Comments on: Building Matters (No. 4): CCC is not CCC – will that concern you?

By: Paul B

Paul B — Wed, 22 Aug 2012 00:44:41 +0000

A plea to accomodate owner builders. The new regs require expensive oversight by a registered builder? Surely we could be much more DIY friendly? Of course ‘Owner Builders’ homes would be CLEARLY TAGGED on the title. No one could ‘accidentally’ buy one!
I would even go so far as to suggest recycled materials could be used – Has anyone noticed how many magnificent rimu framed windows sell for a dollar on ‘Trademe’ these days! Crazy. Double glazing is magnificent, but is it worth financial hardship and stress. I am just slightly intriqued by our apparantly ‘cold seriously life theatening’ older homes which have housed so many healthy kiwis. I would suggest that a comprehensive, scientific, cost benefit analysis that includes stress and health opposed to cost might be very interesting. We seem to have a knack for gross overkill when we attempt to correct problems.
Of course the leaking/rotting homes catastrophe was largely driven by industry attempting to maximise profit at any cost to consumers. If proven durable materials are used minor probems need not be immediately critical
The paperwork/consents etc could be reduced for single level ownerbuilt conventional homes. The consenting authority could even have no liability at all?
As our once proud and common ‘serious can do’ attitude has already been largely crushed the many ‘couchies’ among us need not worry that there will be too many ‘home made builds’ erecting next to them to threaten their very existance
Furthermore we could allow much smaller homes. Also we could allow owner builders to live in uncompleted homes for a limited time provided proper sanitation existed.
“I can ‘smell’ the fury on many breathes” particularly from the industry which of course ‘knowingly’ led us into the problem which initiated all the fuss.
Our new homes are becoming prohibitively expensive for less affluent couples. It is a sad feature of human nature that if a select group is given a monopoly then very soon a scary proportion of that group will realize that they can gouge.
As ordinary consumers become less DIY able they become helpless to see through the hype of unscrupulous ‘experts’.
To be fair of course the sometimes ‘overdone’ regulations can add a huge cost.
Otherwise sadly, we can always build a cheaper home in Australia!
Have we been trained to become excessively risk averse, and are now paying dearly for that.
THOSE NOT TERRIFIED AND STILL A LITTLE BOLD, SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO THEIR OWN THING, SO LONG AS NO ONE ELSE MUST BE IMPACTED. Where is the problem?
Fire away

By: Herodotus

Herodotus — Sun, 19 Aug 2012 07:24:54 +0000

Ray view this as an opportunity to get many home owners to support some proactive alternative. As for many the home the only tangible financial asset many own. So if this is placed at risk (Like Leaky homes’) then with some astute strategy and well place communication to show how many could be exposed and followed up policy. Then Ray you could be the one who could say that thanks to you there is a new government, and that as a consequence new homes are to be well built, to certifiable standards with suitable building materials.
Who wants a repeat situation of the leaky building. And unlike the 5th Labour government that opposed but did nothing perhaps the 6th could be seen to act as well protecting Kiwis.

By: whodunnit

whodunnit — Sat, 18 Aug 2012 06:05:36 +0000

ghostwhowalksnz is one of those strange creatures who think it’s the opposition’s job to criticise even the most mundane legislation rather than come up with any actual policy.

By: ghostwhowalksnz

ghostwhowalksnz — Fri, 17 Aug 2012 22:48:29 +0000

WDI is one of those strange creatures who think its the oppositions job, with no resources, to run a parallel government. To have all the answers nicely teased out, 2 1/2 years before the next election, ironically so he personally can then criticise them.

By: The Al1en

The Al1en — Fri, 17 Aug 2012 20:46:20 +0000

“always nice to see you blogging, even if the content often leaves me scratching my head”

So it’s Labour’s fault you’re a dummy?

By: whodunnit

whodunnit — Fri, 17 Aug 2012 05:15:30 +0000

Howdy Raymond! It’s always nice to see you blogging, even if the content often leaves me scratching my head. I realise that building and construction issues are the only things you’re allowed to talk about now, but this is a serious question for you. Have you actually got any policy alternatives? Are you saying that Labour won’t support this legislation? Are you going to vote against it?

By: Tracey

Tracey — Fri, 17 Aug 2012 00:04:02 +0000

consumers already pick up the bill Ray. Do you actually know how many leaky home owners are out there with no one left to sue or are outside the ten year limit?

I agree things have to change, but how about starting here;

Regulate the so-call building inspectors/experts (including HOBANZ who make some good points but also reinforce bad ones)
Have a system to hold them accountable
Do what the BIA tried and failed to do, make sure everyone, inclduing building experts have insurance which covers the owner’s problems, not theirs, or they dont get registered. Most will probably go out of business.

Promote responsibility to home owners. Obligation to repair and maintain their own homes, not sit back and do nothing

Promote technological advances which assist experts and owners to “look behind their walls” without removing cladding, technology which is currently resisted/opposed by the DBH and many “experts” because it cuts into their business models.

As for completion, it’s currently defined by the courts as when the owner/builder calls for the final inspection, and provided the inspection passes, the works are complete, whether a CCC issues or not.

Have you submitted a different definition for the Bill to be considered?