Search

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 the barrier to restrict access by unsupervised young children to a small heated pool, complies with section 162C of the Building Act. This determination discusses the compliance obligations and considers whether a waiver or modification of the means of restricting access to the spa pool can be granted.

This determination considers the issue of notices to fix for construction of something that the owner claims is not a building. The determination considers whether the construction was of a vehicle, as the owner claimed, rather than a building. The determination also sets out the approach taken in High Court and District Court decisions that have considered the question of whether something with the characteristics of a vehicle were buildings.

This determination considers the compliance of a particular aspect of a pool with respect to Building Code Clause F4 Safety from falling. The determination also considers whether the authority was correct to refuse to issue a code compliance certificate for the work and whether a waiver or modification of Clause F4.3.1 should be granted.

This determination considers the authority's decision to issue a notice to fix relating to a retaining wall surrounding a tennis court in a rural location. In making this decision the determination will consider the south and west sections of the retaining wall and whether the building work done to these sections falls under clause 41 of Schedule 1 of the Act.

This determination considers the issue of a dangerous building notice for an unreinforced masonry building, specifically in relation to the building work that was detailed in the notice as being required to reduce or remove the danger. The determination discusses whether the installation of hoarding and fencing meant the building was no longer dangerous, and what the Building Act requires of a dangerous building notice.

This determination considers the authority's decision to grant a discretionary exemption from the requirement to obtain building consent for the construction of a section of pool barrier. The determination also considers the compliance of the new section of pool barrier with Clause F9 of the Building Code (Means of restricting access to residential pools).

This determination considers the authority’s proposal to issue a notice to fix for work that the authority considers constitutes building work that required building consent.  The issue concerns an abode that has been constructed using a trailer and that the owner contends is a vehicle and not a building.  The matter turns on whether the work carried out was work for or in connection with the construction of a building.

This determination considers the compliance of a recently-completed eight-storey steel framed building. Specific aspects of the completed frame had been brought to the notice of the authority, and the authority also questioned work carried out that varied from the approved consent. The determination considers the compliance of these matters in respect of Building Code Clause B1 Structure

This determination considers an authority’s refusal to issue a code compliance certificate for a 17-year-old house principally due to concerns about its compliance with Clause E2 External moisture.  The building owners had commissioned an assessment of the building’s performance which the authority had declined to accept.