An imaginary conversation with a CDM inspector.

[epsilonGreedy]

Having spent a couple of hours reviewing the excellent CDM2015 mega thread and the synopsis by @recoveringacademicpinned at the top of this forum topic, I want to test my knowledge of CDM2015 as it pertains to my self build scenario. I will attempt to demonstrate my interpretation of the regulations through an imaginary conversation with an H&S inspector who has just arrived for a surprise site visit.

 

Preamble: Let's assume the following build history. (1) Simple brick and block 2-story house 3 bed house on a level site. (2) The walls are now 9ft high and scaffolding is up. (3) I have done 85% of the work solo. (4) On the day of the site visit I am the only person on site.

 

The H&S Official (HSO) arrives.

 

• HSO: Hello can I speak to the site manager?
• ME: There is no site manager appointed, can I help I am the owner of the plot.
• HSO: I really need to speak to your main builder or project manager. I am conducting an inspection of this site under H&S regulations. 
• ME: There is no main contractor or project manager, I am doing everything well virtually everything.
• HSO: This does not sound plausible, anyhow we have been advised there has been a failure to notify this build to my office.
• ME: I consulted your regulations at the start of the build and concluded notification could not be submitted because I am a domestic client and there was no person functioning in a CDM role qualified to submit.
• ME: I had intended to make an enquiry with your department how to submit as my situation seems to fall through legislative gaps.
• HSO: I do not find your answers acceptable I need to speak to the appointed principal designer with regard to CDM 2015 compliance.
• ME: I read through the CDM 2015 regs before the build commenced and concluded the regulations prevented me from appointing a principal designer.
• HSO: Do you expect me to believe the house designed itself!
• ME: No. I designed the house using public domain references and guidance however I do not conduct business as an architect or structural engineer and so your regulations deem that I am not a suitable person to appoint either myself or another as the principal designer. I am just a computer programmer.
• HSO: How did you get building control plan approval?
• ME: I must be a clever computer programmer, I also paid a semi retired builder to review my final plans but his role was brief and tangential, it did not involve creative input.
• HSO: You are telling me this build has progressed without a main contractor, principal designer, architect or any appointed overseer of CDM 2015 compliance.
• ME: Yes. I am equally surprised that your regulations resulted in such an outcome, I was looking forward to undertaking the role of principal designer with its associated CDM compliance function on this site but your laws prevented that.

 

To be continued...

 

Would I be heading for jail?

 

Edited May 14, 2018 by epsilonGreedy

[ToughButterCup]

25 minutes ago, epsilonGreedy said:

[...]

• ME: Yes. I am equally surprised that your regulations resulted in such an outcome, I was looking forward to undertaking the role of principal designer with its associated CDM compliance function on this site but your laws prevented that.

 

I part company with you at the word  resulted.

 

@PeterW will be along in in a minute to dissect the 85% statement  above. 

[epsilonGreedy]

4 minutes ago, recoveringacademic said:

I part company with you at the word  resulted.

 

 

I consider that to be a good result. Can I infer my imaginary dialogue is mostly consistent with prevailing BuildHub community interpretation of CDM2015?

[Jeremy Harris]

On 28/03/2018 at 18:31, epsilonGreedy said:

 

I consider that to be a good result. Can I infer my imaginary dialogue is mostly consistent with prevailing BuildHub community interpretation of CDM2015?

 

 

The key issue is that CDM (all variants) is intended to be an industry regulatory mechanism, and the creators of it just didn't consider self-builders as being within the industry, but they also failed rather dismally to make their intentions with regard to the relatively small number of self-builders clear.

 

It's a pretty typical bit of poor government regulatory drafting work, where not all groups that could be impacted by the regulations were consulted properly.  This is a common failing in government; they are required to produce a regulatory impact statement before getting draft regulation approved, but have a nasty habit of leaving out some who could be impacted adversely by the regulation, and only dealing with these "anomalies" afterwards, and then often rather inconsistently.

 

Thankfully there is a clear, if somewhat tortuous, path through CDM 2015 that, after you've joined up a lot of dots, does result in a clear outcome, which is that, in essence, a self builder is a domestic client and therefore cannot have any appointed responsibilities under CDM2015, and might find themselves creating more problems if they tried to do so, as they might well be putting themself in a position where they could carry liabilities as a commercial client, for which they neither had the expertise or indemnity cover protect them, rather than the very much lower level of responsibility that a domestic client carries under the over-arching health and safety legislation, of which CDM 2015 is a part.

Edited March 30, 2018 by JSHarris
edited to remove language that may have been deemed offensive

[Russell griffiths]

From where I’m standing it sounds as though you will know far more than the bloke turning up.