Description

This determination arises from the decisions of the authority to refuse to issue a code compliance certificate and to issue a notice to fix for the 14-year-old house because it is not satisfied that the building work complies with the requirements of certain clauses of the Building Code that was current at the time the building consent was issued. The authority's concerns primarily relate to the weathertightness of the exterior building envelope of the house. The applicants dispute that the notice to fix should be issued on the grounds that: they believe the building consent is no longer operative in terms of section 166(1)(a) and the building is therefore an existing building for which a notice to fix cannot be issued, and that no breach of the Act and/or its regulations and/or code clauses were identified. The applicants are also of the view that the authority did not properly provide written notice of refusal of the code compliance certificate in terms of section 95A. The matters to be determined are therefore: 1-whether the authority correctly exercised its powers in the provision of its reasons for refusing to issue the code compliance certificate; 2-whether the authority correctly exercised its powers in issuing the notice to fix. In deciding this matter I must consider: a) whether the authority was within its powers in issuing a notice to fix; and b) whether the authority has correctly identified the particulars of the notice to fix; 3-whether the authority made the correct decision to refuse to issue a code compliance certificate