Previous determinations

This determination discusses the code compliance of a 21 year-old house set in a rural location. The determination also considers building elements that have satisfied their required durability requirements under Clause B2 and the maintenance of such items.

This determination considers the compliance of the building work in light of a refusal to issue a code compliance certificate; the refusal was primarily on the grounds of concerns regarding weathertightness and durability of the exterior cladding given the building’s age and its history.

This determination considers the compliance of alterations to a house to extend an existing deck drain through roof space to a gutter, and the particular jointing method used. The determination discusses the required durability for the deck drain and considers current and future performance.

This determination considers whether there was sufficient information provided in a building consent application to establish the compliance of the proposed building work. The determination discusses the approach to be taken in assessing alterations to existing buildings against the requirements of the Building Act, and applies this in respect of the proposed retrofitting of urea formaldehyde foam insulation to the 60 year-old weatherboard clad house.

Discussed whether the external building envelop complies with Clause B2 Durability and Clause E2 External Moisture of the Building Code in force at the time consents were issued (under transitional provisions of the current Act section 436(3)(b)(i)).

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.

Discussed the council’s refusal to issue of a code compliance certificate where the as-built work differs from that consented and was also not in accordance with the Acceptable Solution E2/AS1 or the manufacturer’s details, particularly relating to ridge flashings installed to a profiled metal roof. The determination reviewed the compliance of the as-built work against the performance requirements of the Building Code.