28 Apr 2022
A Disciplinary Committee has found engineer Joo Cho to be “incompetent” in his design of a Christchurch office building at 230 High Street, which failed to comply with the Building Code.
A Disciplinary Committee has found engineer Joo Cho to be “incompetent” in his design of a Christchurch office building at 230 High Street, which failed to comply with the Building Code.
Mr Cho of Seismotech Consulting Ltd was a chartered professional engineer and Chartered Member of Engineering New Zealand when he designed the eight-storey building in 2015.
In late 2017, a graduate engineer observed issues with the building under construction, which were visible from the street.
The graduate engineer’s employer raised concerns with Mr Cho about 13 aspects of the building’s design, including bracing modified to enable access to the stairwell and the structure’s ability to withstand seismic loads.
Mr Cho was unreceptive to the concerns.
The employer subsequently referred its concerns to the Christchurch City Council and Engineering New Zealand.
This sparked Christchurch City Council to review the structure in 2018. That review found the structure did not appear to comply with the Building Code.
Mr Cho disagreed with the findings and the Council sought a determination from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. The determination, released in December 2019, found the building did not comply with the Building Code on ten of 13 points of concern raised by the complainant.
Engineering New Zealand’s investigation discovered that peer reviewers raised issues with Mr Cho during the design stage, including concerns about the modified lateral bracing. However, their concerns were not addressed by Mr Cho. The design of the building also changed significantly during construction.
The Disciplinary Committee found Mr Cho breached his obligations under the Code of Ethical Conduct by dismissing the peer reviewers’ concerns and by signing producer statements for amended designs without addressing concerns that had been raised. It reprimanded Mr Cho in the strongest terms possible, ordering he be removed from the register of chartered professional engineers and ineligible to re-apply for registration for two years.
M.r Cho, who maintains his building design was acceptable and compliant with the Building Code, has been ordered to pay approximately $12,500 (plus GST) towards the costs incurred by Engineering New Zealand.
The Committee expressed deep concerns about his apparent unwillingness to alter his behaviour.
Notes to reporters
Engineering New Zealand is New Zealand's professional body for engineers, with some 20,000 members. We represent – and regulate – our members. We also act as the Registration Authority for Chartered Professional Engineers.
Disciplinary Committees can make orders under the Chartered Professional Engineers of New Zealand Act 2002 and Chartered Professional Engineers of New Zealand Rules (No 2) 2002. Where an engineer is a member of Engineering New Zealand as well as a chartered professional engineer, orders can also be made under our membership rules and disciplinary regulations. The maximum fine that can be imposed is $5,000 under the Act or $10,000 under the membership rules.
Engineering New Zealand is strengthening its accreditation scheme for chartered professional engineers, including stronger assessment criteria and discipline-specific assessment for high-risk sub-disciplines such as structural engineering.
For more information or to arrange an interview, contact Lachlan McKenzie on 021 479 885.
