Sergey Kucher: «The law is written builders for themselves

11.04.2011 13:40
Articles about real estate | Sergey Kucher: «The law is written builders for themselves The new law on the regulation of town planning activity is certainly needed. And the creation of an enabling environment for investors and developers, working in real estate - the good goal. However, says the head of Gasca Sergey Kucher, a law written by builders for themselves, and the problem of construction quality control and responsibility of designers and contractors still remains relevant. The phrase "Who so builds?" Is equally relevant for today's investors, customers and individual developers. How do you rate the quality of construction in the contemporary Ukraine?

Related article: The deputies are working on a new draft law on the «Affordable housing»

C. Kucher: Below average, and this is due to several reasons. Save on everything, even the staff. Firstly, in the construction involved a lot of seasonal migrant workers who often are not specialists.

Secondly, are not respected everywhere specially developed technology works and the application materials. A technological regulations are not met for one simple reason - not the usual staff, or even engineers often do not know them. And if we dig deeper, then the designer does not know them. Do not want to learn. Here is one very good example. Once I was an intern in Finland. There is the world's largest production plant for dry mixes, including and facades. We showed a building built in 1951 with the facade of the plant mixtures. I asked the last time I did repair the facade, to which I replied, "Why? How did then, so the building and costs. We have the same facade often "fray" not because of bad materials, but because they do not comply with the technology. Which government agencies, under the new law should control the construction quality?

C. Kucher: Gasque must control what we're trying to do. And what about the responsibility of companies, specific people? Ie indeed, whether there were any penalties for the consequences of poor construction?

C. Coachman: And here it is - a big problem. The new law, we unfortunately do not have a corresponding punishment for bad design and poor construction work. I believe that the violations in this area should be criminalized. Alas, this is due to our mentality: if the maximum penalty - a fine, well, you know our fines, then sign will be nonsense, and do will be rubbish. And more so, it is important in relation to our designers. Given the complicated situation with the quality of design work, we, together with Minregionbudom and Cabinet develop a system of certification of architects. Each specialist will have a personal certificate. And it is this certificate will be responsible for work done, government regulations and requirements, including security.

Returning to the responsibility, I think, if at least one pseudo-expert leaves sentences in places "not so remote, the rest would seriously consider whether to sign the drawings, the acts performed by the robot is not looking. Alas, even with the introduction of personal certification we will have only one way to influence - to deny these same certificates. It is assumed that issue certificates to be a year for a maximum of three. On the other hand, in a situation of issuing certificates significantly increases the weight of Gasca: we can weed out dilettantes. If we speak openly, the "trash" all. And yet accustomed to the fact that no one is responsible for anything, so in our blood, this a Soviet collective responsibility when, in fact, no one is responsible for anything. It is difficult to fight. Sometimes it comes to the ridiculous: the builders come with the pretense that they are 40 years of building, all they know, and when you open the DBN, and shows that it is written, you hear a surprised "wow, I did not know." Such carelessness - all the time.

And about the quality. Unfortunately, our legal framework and the economic situation are aligned so that neither the customer nor the contractor build quality is not interested. Exceptions - when the customer builds for themselves and all the controls. Why is this happening? In fact, the certification of buildings, structures deals with one man - a designer who defines what a class and provides the data in the project documentation. On the one hand, this is correct, but on the other hand - no. We very often the author says goodbye to the project at the stage exit from his expertise. Then, the customer was left with a project on his hands, working papers often orders from another company, often at the company's general contractor. Abroad, the author of the project should be in the process of building each day to attend the site and regulate the process. Besides the classification of buildings in the UK, for example, confers no designer, not the customer, and three specialists - a representative of an insurance company, local authority acting as our Gasca and a representative of an independent Realtor Association. For example, built in the heart of London building, the customer brings the above-mentioned experts, that they appreciated the building, the area in which the customer is going to pass, conditionally, to 100 pounds per sq ft per month. Each of the specialists found defects in the end affect the class of the building, the final cost of rent - and the fact that according to the customer is a class A to 100 pounds, enters the market with the class B and 50 ... agree that when the owner runs the risk of profit, the He will be keen to monitor the quality and design and construction ... To return to the quality control and compliance. What can the Gask, except how to select a license?

C. Kucher: fine. Effective somehow?

C. Kucher: Fine-then we can write, but there are nuances to the judicial system. Of course, not entirely correct and will revert to the old system where we have exhibited a fine executive bodies wrote off unilaterally from the account of the company fined. But, on the other hand, litigation can drag on for years and end up with nothing. What are the real ways that would Gasque install an effective system of quality control?

C. Kucher: Until - personal certification, when we can sift through unscrupulous, incompetent builders and designers. No other mechanism, but this mechanism is not as fast as it seems. Have to make to the commission, argue, and besides, people can go to court and challenge. To select a license, certificate, you can have after something happened?

C. Kucher: Not necessarily, it is possible and in the process. Since the deviations we see at once. And again, there is a function of technical supervision, which is now not working. Today, customer, contractor engineering supervision - it is a fad Gasca and Ministry. In fact, engineering supervision aims to enforce standards and compliance technologies, and - regardless of the customer, investor, designer, etc. Now we are faced with a banal situation - there are massive violations of technical supervision by a professional customer. Yes, we are trying to deprive the professional technical supervision licenses but have not yet worked out such a mechanism. Now at the Ministry we are considering the possibility of its build and implement. Initially, the expert technical supervision - the man who whistleblower at Gask. And actually comes Gask-check, and only then revealed violations and shortcomings.

That's why Gasque opposed to specialist technical supervision was a staff member or contractor of the customer, so that these people were a few objects, they are not able to cover a large amount, the facility must be on a daily basis.

Why Gasque so meticulously relates to this issue? Everyone thinks it's a fad, the corruption, but I assure you it is not. Well, what else from Soviet norms DBN laid back 30% of the strength and other characteristics, and the designers have reinsured, knowing the "national characteristics" of the construction. Abroad do not exist, well, a maximum of 5%, no one is reinsured. Quite simply observe technology ... Has the function Gasca new law?

C. Kucher: In principle, no. From the perspective of the registering body, which is a building permit records, responsible for certification, commissioning the building, I think many have missed in the Act made it easier for the customer. Introduced a declarative scheme, when a customer submits a declaration enumerating the list of required documents (in stock). If everything is in order, the customer "machine" gets the desired result. But, returning to our mentality, often in the declaration is filed false information, and here we will monitor.

Also in the new Act there are no strong levers of influence, only fines. But our organization can not reject the declaration, the maximum - can stop the construction. It is evident that the law is written builders for themselves. But there are many conflicting points. So everything will depend on the honesty and integrity of employees, customer ... you take a principled stand, but sooner or later you know someone will not accept, and ...

C. Kucher: Then I will not lead Gasque (smiles).

Until we have, thank God, nothing happened Global, which is surprising for such a total lack of responsibility of designers and builders. The Act also removed the examination of certain categories of objects.

C. Kucher: Yes, leave the object of increased complexity - 4 and 5 category. But, I think, DBN will be changed, we are initiating, changes in which almost all buildings except buildings of the private sector, some cafes have been made in the higher category. Unleash designers, they and a 9-storey building will assign to the second category, without examination. Is there already evidence of deprivation of licenses?

C. Kucher: Yes, this year we are deprived of licenses of about 20 companies. The list is already on our site. Many of these companies - just middlemen, without the required number of suitably qualified professionals in the state, but which at one time received a license for general contracting.
Content tags: Legislation construction Kiev
Did you like the material?Subscribe to our newsletter
Your comments:
Your opinion will be the first. Thank you for reading this article. I wish you happiness! Please share your opinion in the comment below.