La mappa del Salva casa

Sanctions and the role of professionals

In seismic zones, compliance with specific standards must be certified

by Francesco Lanatà

20 August 2024

3' min read

The law converting the Salva casa decree did not introduce any significant changes to Article 36-bis in the obligations left to professionals: the most significant changes are limited to interventions on buildings in seismic zones.

Assessment of Conformity

Thus, the conformity assessment in the case of partial non-conformity and essential variations presupposes the conformity of the intervention with the urban planning regulations in force at the time of the submission of the application as well as with the exclusively building regulations in force when the intervention was carried out: according to paragraph 3, the technician must make a declaration with also the year in which the intervention was carried out, which is essential to determine the applicable building regulations.

The period of construction is ascertained according to the precise criteria already established by Article 9-bis of Presidential Decree 380/2001 to ascertain the lawful state of the property: the technician may prove the year of construction of the property using documentation such as land registry data, photographs, cartographic extracts and other public or private deeds.

The issue becomes problematic if the documentation found does not allow proof of the year in which the intervention was carried out: in this case, it is the technician himself who must attest to this, with a declaration for which he assumes responsibility.

Since this is an assessment of experience and knowledge, the technician is liable - even very severely - only if he has made false statements and thus only if he has voluntarily and knowingly made a statement that does not correspond to the truth.

In seismic zones

The new paragraph 3-bis of Article 36-bis regulates the case of interventions subject to assessment in seismic areas (with the exception of low seismicity areas). For their regularisation, also from the point of view of seismic regulations, the provision recalls and adopts the discipline introduced, in the field of building tolerances, by Article 34-bis, paragraph 3-bis. Putting these provisions together, it emerges that the verification of conformity pursuant to Article 36-bis requires, in the case of works in seismic areas, the attestation of the technician as to compliance with the anti-seismic technical regulations in force at the time the work is carried out. In any case, it remains possible for the One-Stop Shop to request, in the course of this procedure, interventions to comply with the safety requirements of the technical regulations of reference.

Landscape compatibility

At the time of conversion, paragraph 5 of Article 36-bis did not undergo any significant changes on the fulfilments and declarations required from the professional when the prior assessment of the landscape compatibility of the intervention is required for the finalisation of the amnesty.

Therefore, the provision that subordinates the ascertainment of conformity to the payment of a sanction, parametralised to the greater amount between the damage caused by the intervention and the profit obtained by the transgression, remains. Recalling Article 167 of Legislative Decree 42/2004, this penalty must therefore be determined on the basis of an appraisal. But not even the conversion has clarified whether this appraisal is to be drawn up by the proceeding administration or by the appointed technician. Practice teaches that the latter gives a representation of data and information useful, for example, to determine the value of the intervention and therefore the profit achieved, so as to allow the administration to calculate and determine the value of the penalty.