Previous determinations

This determination concerns a return wall to a retaining wall built under a building consent; the return wall encroaches over the owners’ boundary into a neighbouring property.  The authority issued a notice to fix in respect of the return wall, as it is of the view it was a built without first obtaining an amendment to the consent.  The determination considers whether the notice to fix was correctly issued, and whether the return wall was a major or minor amendment to the building consent.

This determination considered whether the authority’s decision to grant a building consent with an attached section 37 certificate that did not include a planning noncompliance that was not identified in the certificate. The determination also considers whether the authority could place a section 37 tag on the building work after the building consent had been issued.

This determination considers the authority’s decision to refuse to issue the code compliance certificates for the 13-year-old house and the swimming pool. The determination discusses the authority’s refusal to inspect the building work and whether there was sufficient evidence of compliance in order to issue the code compliance certificates.

This determination was sought by the authority in regards to whether a notice to fix was correctly issued to the designer as a specified person, and whether the sprinkler system is a specified system for the purpose of the compliance schedule and building warrant of fitness.  The determination also considers the compliance of particular features of the building, and discusses the various contraventions listed in the notice to fix.

This determination considers whether there was sufficient information provided in the building consent application and available to the authority as part of its own inspections, without the independent construction monitoring and certificate for the cladding system, to allow the authority to be satisfied on reasonable grounds that the building work woudl comply with the relevant clauses of the Building Code if the building work was carried out in accordance with the plans and specifications.

This determination considers a notice to fix issued for building work carried out without first obtaining a building consent, in contravention of section 40 of the Building Act.

The determination discusses the particulars required in a notice to fix for a section 40 contravention.

The authority has refused to issue a code compliance certificate for building work carried out pursuant to building consent because it is not satisfied that the cladding system that formed part of the building work complied with clauses B2 and E2 of the Building Code at the time it was constructed.

The authority’s formal refusal letter, when read together with an accompanying email referring to the reasons for refusal, had provided sufficient reasons for refusing to issue the code compliance certificate. 

This determination considers a request by the authority to reverse its decision to issue a code compliance certificate; the authority became aware that the building work was not compliant with the building consent or with the Building Code. The determination discusses the scope of the authority's powers in respect of withdrawing code compliance certificates, and concludes that this can only be done through a determination.

This determination considers an authority’s refusal to issue a code compliance certificate due to outstanding producer statement documentation. The determination considers the reasons the authority gave for the refusal.

This determination concerns an authority’s decision to re‐issue a building consent, adding a condition for natural hazard notification under section 73, after it had already issued a building consent for the same building work.

The determination considers whether the authority had the power to re‐issue the building consent.