National Home Builders Registration Council: briefing

Meeting report

HOUSING PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
5 March 2003
NATIONAL HOME BUILDERS REGISTRATION COUNCIL: BRIEFING

Chairperson: Ms Z Kota

Documents handed out:
National Home Builders Registration Council Powerpoint Presentation
Draft Committee Programme 2003
Report of Study Tour to Western Cape (document awaited, not published yet)

SUMMARY
The CEO of National Home Builders Registration Council briefed the Committee on international liaisons and its national historical background, its function as a regulatory body and its capacity.

The provisional programme for 2003 was not adopted but kept as work in progress.
Technical changes and further recommendations were added to the study tour to Western Cape report.

MINUTES
Committee Programme 2003
Public Hearings with the MEC's was cancelled on 8 and 9 April 2003 and accommodated on 15 and 16 April 2003. The chairperson suggested that the committee should not take a decision on the programme, and rather treat it as work in progress until the costing had been done.

Study Tour to Western Cape Report
Various committee members made technical corrections. The Committee decided they would write to the Department of Housing to ask them to clarify why and how they spent R61 million in December 2002, as referred to in the meeting with MEC N Hangana.

Additional Recommendations made to various projects were:
-Hostel Redevelopment Programme, Langa Hostel - Langa residents do not have money to pay for the hostels therefore some kind of arrangement must be agreed on.
-Heinz Park 208 Housing Project - Capacitating administrative staff beforehand.
-Zwelihle phase II - the electricity cables are dangerous to the community and should be installed underground.
-Hostel Upgrading and Redevelopment Project - There should be synergy between the developer and the community in terms of what is happening.
-Rental Stock - A second door and showering facilities should be installed in all houses as per norms and standards.

Mr S D Montsintsi (ANC) inquired why the size of units in Heinz Park and in Zwelihle phase II ranged from 28m squared whereas the minimum size of a unit was 30m squared. The committee resolved to write a letter stating that the 28m squared units built by developers were below standard.

Mr B M Douglas (IFP) explained that the building house budget being used had been approved unit size increment and that the developers had said they could not consider changes.

Ms J A Semple (DP) pointed out that some people owned more that one government subsidised house. Monitoring of the National data base implementation was added to the report as a recommendation.

National Home Builders Registration Council: Briefing
The Chief Executive Officer of National Home Builders Registration Council (NHBRC), Mr Pethola Makgethe briefed the committee on the NHBRC international and national historical background and capacity.

An overview was given of how NHBRC intended delivering housing in the subsidy sector.
Mr Makgethe highlighted sister organisations internationally in countries that included the USA, UK, Ireland, Australia, and Japan. These were of tremendous guidance when laying down international standards. Their sister organisation in the USA had eleven million in reserves they were currently striving for one billion.

Mr Makgethe spoke of their marketing strategy and how people in South Africa were either not aware of NHBRC or reluctant to be part of it. He also spoke about consumer protection and the five year warranty scheme that they offer on houses. He explained that NHBRC was a regulatory body and as their remedial work reflected, the biggest problem in South Africa with regards to housing was foundations and footage; and these were said to account for 34% of the structural defects. It was emphasised that every contractor or owner builder had to be registered.

Challenges
Mr Makgethe said the NHBRC faced challenges in the turnaround time within the housing sector. The balancing the quality of the product at a low cost and materials could result in the shrinkage of NHBRC reserves unless mass production came into play. They offered onsite inspectors for every 500 units.

In closing he pointed out that they currently had offices in all South African provinces except in the Northern Cape.

Discussion
Ms J A Semple (DP) asked if regulations of the NHBRC applied to owner-builders and persons building their own homes under the People's Housing Process.

Mr Makgethe said that the quality of the houses would be different and with the peoples housing process NHBRC would not be involved unless the developer was registered and had enrolled with them. In the case of owner builders, it was assumed that the builder would take special care in building his own house with his own money hence NHBRC did not monitor standards. In terms of section 29 an owner builder using his own money could avoid paying the 1.3% enrolment fee, but in order to do this he would have to seek approval from the minister that he would not be building it against public interest. He ended by saying that they needed to look at what other countries had done and find a less cluttered process.

Mr M Skhosana (ANC) commended NHBRC for moving forward in the right direction. He also sought clarity with regards to having one inspector for every 500 units being built.
Did NHBRC provide an inspector from foundation to completion or just from the roof.

In response Mr Makgethe explained that the housing building sector was different; the inspection was from the roof. He further explained that with the subsidy sector on sight inspection was done from roofing house to house until completion. He added that once they were confident that the contractors were delivering to their satisfaction, they would reduce inspection.

Mr BM Douglas (IFP) pointed out that previously NHBRC only looked at structural defects. Would NHBRC now look at minimum standards such as the inclusion of showering facilities in each house.

Mr Makgethe said that the NHBRC only covered major structural defects; defects such as on roofs and door were at the expense of the builder.

Mr Montsintsi (ANC) related a scenario of a builder who undertook to build a home and accordingly enrolled with the NHBRC, and paid his 1.3 %. Was the builder protected if the minor defect ended up being a major defect?

Mr Makgethe said that the time frame was important. A major structural defect was anything that would lead to the collapse of the house or its walls. He gave the example of a leaking roof, saying that the leak could lead to a major structural defect.

An IFP member asked if in relation to inspection standards, the overhead hanging of electricity cables that were at time used as washing lines fell under the ambit of the NHBRC.

Mr Makgethe said that the NHBRC preferred to have electricity cables installed underground. Municipalities still had their inspectors for certification; and that inspectors had to be able to perform full inspections.

In closing Mr Makgethe spoke of a different grading system which would differentiate the payment of the enrolment fee from the end of April 2003. The system would formulate a reduction formula for people that had been with them for five, ten , fifteen, years respectively; and with good records.

The meeting was adjourned.