2 External moisture and B2 Durability of the Building Code.

This determination considers whether pine vertical timber shiplap weatherboards, painted black, comply with the Building Code Clause B2 Durability, as it relates to Clause E2 External Moisture. The determination considers a number of factors that contribute to Building Code compliance.

This determination considers whether an authority was correct to refuse to issue a code compliance certificate for a building consent granted in 1998 under the former Building Act 1991. The determination will discuss the reasons given by the authority for the refusal, and how they relate to Building Code clauses B1 Structure, B2 Durability, E1 Surface Water, and E2 External Moisture that applied in 1998.

This determination considers an authority’s refusal to issue a code compliance certificate for 20-year-old additions and alterations due to concerns about compliance with the Building Code. The determination considers the authority’s reasons for refusal and whether those items identified by the authority are compliant with the Building Code.

This determination concerns the authority's decision to refuse to issue a code compliance certificate for construction of an outbuilding that was later converted to a sleepout. The determination considers the compliance of the building work identified by the authority in its reasons for refusing to issue the code compliance certificate.

This determination considers whether the changes to a decking system to an existing building in a retirement village constitute a minor variation to the building consent issued for remedial work to the building. The determination considers whether the as-built decking system is compliant and examines the variation against the guidance issued by the Ministry on minor variations.

This determination considers an authority’s refusal to issue a code compliance certificate for a relocated house with 19-year-old alterations and additions principally for reasons to do with the performance of the building envelope. The determination considers the authority’s reasons for the refusal and whether the items identified by the authority are compliant with the Building Code requirements in force when the building consent was issued.

This determination considers the refusal to issue a code compliance certificate for a 20-year-old house due to concerns about its compliance with Building Code Clause E2 External moisture. The determination considers the authority’s reasons for the refusal and performance of the building envelope with the requirements of the Building Code.

This determination considers an authority’s refusal to issue a code compliance certificate for a 20-year-old house principally due to concerns about its compliance with Building Code Clause E2 External moisture. The determination considers the authority’s reasons for the refusal and whether the items identified by the authority are compliant with the Building Code.