Engineer pleads guilty to fraud

An engineer who falsified over 1,000 building consents pled guilty to 112 charges of forgery in Taupō District Court in December

Kodiak Consulting Ltd director Jonathan Beau Hall has been convicted and remanded on bail ahead of sentencing on March 22, which will be held at Rotorua District Court.

Hall, who is an engineering technologist not a Chartered Professional Engineer (CPEng), had been accused of using the identities of qualified engineers to sign off 1,927 building consent documents.

In a statement, Engineering New Zealand Chief Executive Dr. Richard Templer said: “This is a very promising development with the admission from Mr. Hall that he committed forgery. Engineering New Zealand first raised this with the police as part of our responsibilities to regulate the engineering profession.

“It’s very rare to see this behaviour in the profession and I know Mr. Hall’s actions have caused a lot of stress for property owners and councils around Aotearoa.”

Countrywide problem

There are 69 authorities around New Zealand that can issue building consents. Of those 69 authorities, 42 are known to have concerns based on documents provided by Hall, from the Far North to Southland. Taupō is the most affected authority, with 1,141 forged documents relating to projects within the area.

Under Construction has previously reported on Hall’s case. The news broke in August, when it was alleged that Hall signed documents, including producer statements, using others’ identities and credentials, without permission.

According to Engineering New Zealand, a producer statement “provide[s] assurance to councils that a design meets Building Code and consenting requirements when signed by a Chartered Professional Engineer”.

Checks and balances

There are a series of ‘checks and balances’ available to councils to confirm producer statements, said Taupō District Council.

“This includes a step that requires the processing officer to check the Engineering New Zealand database to confirm that the signatory to the producer statement is registered as a CPEng and their registration is current.

“In this case, Jon Hall / Kodiak Consulting forged signatures on producer statements, and defrauded the Council.  As with many regulatory systems, the building consent system fundamentally relies on the integrity and honesty of the people working within it and expects them to not engage in criminal conduct.”

According to a police summary of the case obtained by the Waikato Times, Hall invoiced $2,422,511 across all the projects he falsified documents on – which earned him $558,511.

The summary added that the false documents produced by Hall have placed buildings at risk, which could involve significant remedial work for those building owners.

Unsafe buildings

“There are significant amounts of buildings that have been identified as unsafe and require major structural or foundational changes,” said the police summary.

“It is believed there will be ongoing financial impact for the foreseeable future.”

The Press reported that one company faced a $50,000 bill to rectify one project, while a construction company faced $150,000 in additional costs.

Hall’s offending came to light when Rotorua Lakes Council contacted a CPEng who ‘signed off’ on a document to discuss a project – however the CPEng had no recollection of the project. After reviewing the ‘signed off’ documents, Engineering NZ was alerted to the forgery and a complaint was brought to Wellington Police on May 26 2023.

Insurance complications

News reports suggested that insurance companies are unlikely to cover the cost of the remedial work, and Ben Rickard, Construction Insurance Expert at BuiltIn Insurance Brokers, explains why.

“There is unlikely to be any cover in any of the standard policies available for rectifying any defective specification. However, if that defective specification has resulted in actual physical property damage, then repairing that damage may be covered, but the policy still won’t, as part of that claim, pay for the rectification of the defective specification.”

Rickard added that builders taking on remedial work should make sure to consult their insurer before commencing work.

“Regarding the repair or remediation work on these buildings, I presume this will be done by a reputable engineer and contractor. They will be responsible, and should be insured, for their work only. I would expect, on a case-by-case basis, that their policies will be explicit in stipulating that they won’t respond to any pre-existing defects or damage. If there is a problem, determining the cause (was it due to the pre-existing defect or to the new contractor/design) can be challenging and may cause insurers to be wary of insuring these projects.”

Taking steps

Engineering New Zealand says it has worked hard to provide support across the range of entities effected by Hall’s actions, and will continue to do so as the dust settles on the case.

“Since this situation came to our attention we have taken a proactive approach – we immediately notified police, alerted the affected Building Consent Authorities (BCAs) and are continuing to provide support and advice to them as they determine the best response.

“In terms of providing transparency on engineers who are registered as CPEng, Engineering New Zealand maintains a publicly accessible register that includes all CPEng. This allows anyone receiving a document signed by a CPEng to confirm that the engineer is currently chartered and, if necessary, contact them directly to confirm the legitimacy of their signature.”