Likely it is low level - in my opinion you'd be hugely unlikely to lose your licence.  The remedies open to them are:
a fine
a censure
publishing your name
ordering youto work under supervision
any and or all.

If you plead guilty with mitigating circumstances they will still convene the hearing, but will take into account the fact youplead guilty early. They still convene the hearing and fly in the discipline committee and you are still liable for a % of costs.

Well maybe not, I guess they could find in your favour if you put a statement of facts forward but don't attend.  They will need to know that you aren't going to attend - and they could find you not guilty.  Depends how good you are at writing letters and this is where some of your colleagues in Auckland might be able to come to your assistance.  Practitoners are generally too forthcoming about their skirmishes with the PGDB but if you could find anyone local who has been through the mill they might be able to assist you. 

Cost of coming from Auckland for a day or two with airfares and accommodation is pricey and therefore the costs might outweigh each other.  What pisses me off about this whole thing is that I believe lots of practitioners cop a guilty plea because it is probably cheaper.  This means that justice is truly only available for the rich.  Have you considered talking to the PGDB and seeing if they will hold the hearing in Auckland?  They held Paul Gee's case in Nelson.  Mind you - then you have costs for the PGDB's lawyers (and there are a gaggle of them) + the disciplinary committee flying to Auckland.  Don't get me wrong you aren't charged for all the costs, but I understand if found guilty a % of costs are apportioned.  I have a colleague who submitted a Summary of Facts instead of appearing and plead guilty with mitigating circumstances on installing a wrong gas type of applaince.  He got hit with a $5000 and $2500 costs.  No publication of name and no order to work under supervision.  They said they went light on him because he owned up straight away.  Your case sounds minor in comparison.  Don't want to ruin your day though.

Thanks now go and have a beer and try not to worry too much!

Write to the board with this as your defence:

Provide a copy of the CP's timesheet showing his time on the job and secondly provide yours showing you did not work there. Assuming they don't accept that, this will work:

You were not guilty of a breach of a current enactment as they say. G12/AS1 is a non mandatory document that can be used to show compliance but is not the law. They have sighted this document as the 'enactment' you are in breach of.

Clause G12.3.8, which is mandatory, basically requires the HWC to be able to relieve excessive pressure(part a of G12.3. and limit temperatures to avoid flash steam production(G12.3.8 part b).
 
All there is to prove is that when the TPR was opened that the relief drain at its lesser grade allowed for the water to drain away faster than the KW rating of the heater could heat at. If it backed up and could not relieve the water fast enough then it does not comply with G12. If it works they have absolutely no case.

As an aside the work you've done to remedy the situation is more of an issue. PVC is not suitable for a relief drain and it should be to a readily visible location, not to a downpipe. Here's a blurb the DBH did following a few faults:

http://www.dbh.govt.nz/codewords-10-article-4

A bit on the non mandatory status of G12/AS1:

http://www.dbh.govt.nz/building-about-compliance

Taken from that:

The Compliance Documents are not mandatory, but they are important because they are published and endorsed by the Department of Building and Housing

If you need a hand writing a letter I'd be happy to help, I love helping out the wrongfully accused.

Hey NewGuy - how are you getting on with your problem with the PGDB?  Made any progress?

hi guys/newguy/jax, what a complete mess,all because of what? if this sort of thing is going to happen under the new rules will anyone in their right mind want to stay in our trades,i hope you get out of it o.k.newguy but what a hassle. Perhaps it would be a good time for a couple of hundred tradesmen to turn up at the hearing and stage a protest,we cannot work under this sort of pressure,cheers

To keep a long story short, We were employed by a company (cant say the name at this stage) that didn't pay us what they owed. So we refused to provide producer statements. Subsequently they went to theses clients blaming us for all the trouble they had with getting final CCC and encouraged them to complain to the board. We did many jobs for this company towards the end we refused to continue working for them due to all the problems we encountered with the product they were promoting. So as you can see this is a very complicated case because so many people are involved. I'm very annoyed about the fact the people can take advantage of the way the system works to satisfy their own agenda! I'm confident 100's of hours have already been spent because a pipe overflowed, we rectified the problem 5 hours after inspection but all this does not matter now, I just want to get this behind me.

Got fined 2K and must sit a HWC course.

this country along with its bureaucracy, middle men and paper pushers really is an absolute joke!!




sorry to hear how shafted you have been, silver lining payment plan - and 18?? months to sort out?