Section one: Options to increase the uptake of remote inspections and improve efficiency of inspection processes

The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) has identified four options to improve efficiency and timeliness in the inspection process, primarily through measures to increase the uptake of remote inspections. Appendix 1 summarises these options and provides an initial assessment of the potential costs, benefits, and risks. The options are:

• Option one: Review remote inspection guidance, address failure rates and/or publish wait times (non-regulatory).
• Option two: Require building consent authorities to have the systems and capability to conduct remote inspections.
• Option three: Require building consent authorities to use remote inspections as the default approach to conducting inspections.
• Option four: Create a new offence to deter deceptive behaviour (stand-alone or complementary option).

Building consent authority duty of care would remain unchanged under all of the above options.

Option one: Review remote inspection guidance, address failure rates and/or publish wait times (non-regulatory) 

MBIE published remote inspection guidance in July 2024. MBIE will monitor its impact and if necessary, review and update it. For example, guidance could be made more directive and detailed around what building work should be inspected remotely and how remote inspections should be performed.

Inspection failures impact building consent authority efficiency and timeliness due to time spent on re-inspections. Rework as a result of failed inspections also add time and cost to a build. MBIE recently began monitoring building consent and code compliance certificate timeframes. Identifying common causes of inspection failures and developing options to reduce these (for example, guidance and training for the sector, public reporting on causes of inspection failures) could support more efficient use of inspection resources, and improved sector productivity due to less time on rework.

Alongside this, MBIE could collect and publish data on inspection wait times across building consent authorities and/or set targets, to encourage building consent authorities to implement actions to ensure more timely inspections.

Option two: Require building consent authorities to have the systems and capability to conduct remote inspections

To be accredited, a building consent authority must meet the criteria of the Building (Accreditation of Building Consent Authorities) Regulations 2006. This includes a requirement to have policies and procedures for planning, performing and managing inspections.

These regulations could be amended to require building consent authorities to have the systems and capability (as well as policies and procedures) to conduct inspections remotely.

Under this option, building consent authorities would retain discretion on when they inspect remotely.

Building consent authorities would be encouraged to update their policies and procedures ahead of amendments to regulations to enable smooth implementation (such as, to allow time to familiarise with remote inspections and stagger investment in training and technology).

Option three: Require building consent authorities to use remote inspections as the default approach to conducting inspections

This option would amend the Building Act to require building consent authorities to use remote inspections as the default approach for carrying out certain inspections.

Regulations could specify the inspection types or criteria for which inspections should be carried out remotely. To manage the risk that an inspector could miss a crucial element during a complex remote inspection, the requirement to use remote inspections could initially focus on lower risk building work or inspections such as plumbing and/or elements of single level builds, re-inspections, and inspection types with low failure rates. This could be expanded over time, as technology improves, and building consent authorities and the sector become more confident and skilled in the use of remote inspection tools.

There would be further consultation on the details of any proposed regulations.

Some exclusions from the default requirement may be needed, including when:

• there is poor internet connectivity at the inspection site
• there is poor lighting or adverse weather that may impair video/photo quality
• the inspector and/or builder deem it necessary to conduct an on-site inspection to ensure critical details are not missed
• a building professional has previously been deceptive or regularly failed inspections
• building work is being carried out by an individual with an Owner-Builder Exemption^[1].

Inspectors would also retain the ability to follow up with an on-site inspection if they were not able to be satisfied using remote inspection tools that the building work was carried out in accordance with the consent^[2].

Option four: Creating a new offence to deter deceptive behaviour (stand-alone or complementary option)

Note: this option could be implemented as a stand-alone change or in combination with other options (such as, option one, two, or three).

Building consent authorities have expressed concern that it may be easier to hide or disguise non-compliant work during a remote inspection. Some people may take advantage of this and deliberately hide, disguise, or otherwise misrepresent building work (for example, provide images of other completed building work), to pass an inspection. This would increase the risk of non-compliant work going undetected. Any consequent building defects would negatively impact building owners and could draw building consent authorities into liability claims.

Some building consent authorities have managed this risk by limiting the use of remote inspection tools to trusted builders with a good track record of passing inspections.

However, if building consent authorities are required to use remote inspections by default, the likelihood of dishonest behaviour may increase. To mitigate this risk, a new offence could be created to target deceptive behaviour during a remote inspection. The offence relates specifically to deliberate actions to hide, disguise, or otherwise misrepresent non-compliant building work.

Because this behaviour could lead to significant negative health, safety, and financial harm, MBIE proposes the offender would be liable on conviction to a maximum fine of $50,000 for an individual and $150,000 for a body corporate or business. This aligns with similar offences and fines under the Building Act. 

The following questions are only for building consent authorities and Accredited Organisations (Building).

Footnote

^[1] This exemption means you do not need to be or use a licensed building practitioner for any restricted building work. A building consent is still required, and work must comply with the Building Code. The criteria to qualify for the exemption are detailed at: Owner-builder obligations – Building Performance(external link).

^[2] Section 90 of the Building Act also enables on-site inspections at any time, including for the purposes of spot checks.

Increasing the uptake of remote inspections | Section two: Increasing inspections capacity through the use of Accredited Organisations >