Update on the Establishment of a List of BS Expert and the associated proficiency course
As reported in January issue of Surveying Times and with a view to introduce an expert determination mechanism for building maintenance matters, it is considered that a pilot scheme could be implemented on water seepage cases. Alongside with the development of protocol for expert determination, a list of expert will be established shortly for interested BS members who are experienced in technical aspects of building maintenance and practising expert witness to register. Apart from the technical skills, relevant legal training would also be a pre-requisite. Details will be available in the application form which is under preparation.
For those who wish to acquire the relevant legal training, we are delighted to inform that HKU SPACE has agreed to tailor-make an award bearing programme for BS members on the fundamental legal knowledge for expert witness in Oct/ Nov 2010. As a highlight, the programme will cover court procedures, the role and practice of an expert in Expert Determination, law of evidence, etc. which would be essential to our members practising as expert witness as well as the adjudicating expert in the purported Expert Determination. It will be a 75-hour programme spanning over three to four months. There would also be assessment in the course possibly in the form of case studies and practice. The details of the programme are under development and we will keep you updated on the enrolment details once they are available.
Legco Panel Meeting on MBIS and MWIS
Vincent Ho represented the Institute to attend the Legislative Council Panel Meeting on the proposed Mandatory Building Inspection Scheme (MBIS) and Mandatory Window Inspection Scheme (MWIS). During the meeting he voiced out our views which were collected from the forum on MBIS held on 12 March 2010 and they are summarized as follows:
1. 香港測量師學會就政府提出之強制驗樓計劃及強制驗窗計劃表示歡迎，並期望立法會可盡快完成立法。有關之驗樓計劃已討論多年，我們期望相關立法程序及行政準備工作可加速進行，不需再待廿多個月之久。
2. 總括來說，驗樓和驗窗的指定年期，分別為30年和10年，已得到各業界的共識及是可接受的。以10年作為樓宇檢驗周期在現階段是合理的平衡建議，然而，對於超過40或50年
樓齡以上的樓宇，未來有可能需要把檢驗周期縮短為六至七年。我們通常建議業主以翻新後六至七年的周期進行樓宇檢驗，以便有足夠時間計劃下一周期所需之維修及翻新工程。
3. 學會就今次草案的具體內容，有以下之原則性疑問，希望當局再深入研究及加以修改。
a) 在發展局提交的<立法會參考資料摘要>內容裡，當局表示驗樓工作 [相對簡單], 本會則表示強烈的不同意. 樓宇安全檢查牽涉的勘察內容必須包括整幢大廈各部分，除了整體結構狀況外，更重要的包括防火及走火通道安全標準，涉及樓宇衛生之排水管狀況，大廈內部維修性問題（如批盪、石屎剝落、安全圍欄）、窗戶、大閘、玻璃幕牆、外牆及天面防水、非法僭建物狀況、公用地方是否存在改裝、外牆飾面批盪、伸出物安全性等。此等勘察不但要指出各損毀部分, 並且要判斷出有關之損壞出現之原因，提供專業依據以作為維修工程方案之基礎。
在整個勘察過程中, 我們不但要知道樓宇設計的法規基本要求, 並要理解到怎樣運用合適的方法和材料以配合原有樓宇之建築方法而提出維修方案。這工作有如醫生診症，不但要指出病徵，而且要準確地、有效地提供專業的醫治方案。我們不相信這工作相對於新建工程的設計以及監督來得簡單. 我們不能輕視[註冊檢驗人員]的重要性及所需的專業資格。因此，當局不應為滿足數字要求而不恰當地把註冊為有關檢驗人員的資歷降低. 我們認為該等人員必須具備整體樓宇勘察、修葺及保養方面足夠的專業能力及水平. 而單有新建樓宇設計或結構設計培訓及經驗者並不足以應付相關工作.
b)在草案中有關強制驗窗的[合資格人士]可為個人或註冊承建商. 我們認為以公司身份進行驗窗工作會造成身份不清,責任不明的現象.因為驗窗工作需要即時作出專業判斷，所以個人資歷是十分重要的。如以公司身份, 則難以控制進行檢驗人員的專業水準及釐清專業及法律責任。既然驗樓人員是以個人身份註冊，驗窗亦應一樣.
c) 有關強制驗樓範圍在草案中是以「公用地方」為界定. 由此看來, 條例的原意是有關驗樓工作並不要求進入個別單位進行檢驗. 但在草案中提出的公用地方的定義卻是參照[建築物管理條例(Cap.344)]中的公用地方定義. 在 Cap.344 內的公用地方亦可指為單位內之主體結構構件, 例如柱及主承力牆. 這樣的話, 是否意味著要進入個別單位去進行檢驗有關之部分? 此將與草案原意有明顯抵觸。我們認同進入一定比例單位視察可對樓宇整體情況可有更全面評估, 但當局需對這重要立法意向作清晰說明.
d) 同樣地, 對於外牆的定義亦需再加考慮.因為草案表示外
e) 草案提出"註冊檢驗人員" 的註冊委員會只有三名成員. 相對於認可人士註冊委員會5名成員的人數要求, 我們認為三名成員並未能夠有效及準確地評審有關之申請.
f) 我們又認為強制驗樓及強制驗窗計劃可能會出現很多上訴個案.依靠現行建築物條例內之上訴審裁小組的機制處理有關上訴並不有效和可行.當局需認真研究一套有效及快捷的機制,以處理強制驗樓及強制驗窗計劃所引起的上訴事項.
g) 我們亦發現在強制驗窗計劃內,合資格人士如為個人身份則需同時監管相應之維修工程. 但如果合資格人士為註冊承建商背景的話,則在進行維修時,便不需要第三者之監管，此乃明顯的雙重標準.其實,一般換窗工程在去年通過之小型工程條例下, 承建商進行類似之換窗 維修工程時並不需要第三者監管.很明顯,強制驗樓及強制驗窗計劃並未能恰當地、全面地與小型工程監管機制接軌.
4. 我們認為屋宇署將發出的作業守則應切合實際需要和簡單易明, 以令專業人士和公眾都能接受及明白.在起草[守則]期間,香港測量師學會曾多次給屋宇署提出意見，希望屋宇署採納本會提出的意見以完善有關[守則],並確保計劃在實施時得到業界的認同.
5. 除了作業守則之外,我們亦建議屋宇署制訂供一般業主參考之指引以便他們了解法例規定之驗樓及維修內容.
6. 屋宇署應建立一套有效的質量監控機制,對檢驗人員提交之檢樓報告進行必要的覆核,以確保公眾得到妥善及專業服務及建議.
7. 政府對樓宇業主提供的驗樓資助的審查條件,不應過於嚴格，應採取一套比較靈活的審查標準,以確保最起碼的初步驗樓工作可以進行. 我們相信業主在掌握了基本的檢驗專業意見後,一般都樂於承擔必要的維修工作. 對於政府表示沒有法團組織之大廈未能提供驗樓資助, 我們相信會阻礙整個計劃的實施成效.
8. 根據過往經驗,我們相信會有不少未成立法團的大廈,因未能受惠政府資助或因部份業主忽視其責任而不能自行完成驗樓工作.屋宇署必須提供支援由屋宇署代聘專業人士完成驗樓及跟進所需維修工程以保障整體業主、住客及公眾安全.
9. 如果強制驗樓計劃要求之檢驗內容及深度超越現時行業之一般標準,則政府提出之驗樓費用將遠不足夠.我們認為個別樓宇構件或結構之詳細檢查應根據初步驗樓結果需要而決定,以減低驗樓成本,減輕市民負擔及節省時間.
Opinions voiced out by Vincent were well received by Legislative Council Panel members. If you have further views to supplement, please pass them to our working group members.
The 42nd Annual Conference of the Building Offcials Institute of New Zealand (BOINZ)
The Hon Secretary of the General Council, Mr Edwin TANG and our Vice Chairman Mr Robin LEUNG attended the Conference of BOINZ which was incorporating the first International Symposium of Building Officials, held from 11 April 2010 to 14 April 2010 in Rotorua, New Zealand.
This conference touched mainly on the local issues of New Zealand including government’s consultation for amending their Building Act and technical issues relating to their typical houses development. The International Symposium related mainly to the comparison of systems between New Zealand and Australia and the opportunity of future cooperation between BOINZ and Australia Institute of Building Surveyors (AIBS).
The attendance of Edwin and Robin in this conference established an important link with the Building Officials in the Pacific Region. It is expected that further liaison with Building Officials in Asia Pacific would be made in near future for establishing a regional organization of Building Officials to enhance the exchange of experience, best practice, building codes and safety standards.
A CPD event is being organized to share their findings and that of mine during the World Organization of Building Officials Congress 2010 held in Mexico City from 20 April 2010 to 22 April 2010.
