from the Complainant regarding this issue. It is alleged that the third Respondent provided the Council with false certification of a wall, that he failed to challenge the statements made by the first Respondent and that he affirmed his “false certification” in the subsequent court action. 10. A D Barratt It is alleged that the (2013/09/30 41) A Peer Counselling – against A Complainant pointed out meeting was Mitchell Pr inconsistencies and successfully concluded Tech Eng irregularities in the alteration of with the Respondent (877066) his neighbour’s home. A stop on 23 April 2014 and works order was issued which the Peer Counselling led to the Respondent sending Report was received. a email to the “threatening” Complainant. 11. P Venter The Respondent was appointed (2013/03/26 08) The Assignee’s report – against H S as the engineer to conduct was considered by the Van Der Walt engineering work on the Investigating Pr Eng foundation, floor slab and stairs Committee which (860204) of the Complainant’s dwelling. resolved that there was The said structures no evidence of demonstrated defects. improper conduct by the Respondent. 12. A Solomon It is alleged that the (2013/07/08 - 29) The Assignee’s verbal against L C Respondent undertook work report was considered Smith Pr Eng without the Complainant’s by the Investigating (860253) consent or approval of the Committee
from the Complainant regarding this issue. It is alleged that the third Respondent provided the Council with false certification of a wall, that he failed to challenge the statements made by the first Respondent and that he affirmed his “false certification” in the subsequent court action. 10. A D Barratt against A Mitchell Pr Tech Eng (877066) It is alleged that the Complainant pointed out inconsistencies and irregularities in the alteration of his neighbour’s home. A stop works order was issued which led to the Respondent sending a “threatening” email to the Complainant. (2013/09/30 – 41) A Peer Counselling meeting was successfully concluded with the Respondent on 23 April 2014 and the Peer Counselling Report was received. 11. P Venter against H S Van Der Walt Pr Eng (860204) The Respondent was appointed as the engineer to conduct engineering work on the foundation, floor slab and stairs of the Complainant’s dwelling. The said structures demonstrated defects. (2013/03/26 – 08) The Assignee’s report was considered by the Investigating Committee which resolved that there was no evidence of improper conduct by the Respondent. 12. A Solomon against L C Smith Pr Eng (860253) It is alleged that the Respondent undertook work without the Complainant’s consent or approval of the (2013/07/08 - 29) The Assignee’s verbal report was considered by the Investigating Committee
RNW1776-161005.docx