I have tried every single MP in Parliament, but I will try again.....and again and again...

The worst part is they seem to not want to open Pandora's box and are hoping this will go away.....but this guys work is still there ticking away, I have seen it.....all of the really bad ones I put right (approx five or six a year)....no one wants to know because they aren't dangerous any more!!


Sadly it will probably take another incident, then they will look for another scapegoat.......I just hope and pray I am wrong, but I have seen too much to doubt it.....I truly believe it is a matter of time, just like last time.....Remember I spent 6 years warning last time....BEFORE THE EXPLOSION......but then they framed me for it.

I totally agree mate, any ideas what we can do?

Judicial review over CTV engineer investigation
24

March

2015
 

By Hon Dr Nick Smith

Building and Housing
Share on
Facebook


Twitter

 


 





The Government has lodged an application before the High Court to seek a judicial review of the decision by the Institute of Professional Engineers of New Zealand (IPENZ) to drop its investigation into Dr Alan Reay’s role in the design of the CTV building, with the documents served to Dr Reay this afternoon.

“The collapse of the CTV building during the 22 February 2011 earthquake resulted in the tragic death of 115 people and rates as one of New Zealand’s worst engineering failures. We owe it to the memory of those who lost their lives to hold those responsible to account for the building’s flawed design, and to ensure every possible lesson is learnt by the engineering profession to minimise the future risk,” Dr Smith says.

“We are taking this judicial review because we believe the decision to drop the investigation into Dr Alan Reay after he resigned from IPENZ was flawed. We want the decision overturned and IPENZ to complete the investigation into the professional conduct of Dr Reay’s role in the design of the CTV building.”

The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment’s Chief Engineer lodged a complaint with IPENZ in 2012, sparking the IPENZ investigation. Dr Reay resigned from IPENZ on 28 February 2014 and consequently IPENZ discontinued the disciplinary processes against him, as IPENZ considered it no longer had jurisdiction to deal with a former member. A subsequent decision by the High Court in September 2014 regarding Mr David Harding, the other engineer involved in the design of the CTV building, ruled that an investigation and disciplinary hearing could continue even when a member resigned.

The proceedings filed in the High Court seek to set aside the decision by IPENZ to dismiss the complaint so that the disciplinary investigation can proceed. This proceeding is separate to the complaint that is currently being heard by IPENZ that Dr Alan Reay failed to disclose his involvement in the CTV building when he sought renewal of his registration as a Chartered Professional Engineer in 2012.

“It is important that we clarify the law as to whether a professional can avoid disciplinary proceedings by simply resigning. Completing the IPENZ investigation will also be important in clarifying the professional standards expected of a senior engineer supervising the work of a more junior engineer,” Dr Smith says.

“The proceedings are complementary and not an alternative to reforms to improve the regulation of professional engineering. We released a discussion paper late last year on proposed changes and, after we have considered submissions, will be progressing with legislative change.”

Also you have to ask how can someone who hasn't even sat an apprenticeship can not only get his full craftsman licence but he can also have the connections to become a member of an engineering organisation, which I am guessing you have to be an engineer to join?

Now if you were the person who gifted this muppet a full licence and was responsible for investigating an explosion....who would you rather do for the explosion, the person you gave a licence to after just a chat..... or frame some stoodge?

Not to mention that Mr Hammond was the very same person who lobbied for the self cert system, the same system that was run so badly that it had to carry a disclaimer.....FFS.

I complained to the Board about Mr Hammond's appointment to be the "impartial" investigator, Mr Hammond then went on to misrepresent evidence and hide photos that proved what I had said was true.


Have a read of the transcript of my attempt to stay proceedings and apply all the evidence that is listed on this stream.......have a rad of who presided over this hearing.....who knew most of this evidence.......




Now apply it to a job you may have made a mistake on, or someone has altered your work (as happened to me)....and it blows up or hurts someone.........ARE YOU PREPARED TO LOOSE EVERYHTING?

I tried for 6 years to fix this BFORE the explosion......that's fair aye!

The thing is I don't even think they were protecting Darnley, although he was connected enough to get given a licence and be welcomed as a member of NZIGE, they were protecting themselves.....the ones who allowed the flippant issuing of a full certifying gas fitting licence and a cert system run so bad they were accepting certs with no test results or signatures, etc some certs being highlighted of this essential information with highlight pen....I kid you not I got the copies.

They threatened me with a handwriting expert, but ignores Darnley when he says he don't recognise his own handwriting......dodgy as...


Someone nearly dies and they covered it up while the poor sod was recovering in a burns unit......remember this......below



Vision and Values

a. Vision: The Plumbers, gasfitters, and Drainlayers Board (PGDB) exists so that, in respect of the provision of sanitary plumbing, gasfitting, and drainlaying services, the health and safety of members of the public is protected without undue cost. they had no problem with spending $250 000 to terrorise my family

b. Values:

i. Fairness ignoring evidence and photos

ii. Impartiality stacking the hearing with their cabal of dodgy mates, even having the chair and investigator who are thick as thieves

iii. Transparency not being fully up front with info, relationships and hiding evidence

iv. Trustworthyness See the above and apply it to this bullshit press release





It is the opposite of this that they publically pontificate about.....are you enjoying being treated like a bunch of fools?

Now compare the past rules with the new ones, attached, Master Plumber's Rules-passed-at-AGM-23 03 12.


Have a look for the rule about....Members will not criticise another's workmanship or pricing policies.....I am having trouble finding it, it seems more concerned with logo's and van stickers to me



So what would this tell you about the hierarchies' future intentions for their "fellow" members......

Perhaps a Master Plumber member could explain their take on this direction or perhaps ask those that signed off on these new rules?

I am pretty sure that someone from the MP hierarchy reads this forum, I mean they tried to take me to a Master Plumber disciplinary tribunal, AFTER, the kangaroo court hearing.... for comments made on this forum, this forcing me to hand in my resignation from MP.

You see I thought Master Plumbers was a fraternity with morals and standards that promoted safety and compliance, I suppose I got that wrong. 

Perhaps one of the people on the Master Plumber's discipline committee, from the threatened disciplinary mentioned above, could explain?