Save

2013/040: Regarding the refusal to issue a code compliance certificate for a 13 year-old house with unauthorised recladding

Abbreviation
2013/040
Valid from
15/07/2013

Information provider
Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment
Information type
Determination
Format
PDF

Description

The application for this determination arises from the following: 1-The original house was built in 1998 and 1999 with monolithic cladding fixed directly to the timber framing in some areas. In 2012 the applicant decided to sell the property and removed some areas of monolithic cladding; 2-The applicant removed the areas of monolithic cladding and replaced them with timber weatherboards installed over a drained cavity  without obtaining building consent or an amendment to the existing building consent; 3-The authority carried out a final inspection in early 2013 and refused to issue a code compliance certificate for the house due to the unauthorised work; the authority then issued a notice to fix which identified the change in cladding; 4-The authority is also not satisfied that the recladding work complies with certain clauses of the Building Code, in particular its weathertightness and durability. The matter to be determined is therefore whether the authority was correct to refuse to issue a code compliance certificate and to issue the notice to fix for the house, and whether the recladding work complies with the Building Code. In deciding this matter, I must consider: 1-Whether the recladding work required building consent, taking into account the existing building consent for the house; 2-Whether the recladding work complies with Clause E2 External Moisture and Clause B2 Durability of the Building Code. The recladding work includes the new timber weatherboards, the new drained cavity, original timber framing, associated windows, the flashings, and the adjacent original wall and roof claddings, as well as the way components have been installed and work together. Defects in the upper deck were also identified in the notice to fix and remedial work to the deck is underway with the authority?s agreement. The deck is therefore not considered in this determination. This determination is limited to the recladding work, including the durability of the original timber framing underlying the reclad walls. Except at intersections with the recladding work, this determination does not include the original wall and roof claddings not altered during the recladding work.

For assistance with locating previous versions, please contact the information provider.
View on Information Provider website Download this resource (PDF, 323KB)
For assistance with locating previous versions, please contact the information provider.
This resource is not cited by any other resources.

2013/040: Regarding the refusal to issue a code compliance certificate for a 13 year-old house with unauthorised recladding

This document is not CITED BY any other resources:

2013/040: Regarding the refusal to issue a code compliance certificate for a 13 year-old house with unauthorised recladding

Description

The application for this determination arises from the following: 1-The original house was built in 1998 and 1999 with monolithic cladding fixed directly to the timber framing in some areas. In 2012 the applicant decided to sell the property and removed some areas of monolithic cladding; 2-The applicant removed the areas of monolithic cladding and replaced them with timber weatherboards installed over a drained cavity  without obtaining building consent or an amendment to the existing building consent; 3-The authority carried out a final inspection in early 2013 and refused to issue a code compliance certificate for the house due to the unauthorised work; the authority then issued a notice to fix which identified the change in cladding; 4-The authority is also not satisfied that the recladding work complies with certain clauses of the Building Code, in particular its weathertightness and durability. The matter to be determined is therefore whether the authority was correct to refuse to issue a code compliance certificate and to issue the notice to fix for the house, and whether the recladding work complies with the Building Code. In deciding this matter, I must consider: 1-Whether the recladding work required building consent, taking into account the existing building consent for the house; 2-Whether the recladding work complies with Clause E2 External Moisture and Clause B2 Durability of the Building Code. The recladding work includes the new timber weatherboards, the new drained cavity, original timber framing, associated windows, the flashings, and the adjacent original wall and roof claddings, as well as the way components have been installed and work together. Defects in the upper deck were also identified in the notice to fix and remedial work to the deck is underway with the authority?s agreement. The deck is therefore not considered in this determination. This determination is limited to the recladding work, including the durability of the original timber framing underlying the reclad walls. Except at intersections with the recladding work, this determination does not include the original wall and roof claddings not altered during the recladding work.

View on Information Provider website Download this resource (PDF, 323KB)
2013/040: Regarding the refusal to issue a code compliance certificate for a 13 year-old house with unauthorised recladding
Description

The application for this determination arises from the following: 1-The original house was built in 1998 and 1999 with monolithic cladding fixed directly to the timber framing in some areas. In 2012 the applicant decided to sell the property and removed some areas of monolithic cladding; 2-The applicant removed the areas of monolithic cladding and replaced them with timber weatherboards installed over a drained cavity  without obtaining building consent or an amendment to the existing building consent; 3-The authority carried out a final inspection in early 2013 and refused to issue a code compliance certificate for the house due to the unauthorised work; the authority then issued a notice to fix which identified the change in cladding; 4-The authority is also not satisfied that the recladding work complies with certain clauses of the Building Code, in particular its weathertightness and durability. The matter to be determined is therefore whether the authority was correct to refuse to issue a code compliance certificate and to issue the notice to fix for the house, and whether the recladding work complies with the Building Code. In deciding this matter, I must consider: 1-Whether the recladding work required building consent, taking into account the existing building consent for the house; 2-Whether the recladding work complies with Clause E2 External Moisture and Clause B2 Durability of the Building Code. The recladding work includes the new timber weatherboards, the new drained cavity, original timber framing, associated windows, the flashings, and the adjacent original wall and roof claddings, as well as the way components have been installed and work together. Defects in the upper deck were also identified in the notice to fix and remedial work to the deck is underway with the authority?s agreement. The deck is therefore not considered in this determination. This determination is limited to the recladding work, including the durability of the original timber framing underlying the reclad walls. Except at intersections with the recladding work, this determination does not include the original wall and roof claddings not altered during the recladding work.

View on Information Provider website Download this resource (PDF, 323KB)
This resource does not cite any other resources.

2013/040: Regarding the refusal to issue a code compliance certificate for a 13 year-old house with unauthorised recladding

This resource does not CITE any other resources.
Save
Feedback