business.govt.nz"
Search this website
| Options Options
Search Type
Document Actions
 

4. Registrar’s Report

Up one level

4.1 A written report was received from Nigel Bickle, the Registrar, which was introduced by Mr Scully on the Registrar’s behalf. The report covered the following:

4.2 In order to become licensed, the Appellant was required to satisfy the Registrar that he met the applicable minimum standards for licensing (under section 286 of the Act).

4.3 The minimum standards are set out in Schedule 1 to the Rules, and take the form of “competencies” which must all be satisfied as follows:

  • Competency 1: Comprehend and apply knowledge of the regulatory environment of the building construction industry.
  • Competency 2: Manage the building design process.
  • Competency 3: Establish design briefs and scope of work and prepare preliminary design.
  • Competency 4: Develop design and produce construction drawings and documentation.

4.4 These competencies may be demonstrated by meeting some or all of the performance indicators that are also set out in Schedule 1 (Design 1 competencies) of the Rules. In carrying out an assessment, the Assessor must use methods prescribed by the Registrar (see Rule 11(1)).

4.5 The competencies address a broad range of skills and knowledge a design practitioner should be able to demonstrate. These address the skills and knowledge necessary for a designer to be able to satisfactorily demonstrate compliance with the New Zealand Building Code. However, the competencies also address other skills that a competent designer is expected to demonstrate, for example managing the design process or establishing a design brief.

4.6 The Registrar must take into consideration the Assessor’s recommendation before making a decision (under Rule 12(2)).

In the Registrar’s view, the Assessor:

(a) is a reputable and experienced practitioner,
(b) has been selected as a person appropriate to be an Assessor and has been trained in assessment,
(c) has met the Appellant and reviewed his design work first hand.

4.7 Reliance on the Assessor does not mean that the Registrar cannot reach a different view about an applicant from the view reached by the Assessor. The Registrar is required to maintain an independent view. However, in the normal course of events the Registrar will accept a recommendation of the Assessor, unless there are strong reasons for not doing so.


4.8 In making the recommendation to decline the application, the following reasons were recorded by the Assessor:

(a) Correspondence showing management of building design process (Competency 2) was limited.
(b) Establishing design briefs and scope of Works (Competency 3) was limited.
(c) Contracts were only verbal contracts.
(d) Site investigations were left to the owner (Competency 3).
(e) Specifications were limited and drawings were limited and sketchy (Competency 4).
(f) Very little description on details supplied for all 3 projects submitted.
(g) No Health and Safety policy as a designer or builder and appears unclear on requirements.

4.9 The Assessor suggested that the Appellant has the capability to become Design 1 approved. The Appellant needs to document, record and formalize his work practices in more detail than he is currently providing. The Appellant also needs to take greater responsibility towards site investigation and planning requirements and formalize contracts with the client. The Assessor suggested that the Appellant should implement this for upcoming projects and reapply at a later date.

 

Last updated 11 May 2015