By Natalie Akoorie of
Matt Biddle disagreed with the decision to suspend him again and said he had learned from his "mistake". Photo: NZ Herald / Google
An architectural designer convicted of forgery and working while unlicensed has been struck off the Licensed Building Practitioners' register for two years, just months after getting his licence back.
The Building Practitioners Board said Matthew John Biddle was not fit to hold a building licence that would allow him to design houses and supervise others, because of his dishonesty convictions.
It cancelled his Design Class 1 for a term of two years before he could reapply.
But Biddle told the board he did not agree with its decision, that he had learned from his "mistake", and he only wanted to move forward with his life and career.
The 52-year-old former Mt Maunganui man was convicted of two charges of holding himself out as an LBP and one of carrying out restricted building work and sentenced to six months' home detention in April last year.
His licence has been suspended and cancelled since 2017 and he has been fined and ordered to pay costs in various disciplinary hearings over professional misconduct and negligence.
At a hearing in early August in Tauranga, Biddle told the board a complaint made against him the same day he got his licence back in March this year felt like a "vendetta".
Biddle said his convictions in the Tauranga District Court, including for forging the signature of another LBP to hide his own suspension, had had a huge impact, mainly on him.
He did not think his two clients, the homeowners who he is now paying reparation to, were very affected.
Since the convictions, he had been in and out of jobs and was currently unemployed, and publication of his name in the board's latest decision would be another "kick in the guts", he said.
During the hearing, Biddle claimed using another LBP's number and documentation on plans submitted to two councils, as he did, was common in the building industry, but he now knew it was wrong.
However, the board questioned whether it was only after Biddle was convicted of forgery that he learned the error of his ways, despite being in the industry at the time of the forgeries for more than 25 years.
The complainant, Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment registration and licensing occupational regulation manager Gary Parsons, denied his complaint less than two hours after Biddle's licence was approved was an abuse of process.
The lawyer representing Parsons, Martin Denyer, pointed out that Biddle's fitness as an LBP was not able to be determined during his licence application process, which was why Parsons complained as soon as the licence was approved.
Parsons also pointed out that competency and fitness were two different things and while Biddle had eventually been assessed as competent to hold a Design 1 licence, Parsons had concerns about his fitness because of the convictions.
Denyer said the forgeries were serious and directly undermined the LBP scheme, and that there was an element of minimisation of the offending by Biddle when he claimed forgery was common in the industry.
He said Biddle's criminal offending came soon after a period of disciplinary proceedings against him by the board, and he sought a penalty of suspension or cancellation harsher than had already been handed down previously, which was 18 months.
A need to protect the public
The board upheld the charge that the criminal offences adversely reflected on Biddle's fitness to be an LBP, with chairman Mel Orange saying it was a question of integrity and protecting the public.
In announcing the decision, MBIE said a public register with the names of all LBPs was available and the practitioners should be able to show their licence card when asked.
"Anyone who is engaging a builder to carry out restricted building work is encouraged to check if they hold a licence by looking them up on the LBP public register."
Biddle, who appeared remotely at the hearing from Auckland, argued he was not given a chance to prove himself fit and suggested a probation period instead, but the board said there was no allowance for such penalties in the Building Act 2004.
The board did not impose a fine or order Biddle to pay costs, instead noting that any surplus money Biddle had should go toward the reparation repayments he was making to his two former clients.
However, it said Biddle would be named in its decision and the case would be sent to other architectural designers to learn from.
Biddle's interim name suppression lapsed once the board's written decision was published today.
*This story was originally published by the New Zealand Herald.
