Name of File 6039-74-23.pdf cached at 11/12/2017 00:29:45 - with 4 pages. pdfPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\86\86d336d2-469a-469b-b6a6-e56958416810.pdf. thumbPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\pdfthumbs\86d336d2-469a-469b-b6a6-e56958416810_1.png. objDoc: 1 - True. objPreview.Log: . strFileName: 86d336d2-469a-469b-b6a6-e56958416810_1.png

Members/subscribers must be logged in to view this article

Verulam

Checking building design John Smith (Verulam, 15 October 1996) seems to have struck a nerve. Many members have reacted, mostly agreeing with Dr Smith that details submitted for Building Regulations approval tend to be poor and frequently wholly inadequate. Mr B. Pearlstone, from Billericay, Essex, complains that one applicant asked the checking engineer how to go about the design of an unusual problem. He continues: What I find annoying is that a very large percentage of applicants’ calculations and drawings have no recognisable authorship, no preparer’s name, no signature, no check reference. Do they have PI insurance? Verulam