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

3. The Registrar's Report

Up one level

3.1 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). These minimum standards are set out in Schedule 1 to the Rules, in the form of "competencies" which must all be satisfied.

For Design/Area of Practice 3 these competences are;

• 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.

In order to be licensed an applicant must demonstrate that he/she meets all the required Competencies of the Licence Class.

3.2 These competences may be demonstrated by meeting some or all of the performance indicators for the applicable Licence Class set out in the Rules. In carrying out an assessment, the Assessor must use the "Assessor Guidelines" prescribed by the Registrar (see Rule 11(1)).

3.3 The competencies address a broad range of skills and knowledge that a competent practitioner should be able to demonstrate.

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

Reliance on the Assessor's recommendation 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. In the normal course of events, however, the Registrar will accept a recommendation of an Assessor, unless there are strong reasons for not doing so.

3.5 In making the recommendation to decline the application, the following reasons were recorded by the Assessor;

(a) The Appellant had few examples of his drawings for the rest home project (project 1) available to show the Assessor, and could not recall important aspects of it. There were no project files or any information available to substantiate the rest home project, and it was difficult to verify what The Appellant's role in the project has been.

(b) A small basement alteration relied on the engineer's drawings for much of the structural detail. The [name redacted] residence was a category 1 building.

(c) The Appellant's knowledge and experience of contractual matters was very limited. (d) The Appellant was using a non-licensed version of Masterspec, and many of the schedules were not filled in.

(e) For the [name redacted] residence, there was no evidence of a client brief or initial design sketches, and no evidence of lodging the building consent application or dealing with council requests for information. The Appellant was not involved with tendering of the project or contract administration.

3.6 The Registrar based his decision to decline the Design/Area of Practice 3 application and grant the Design/Area of Practice 1, solely on the Assessor's recommendation, for the reasons set out above.

 

Last updated 11 May 2015