Search

Discussed whether, given the age of the house, the authority could be satisfied that building work complied with the Building Code in relation to Clauses B1, B2 and E2 and modification of durability provisions to allow provisions to commence from the estimated date of substantial completion. Also that potential liability is not grounds for refusal to issue a code compliance certificate and modification of durability provisions.

This determination considers the authority's exercise of its powers in respect of conditions on a building consent for the partial recladding of a house relating to the possibility of timber framing requiring remediation.

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.