According to the tribunal’s decision, Ben* planned to build the small sleepout on his property to rent out.
By chance, he met *Uri through an online transaction and the pair began talking about the project.
Anderson said Uri claimed he was “not a builder” but had done similar work before.
The tribunal was not able to confirm his name on the register of Licensed Building Practitioners.
Uri put together a scope of work and emailed the quote to Ben, who accepted it and work began.
When it was still not finished, Ben sought professional advice, which showed there were “significant issues” with the quality of the work, Anderson said.
Defects identified in the report included piles spaced too far apart with bearers not resting on a pile, the use of incorrect timber, roof rafters set too far apart, and the use of some roofing iron that was only a partial sheet, leaving a join partway down the run.
No building paper or netting was added before the roofing was installed and no head flashing was installed around the windows before cladding went on or before framing was complete.
Finally, the wrong thickness of plywood was laid as flooring and fixed the wrong way along the joists, which meant the floor sagged when walked on.
Ben lodged a claim for an order that Uri’s company pay him $8000.
The tribunal dismissed the claim against the company, then added Uri personally as a respondent, and partially upheld the claim against him.
Anderson placed weight on the fact that no GST was charged, and payments all went to Uri personally rather than to his business.
No standards set out in quote
Anderson said that to measure whether there was defective work, he had to decide what standard the contract required Uri to meet.
However, there were no performance criteria or standards set out in the quote.
The tribunal said the property owner did not hold a building consent for the work and was satisfied he did not need that or a resource consent.
He also knew the person he hired for the job, who was the director of an unnamed business, was not a registered builder.
“This was a transaction between two private individuals,” the decision said.
Anderson was satisfied that while it was necessary for the work to be done with reasonable care and skill, that did not automatically mean “all work must be done to the standards of the NZ Building Code”.
The comment has surprised a trades industry leader, who told NZME “all building works need to comply” with the code, but not all needed a consent.
The chief executive of the New Zealand Certified Builders Association, Malcolm Fleming, said detached, single-storey structures up to 30sq m could be built without a building consent, provided they had no plumbing and were used only as a sleepout or shed.
There were no details in the tribunal decision about the size of the sleepout.
In reaching his decision, Anderson said the test was around considering if Uri had completed the work with the reasonable care and skill an amateur builder would be expected to use.
He said it would be unreasonable to hold Uri to a standard which required him to meet the performance level of a registered builder, but the extent and nature of the issues were such that Uri had failed to deliver to a standard which could be fairly expected of him even as an amateur builder.
Malcolm Fleming of the Certified Builders Association, here with Building and Construction Minister Chris Penk last year, says all building work needs to comply with the building code. Photo / Marika Khabazi, RNZ
He said the failure was a breach of Uri’s contract with Ben, as was his failure to complete the project as scheduled by April last year, but delayed by the theft of the tools – which Ben accommodated, rescheduling the work.
The job still wasn’t finished by July last year.
Anderson said there were steps Uri could have taken to protect himself from the delays, including obtaining insurance cover or hiring or borrowing the necessary replacement tools to allow him to continue working.
The tribunal’s final order of $6688 awarded to Ben included four months’ interest at 10% on the amount already paid for an incomplete project, reflecting the gap between the time the project was to have been completed and the date the claim was lodged.
Make sure your builder is qualified
Fleming said it was critical for anyone undergoing any building works to ensure their builder was qualified and trade certified.
“Homeowners have got to think very carefully about who they engage to build an outbuilding, or any building, and think about how to mitigate risks.”
He said ensuring they were a member of a trades association was a start.
“If you don’t tick those boxes, you open yourself up to problems.”
Fleming said the key things were that the building code had to be adhered to, regardless of the structure being built, and homeowners had to do their due diligence on builders hired to make sure they were properly qualified.
*Anonymised names have been used in place of initials and in keeping with tribunal rules around suppression.
Tracy Neal is a Nelson-based Open Justice reporter at NZME. She was previously RNZ’s regional reporter in Nelson-Marlborough and has covered general news, including court and local government, for the Nelson Mail.