Why does the government allow potential conflicts of interest in private sector certifications of standards of housing building?

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
4,093
Why does the government allow potential conflicts of interest in private sector certifications of standards of housing building?

See https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/mar/11/why-are-britains-new-homes-built-so-badly The regulations in the UK which The Guardian criticises in the linked article look a lot more likely to ensure good standards of housing building than Ireland's going by the article in June 25th The Times about Irish regulations https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/copy-food-safety-policing-to-prevent-another-priory-hall-vq6tz0jcp

In changes to Irish regulations introduced in 2014,certifications of developments at critical stages of Irish housing construction can be signed off by an employee of the developer.Surely the government was aware of the huge conflict of interest there? Legally,Irish councils have been responsible for enforcing housing construction regulations since 1990 but most do no enforcement. Is the government too close to the housing building lobby as symbolised by the tent at Galway Races?

Lack of strict regulations like those in Germany can speed up developments and keep costs down but place the public at the mercy of unscrupulous builders. Even if a buyer pays for a technical inspection after a building is completed, it is often impossible to discover defects behind walls. The buyer can rely on the good reputation of the builder for quality but even the best builders in this highly cyclical and often heavily borrowed industry may be tempted to cut corners in business downturns.
 
Last edited:


ruserious

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
29,092
Imagine thinking of writing that OP at this time in the blistering hot night.
 

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
4,093
Imagine thinking of writing that OP at this time in the blistering hot night.
In the past,I was used to vastly hotter and more humid weather in New York City where many businessmen take an extra shirt to work. Stepping outside an airconditioned building can cause intense sweating there.
 

Hitchcock

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
8,781
See https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/mar/11/why-are-britains-new-homes-built-so-badly The regulations in the UK which The Guardian criticises in the linked article look a lot more likely to ensure good standards of housing building going by the article in June 25th The Times about Irish regulations https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/copy-food-safety-policing-to-prevent-another-priory-hall-vq6tz0jcp

In changes to Irish regulations introduced in 2014,certifications of developments at critical stages of Irish housing construction can be signed off by an employee of the developer.Surely the government was aware of the huge conflict of interest there? Legally,Irish councils have been responsible for enforcing housing construction regulations since 1990 but most do no enforcement. Is the government too close to the housing building lobby as symbolised by the tent at Galway Races?

Lack of strict regulations like those in Germany can speed up developments and keep costs down but place the public at the mercy of unscrupulous builders. Even if a buyer pays for a technical inspection after a building is completed, it is often impossible to discover defects behind walls. The buyer can rely on the good reputation of the builder for quality but even the best builders in this highly cyclical and often heavily borrowed industry may be tempted to cut corners in business downturns.
While representing an improvement on the self certification that gave us Priory Hall and Longboat quay it clearly is inadequate. As for why the government allow it well it's probably something to do with their adherence to broadly neoliberal thinking and practice that also perpetuates the housing crisis...
 

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
4,093
While representing an improvement on the self certification that gave us Priory Hall and Longboat quay it clearly is inadequate. As for why the government allow it well it's probably something to do with their adherence to broadly neoliberal thinking and practice that also perpetuates the housing crisis...
Political pandering to NIMBYS who want nothing built near them caused the housing crisis, mainly in Dublin. Planning permision red tape,vexatious appeals and lack of investment in sewerage and water facilities were the political methods. Mass media reporters usually fail to grasp this, instead blaming landlords.

The government would be stupid to think that the market can deliver high quality housing without some robust inspections of construction. Economics 101's neoliberal perfect competition model assumes the buyer has perfect knowledge of the product but in housing it is almost impossible to detect uninspected shoddy construction behind completed walls.
 
Last edited:

Watcher2

Well-known member
Joined
May 2, 2010
Messages
34,335
See https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/mar/11/why-are-britains-new-homes-built-so-badly The regulations in the UK which The Guardian criticises in the linked article look a lot more likely to ensure good standards of housing building than Ireland's going by the article in June 25th The Times about Irish regulations https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/copy-food-safety-policing-to-prevent-another-priory-hall-vq6tz0jcp

In changes to Irish regulations introduced in 2014,certifications of developments at critical stages of Irish housing construction can be signed off by an employee of the developer.Surely the government was aware of the huge conflict of interest there? Legally,Irish councils have been responsible for enforcing housing construction regulations since 1990 but most do no enforcement. Is the government too close to the housing building lobby as symbolised by the tent at Galway Races?

Lack of strict regulations like those in Germany can speed up developments and keep costs down but place the public at the mercy of unscrupulous builders. Even if a buyer pays for a technical inspection after a building is completed, it is often impossible to discover defects behind walls. The buyer can rely on the good reputation of the builder for quality but even the best builders in this highly cyclical and often heavily borrowed industry may be tempted to cut corners in business downturns.
Developers and house completions means money for the local authorities. Someone has to pay for the pensions. A senior planner told me when I was trying to move into my house and get the completion certificate signed by whoever (the developer, surprise surprise was acting the dick) that they will give permission to developers to start new developments despite not having in any way nearly done good on previous developments (it's a regulation apparently - don't finish one development adequately? No new developments until you sort your sh1t out) but councils look the other way because it means money in the form of development levies and planning application monies.

He also, in the same conversation (must have had a bad day with his boss) told me that councils don't want to take estates in charge because they don't have the resources or capacity to deal with the sheer number of developments being built. It was 2004. So they make it extremely difficult if not impossible. This is what he told me. On the phone, and no, I did not know the guy personally. Fup me, they didn't have the capacity to carry out their obligations for the number of developments they, themselves were granting permission. Twas one hell of an admission. Pity I didn't know about the lack of fire compliance, he might have spilt the beans on that too.
 

PBP voter

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 18, 2015
Messages
9,254
Cowboys Ted. They are a bunch of cowboys.
 

carlovian

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
5,272
In the past,I was used to vastly hotter and more humid weather in New York City where many businessmen take an extra shirt to work. Stepping outside an airconditioned building can cause intense sweating there.
Which is the public sectors fault because ?
 

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
4,093
Developers and house completions means money for the local authorities. Someone has to pay for the pensions. A senior planner told me when I was trying to move into my house and get the completion certificate signed by whoever (the developer, surprise surprise was acting the dick) that they will give permission to developers to start new developments despite not having in any way nearly done good on previous developments (it's a regulation apparently - don't finish one development adequately? No new developments until you sort your sh1t out) but councils look the other way because it means money in the form of development levies and planning application monies.

He also, in the same conversation (must have had a bad day with his boss) told me that councils don't want to take estates in charge because they don't have the resources or capacity to deal with the sheer number of developments being built. It was 2004. So they make it extremely difficult if not impossible. This is what he told me. On the phone, and no, I did not know the guy personally. Fup me, they didn't have the capacity to carry out their obligations for the number of developments they, themselves were granting permission. Twas one hell of an admission. Pity I didn't know about the lack of fire compliance, he might have spilt the beans on that too.
The sheer number of development in the Celtic Tiger was like the storm of the century, so councils can't be blamed for construction problems then.

As for councils penalising negligent developers, that would make planners judge and jury, a power that could be abused. It is difficult to obtain evidence of negligence without independent building inspections and builders are entitled to their day in court. As for the buyers who may suffer shoddy building, that should urgently be remedied by reform that improves inspections.
 

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
4,093
Going by the low interest in this thread, house buyers may be unaware the house they buy could be the proverbial pig in a poke. Maybe the thread headline should be, "New houses could be plagued with construction faults, though signed off as officially inspected".
 
Last edited:


New Threads

Most Replies

Top