Previous determinations

This determination considers the authority’s refusal to issue a code compliance certificate where the building work was carried out without required inspections.  The determination considers the compliance of three areas identified by the authority in its refusal.

This determination is concerned with the compliance of a timber retaining wall with Building Code Clause B1 Structure. The determination considers whether the wall once completed will comply with Building Code Clause B1 Structure, and whether the authority was correct not to issue a notice to fix in relation to the retaining wall.

This determination considers the use of glue-laminated timber as framing to the walls and roof trusses of a house.  The glue-laminated framing was substituted during construction for solid timber described in the approved building consent without approval being sought.  The determination considers the compliance of the glue-laminated framing and whether the substitution could be considered a minor variation to the approved consent.

Note: This determination is subject to clarification

This determination considers the lifting of an insanitary building notice and whether the building in its current state is insanitary or dangerous.  The determination also considers whether two building consents should have been granted subject to notification of the natural hazard inundation, and whether a notice to rectify should have been for building work that was not compliant with the Building Code and for building work carried out without building consent.

Note: This determination is subject to clarification

This determination considers the ground preparation to a site before a house with a proprietary foundation had been constructed. The site was in the Canterbury region and had been classified as TC2. The determination considers whether the site and its preparation meet Clause B1 Structure, and whether the authority was correct to issue the code compliance certificate in respect of this work.

This determination considers the issue of a code compliance certificate for alterations to a relocated house.  The determination discusses the compliance of the building work with the building consent and with relevant clauses of the Building Code

Note: to be read in conjunction with Determination 2017/008.

This determination considers a second refusal to issue a code compliance certificate for a now 17-year-old house with monolithic cladding that was the subject of a previous determination.  This determination discusses the validity of the refusal with regard to the time in which a building consent authority must make a decision, and the relationship between the requirement to give reasons for refusing to issue a code compliance certificate and the issue of a notice to fix.  The determination considers the information the authority had before it at the time it made its decision and whether the items identified by the authority are compliant with the Building Code.

This determination considers an authority’s decision to grant building consent subject to a section 73 notice requiring a notice to be placed on the land title identifying the land as being subject to natural hazards - being erosion and inundation.  The subject property is adjacent to a river located in a rural setting. 

This determination considers two houses damaged in the Canterbury earthquake sequence and whether the information provided in support of the building consent for the repair of the buildings was sufficient for the authority to be able to grant the consent.  

This determination considers the authority’s exercise of its powers of decision in relation to a notice to fix issued for a house with monolithic cladding.  The determination discusses the relevant standards at the time of construction and whether the notice to fix should have required replacement of the untreated timber framing used with treated timber.