User Profile

[John the builder]

your argument has merit except that schedule 1 exemption 43 now allows for just such a building living space to be erected and without consent. So the building act also allows for unconsented buildings

I understand that manufacturers are trying to get recognition that manufactured units...

[John the builder]

TH shouldn't be seen as a loophole but rather something outside the building act. The understanding of this sits in old property law that recognized that chattels were not part of the land.

As a lawyer PD do you appreciate this aspect?

If not a building then a TH owner can...

[John the builder]

good discussion and contribution PD and P

Dall decision here.
https://districtcourts.govt.nz/all-j...nd-employment/

it should be simple under s8 is this a building? Under s8 a vehicle...

[John the builder]

Thanks for the considered reply. I am familiar with both decisions
Dall affirmed that a vehicle cannot be a building

MDC decsion repeated this but found the opposite that says more about the MDC decision in my view. It is clear however that a tiny house may not be a building which...

[John the builder]

no there isnt..........................
but s8 defines what a building is and when a vehicle is a building ( immovable and permanently occupied

a caravan is understood to be the exception and a TH can be a caravan............

condemning people to thin walled cold buses...

[John the builder]

You need to have a LBP involved if you want to do without consent under schedule 1?

you can build yourself with consent and under a owner-consent exemption not RBW but then you are hooked into consent and planning rules etc the focus of this poster was transportable without consent....

[John the builder]

H1.2 is Boron based and there for decay resistance you confuse the low levels prior to 2003 left for borer.

[John the builder]

PD
what you don't factor in is that you need land to put a building on and it becomes fixed to that land so if you don't own the land you don't own the building. Great for PD's like you but crap for occupiers.

Did that "judgement" have a rigorous defense or was it a case...

[John the builder]

it sounds like the seal is there but you need an expert to confirm?
Under the window is intended to be left open to allow drainage if required

[John the builder]

there should be a seal there under the paint already perhaps the crack is only the paint?? can you carefully dig in and see if there is any sealant behind the flange of the window/door

[John the builder]

I doubt these are allowing water ingress but it is a given that good maintenance is important, If you have a cavity then that is intended to provide a defense to a degree of ingress. You dont say when the house was built if it has a cavity this is likely after 2003 when treated timber framing was reintroduced...

[John the builder]

your assumption may be incorrect

Certain fire stopping and installing collars and dampers may require specialist installers but it is unlikely to apply to residential situations.

using passive fire specialists would likely be expensive and while that industry would have you...

[John the builder]

Most of what council say is BS

the building act simply says that a vehicle is not a building as long as it is not immovable AND permanently occupied.

While a vehicle that is road worthy and has a WOF is easier to move the lack of same does not make it immovable. This is a matter...