Certificate of Occupancy and Certificate of Compliance

[mmc]

Hi,

Does anyone have a building department that requires a property owner get their Certificate of Compliance from the Con Comm before the Building Inspector will issue a CO for the house?

Thanks.
MMC

[patrickgarner]

New one to me. I can't imagine why they'd be linked, but nothing surprises me when it comes to bureaucratic ingenuity.

[mmc]

I agree.

[baribeau375]

Yes, as an enforcement strategy we have used withholding a CO as a mechanism to ensure assessed fines for violations are paid and compliance achieved. To accomplish this, we worked with the town clerk and building department. It is an effective approach to ensuring that parties bound by orders of conditions respond as required to administrative actions.

[patrickgarner]

If it hasn't happened, I'll predict this will end up in court, ultimately costing the town a bit of general funds. As I wrote a year ago, ingenious howsoever unrelated.

[JMD1986]

I would be interested in reading the language that is being applied in this situation and if any court challenges have been made.

I have come across many cases where a builder/developer files a NOI for the construction of a home. It's built and sold within the 3 year period and then all of a sudden the homeowner is faced with trying to get a CoC on a project they didn't build and the builder/developer if off on some sunny island.

I would have no issue with a notice being attached to the certificate of occupancy stating that a Certificate of Compliance is required for the construction of that home. That way the unsuspecting homeowner has some form of dialog with the builder/developer prior to final papers being passed but I would agree that this would only provoke a court battle and you being on the loosing end.

Now if the house was built in wetlands without a NOI and a building permit inadvertantly issued. A differnet can on worms is opened.

[mmc]

That's why Orders of Condition are recorded in the Registry. It shows up on the title of the person who owns the property. So a buyer has constructive knowledge of it prior to closing on the purchase. If a title search is not done, the OOC still runs with the land and they are required to deal with getting the COC. Hence the language of General Condition #16.

[KP]

We include a condition in all OOCs requiring a cash deposit (ranging from a few hundred dollars to several thousand depending on the scale of the project) to ensure that as built plans are received and that a certificate of compliance can be issued.

[Agent Selby]

I sign-off on any CO that has an OOC, but usually the house is able to be occupied well before I would sign off on a COC (due to landscaping, etc). But what signing off does do is allow me to catch anything really big - like a violation of our No Disturb Zone.

[patrickgarner]

Frankly, the more I've thought about the requirement for a COC before a CO is issued, the more amazed I am. In fact I've never encountered a similar requirement in any town I've worked in. As Agent Selby notes, final stabilization is often lacking when a house is complete. Causes are numerous, but the most common is a seasonal constraint (it's difficult for grass to germinate in January). Not allowing occupation for such a cause sets up a tremendous legal vulnerability, in my opinion, for the town. I sure would clear it with town counsel before proceeding with anything similar. This sort of requirement is, in my opinion, guaranteed to make any commission immensely unpopular, which is not good for the home team.

Interesting thread here, but I find the underlying concept (& assumptions) somewhat dismaying.