UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
tarquinlinbin
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

Hi All

We have had a recent visit from someone to quote for replacement
windows.

We had hoped that we could have large glass panels at the bottom with
single and/or twin top openers at the top,depending on width of
window,, i.e twin top openers on the wider windows.

Our man says this is a problem though because it would not be in
compliance with building control regs with regard to fire escape. The
bottom line is that it seems me must have side openners on the bedroom
windows to allow escape but the rest,i.e ground floor and landing
windows,could be top openers. Of course this may spoil the look of the
front/rear elevation of the house as we would then have a mix of top
and side openers.

Apparently the above is to be in compliance with a reg change in
2002?? or something like that?.

If the windows are not in compliance with the reg then a FENSA reg/or
building control cert cannot be obtained.

Our man says he usually obtains the building control cert in
preference to FENSA as FENSA only inspect a small proportion of
installs whereas local authority building control inspect all installs
that they certify.

So the bottom line is,comply and therefore get a cert,flout and dont
get a cert.

Our man says that if we dont have a cert,(not in strict compliance)
then this will be picked up by a surveyor acting on behalf of any
future purchaser.

I guess i'm asking,is the building control cert really necessary or is
it common place to flout?.

I expect ALL installs done by big national co's would HAVE to be in
full compliance?

any thoughts welcome..

joe

  #2   Report Post  
Peter Crosland
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

If the windows are not in compliance with the reg then a FENSA reg/or
building control cert cannot be obtained.


Correct.


Our man says he usually obtains the building control cert in
preference to FENSA as FENSA only inspect a small proportion of
installs whereas local authority building control inspect all installs
that they certify.

So the bottom line is,comply and therefore get a cert,flout and dont
get a cert.

Our man says that if we dont have a cert,(not in strict compliance)
then this will be picked up by a surveyor acting on behalf of any
future purchaser.


Correct and solicitors are getting ever more tough on this because of
laibilty issues if clients lie.

I guess i'm asking,is the building control cert really necessary or is
it common place to flout?.


Yes and probably.


  #3   Report Post  
Andrew Gabriel
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

In article ,
"Peter Crosland" writes:

Correct and solicitors are getting ever more tough on this because of
laibilty issues if clients lie.


A couple of years ago, detailed questions were being asked.
I checked with a couple of colleages who moved a few months
ago, and the questions asked were very much reduced. One
was specifically asked only about any structural alterations
to the building and changes to underground sewers/drains
(can't recall the exact term used now). The other was also
asked only a few limited questions. I don't know how typical
these two cases are.

--
Andrew Gabriel
  #5   Report Post  
dh
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

Hi Joe - i've recently gone through the same process so maybe I can
offer some useful info.

The regulations regarding replacement windows date back to 2002 and as
I've owned my house for longer I could probably have got away without
a building control/fensa document as I know of several instances where
people have simply written a declaration, at the point of sale, that
their windows predate the regulations coming into force.

That said I also know of one instance of someone who installed windows
without getting the the documentation sorted out and was subsequently
'caught out' when someone contacted the local building control office
(the guy was basically a bit of an arse and I think he rubbed a
neighbour up the wrong way).

In practice I think thats a bit of a rare occurrance but in the end I
went down the road of applying for a building control certificate, in
part because its my experience that solicitors do now routinely ask
about double glazing and also because the certificate was only £70
from my council (newcastle) - not alot to pay when you think the house
can now be advertised as having new double glazing that meets current
regulations for safety and thermal efficiency.

With regard to the design of windows you'd like to have installed the
guidance notes I received from the council boil down to the following
-

1] the glass has to meet the new requirements for thermal insulation -
standard double glazing doesn't do this; there are some alternatives
but commonly this means getting double glazed units that are
constructed with pilkinton K glass

2] If you have have existing first floor means of escape (an
unobstructed openable area of at least 0.33metre squared, not less
than 450mm high and wide, with the bottom of the opening between
800-1100mm from the internal floor level) then you you have to keep
it.
If you have windows that don't meet that criteria then while you are
strongly recommended to provide a means of escape when you are fitting
replacement windows this is not a requirement of the regulations.

3] Glazed areas within 800mm of floor level should be either toughened
or laminated

4] If your old windows have trickle vents for the puposes of
ventilation, your replacement ones do as well, otherwise they are not
a requirement for replacement windows

There are additional instructions, with regard to having proper
structural support, particularly where replacing a bay window. This
wasn't a factor for myself so I didn't look into it.

I installed two 'means of escape' windows out of nine installed on the
first floor. When the building inspector came round he was in the
house for two minutes, had a cursery look around, and informed me i'd
get my certificate in the post within a couple of weeks. I would say
the main thing he took note of were the pilkington k stickers on each
double glazing unit, but he did also comment approvingly on their
being a fire exit on the first floor.

What you might consider doing is having the top openers you desire,
and at least one window, perhaps at the rear of the building, where
the larger lower window also opens to offer a fire exit. I've done
this on a previous house and it did not look out of place.

It's also worth noting that all the fire exit windows i've had fitted,
in my current house and previously, have been top openers - there may
be practical reasons why the guy suggested side opening fire exits but
I don't think their are regulatory reasons.

Hope this helps.


  #6   Report Post  
Hugo Nebula
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 19:05:22 +0100, a particular chimpanzee named
tarquinlinbin randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

Our man says this is a problem though because it would not be in
compliance with building control regs with regard to fire escape. The
bottom line is that it seems me must have side openners on the bedroom
windows to allow escape but the rest,i.e ground floor and landing
windows,could be top openers.


If the windows are not in compliance with the reg then a FENSA reg/or
building control cert cannot be obtained.

Our man says he usually obtains the building control cert in
preference to FENSA as FENSA only inspect a small proportion of
installs whereas local authority building control inspect all installs
that they certify.


Replacement windows from April 2002 have to comply with the Building
Regulations' requirements for thermal efficiency, and have to be no
worse in terms of other requirements than they were previously. So if
the windows didn't have openings suitable for means of escape before,
there is no requirement to do so now. [IIRC there was a requirement
on installers to make sure that at least one window on a first floor
had a suitable opening, but this wasn't a requirement of the Building
Regulations. I think it may have been a bit of Trading Standards
legislation.]

With replacement windows, there are two 'routes' to complying with the
Building Regulations; an application to the local Council or having
the windows installed by a FENSA-registered installer.

With the first, the Council checks that the windows meet the
requirements, for a fee, and issues you with a certificate if all is
OK. With the second, the installer 'self-certifies' his own work (and
in theory issues a notice to the Council that he's done so, and should
issue you with a certificate). The Glass & Glazing Federation who
oversee the FENSA scheme should do spot checks to make sure that the
installers are complying, but this has nothing to do with any
particular installation, rather a check on the installers.

I don't know how much it costs to register with the GGF, but given
that a typical application to a Council costs about £50-70, then a
reasonably-sized company would quickly rack up a bill in the
£thousands in the course of a year if they weren't FENSA registered
(unless they were throwing the onus onto the householder, in which
case I would be asking for that money off the bill).

Whether you choose to make an application is up to you (like whether
you choose to pay road tax on your car), but it may come back to bite
you if you choose to sell.
--
Hugo Nebula
"The fact that no-one on the internet wants a piece of this
shows you just how far you've strayed from the pack".
  #7   Report Post  
DannyBoy
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

Hugo Nebula wrote in message . ..

With the first, the Council checks that the windows meet the
requirements, for a fee, and issues you with a certificate if all is
OK.


Can the certificate be granted *after* the windows have been fitted?

I'm tempted to fit my own but I don't want to pay an extra seventy
quid. Would rather risk it and get the cert if I get caught out.

Failing that, is there a date stamped on the windows anywhere?
  #8   Report Post  
G&M
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs


"DannyBoy" wrote in message
om...
Hugo Nebula wrote in message

. ..

With the first, the Council checks that the windows meet the
requirements, for a fee, and issues you with a certificate if all is
OK.


Can the certificate be granted *after* the windows have been fitted?


Once you removed the stickers quoting the U value you'll struggle to get
one. You could take photos of the units in place with the stickers on
perhaps, but I don't know if that will work. Note that the regs will be
tightened up again sometime in 2005/6 so if you don't declare before that
date it's likely you'll fail the new specs so won't get one anyway.



I'm tempted to fit my own but I don't want to pay an extra seventy
quid. Would rather risk it and get the cert if I get caught out.


You're lucky your council has a cheap rate for windows. Some still charge
at the full pro-rata whack.



  #9   Report Post  
Lobster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

Hugo Nebula wrote in message . ..

Replacement windows from April 2002 have to comply with the Building
Regulations' requirements for thermal efficiency, and have to be no
worse in terms of other requirements than they were previously. So if
the windows didn't have openings suitable for means of escape before,
there is no requirement to do so now.


Is this 'means of escape' rule the same for a property which is
rented? Or are the rules more strenous then?

If you do have a means of escape window, what are the rules about
height above floor etc; because presumably Building Regs are concerned
about toddlers etc opening them and plummetting from the first floor?

David
  #11   Report Post  
Owain
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

"Lobster" wrote
| Is this 'means of escape' rule the same for a property which is
| rented? Or are the rules more strenous then?

If you are renting a property to more than 2 unrelated people it is defined
as a House in Multiple Occupation and an HMO licence is required from the
local council. As part of the application procedure, your application will
be reviewed by the local fire brigade and you will be required to bring
means of escape up to a satisfactory standard as a condition of being
granted the licence. Current building regulations would not necessarily be a
satisfactory standard, as the benchmark standards for HMOs (or the version
adopted by your local council) may have a higher standard, to reflect the
higher risk of fire in an HMO.

If the house is a straightforward 3/4 bedroom 2 storey the requirements are
unlikely to be onerous. If the house is a 'double-upper' on the 5th and 6th
floors of a tenement, they may be.

That's my understanding of how the regs are applied in Edinburgh, which
publishes better information than most on its website.

Owain


  #12   Report Post  
Lobster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

Hugo Nebula wrote in message . ..
On 1 Jul 2004 06:38:04 -0700, a particular chimpanzee named
(Lobster) randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

Is this 'means of escape' rule the same for a property which is
rented? Or are the rules more strenous then?

If you do have a means of escape window, what are the rules about
height above floor etc; because presumably Building Regs are concerned
about toddlers etc opening them and plummetting from the first floor?


It's for any property.

For new work, a window opening should be no lower than 800mm above the
floor (600mm for rooflights in loft conversions). Restrictors to keep
the window from opening no more than 100mm are often acceptable if the
opening is lower. Again, there are no continuing powers with the
Building Regulations, so if the existing window doesn't comply with
the latest requirements for openings, there's no obligation to
upgrade.


Well well... this is purely a coincidence, but the BCO came round
today to check on something unrelated (handrail on the staircase), and
we agreed she'd be back next week for a final check and to issue the
completion certificate. She's been round probably 5 or 6 times in
all, over the past 3 months or so. I didn't even mention windows
today, but this evening I got an email from her as follows:

"I am sorry to inform you that following my site inspection on 2nd
July 2004 it came to my attention that the current first floor bedroom
windows to both properties do not comply with recommended 'means of
escape windows' as stated in Approved Document B. I know you are
nearing the end of the project but as the work being undertaken is
classed as a 'material change of use', means of escape windows will be
necessary. The theory behind it would be if their was a fire in the
kitchen in one property and the lounge in the other the alarm was
raised but the staircase was full of smoke the only alternative escape
would be the bedroom windows. I do realise the inconvenience this will
cause, in either case of renting the properties or selling them, the
requirement will still be the same. I have attached the section of
Approved Document B that gives the means of escape window dimensions
and locations."

My project (which I've asked many questions about here!) is
reinstating two small 1900's terraced houses from one (they had been
knocked together into a single house about 30-40 years ago I think).
Is that why she's talking about 'material change of use'?? It had
been my understanding, in agreement with Hugo's post above, that the
rules did not apply retrospectively and that the windows were fine as
is. Anyone got any ideas or comments?

As I mentioned in a post a few weeks back, this is really doing my
head in. Last time the BCO was round she came up with the need for
interlinking the smoke alarms and an extractor fan for the kitchen
(after the plasterer had been and gone). And now this... I'd had a
builder in, with a scaffolding tower, about two months ago installing
another window and door, which would have been the ideal time to do
this work. As it is, I've now reached the decorating stage in the
rooms concerned. I can only wonder what else she'll come up with...
:-(

David
  #13   Report Post  
Hugo Nebula
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

On 2 Jul 2004 12:37:07 -0700, a particular chimpanzee named
(Lobster) randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

My project (which I've asked many questions about here!) is
reinstating two small 1900's terraced houses from one (they had been
knocked together into a single house about 30-40 years ago I think).
Is that why she's talking about 'material change of use'?? It had
been my understanding, in agreement with Hugo's post above, that the
rules did not apply retrospectively and that the windows were fine as
is. Anyone got any ideas or comments?

Ah, the penny drops. Changing a building to create a greater or
_lesser_ number of dwellings than previously is a "material change of
use", and as such pretty much all of the requirements apply. This
includes the means of escape in case of fire.

It sounds like you have received less than exemplary service from, I
suspect, a trainee BCO who may be unsure of the requirements herself.
We've all got to learn sometime (as you are also learning about the
Regulations as you carry out the work), and maybe you've been putting
her on the spot to say whether something is right or not when she
needs to take advice. Maybe you are a bit intimidating, and she feels
she can't tell you that something needs to be done to your face. I
don't know; I'm only seeing a very small part of the picture here.

As I mentioned in a post a few weeks back, this is really doing my
head in. Last time the BCO was round she came up with the need for
interlinking the smoke alarms and an extractor fan for the kitchen
(after the plasterer had been and gone). And now this... I'd had a
builder in, with a scaffolding tower, about two months ago installing
another window and door, which would have been the ideal time to do
this work. As it is, I've now reached the decorating stage in the
rooms concerned. I can only wonder what else she'll come up with...


Ask her (in the form of a letter or e-mail) to state the applicable
requirements that your work needs to comply with, and wherever
possible, ways of meeting them. Don't however expect Building Control
to design your work for you; that's what an architect or surveyor is
for.
--
Hugo Nebula
"If no-one on the internet wants a piece of this, just how far from the pack have you strayed?"
  #14   Report Post  
Lobster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

Hugo Nebula wrote in message . ..
On 2 Jul 2004 12:37:07 -0700, a particular chimpanzee named
(Lobster) randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

My project (which I've asked many questions about here!) is
reinstating two small 1900's terraced houses from one (they had been
knocked together into a single house about 30-40 years ago I think).
Is that why she's talking about 'material change of use'?? It had
been my understanding, in agreement with Hugo's post above, that the
rules did not apply retrospectively and that the windows were fine as
is. Anyone got any ideas or comments?


Ah, the penny drops. Changing a building to create a greater or
_lesser_ number of dwellings than previously is a "material change of
use", and as such pretty much all of the requirements apply. This
includes the means of escape in case of fire.


Hmm, that would appear to be that then...

It sounds like you have received less than exemplary service from, I
suspect, a trainee BCO who may be unsure of the requirements herself.


I think she's the boss of her dept actually!

We've all got to learn sometime (as you are also learning about the
Regulations as you carry out the work), and maybe you've been putting
her on the spot to say whether something is right or not when she
needs to take advice. Maybe you are a bit intimidating, and she feels
she can't tell you that something needs to be done to your face. I
don't know; I'm only seeing a very small part of the picture here.


What, me intimidating?! To be honest I think we've always got on very
well; we've talked through quite a few issues and come up with
acceptable solutions, and I've been nothing other than totally
deferential to her at every meeting - I'm well aware of the Power of
the BCO so have done my utmost to stay in her good books, and have
always implemented everything I've been asked to, smiling sweetly when
inside I've been screaming '****, ****, ****'! This is the first time
she's emailed me rather than talk to me direct; presumably she's
embarrassed about having missed this issue before.

But where will all this stop? Eg, one of the properties has an
original dogleg staircase up the middle of the building, with
triangular treads where it turns the corner, and only about 1.8m
headroom at one point; both of which would be obvious non compliance
with modern standards. The BCO commented on it herself and said that
as it was an existing feature it would be OK - makes me think these
decisions are made rather arbitrarily (in which case, isn't there any
right of appeal or something?)

If she were to change her mind on the staircase next week, I honestly
don't know how we would redesign things internally to accomodate a
modern version, but it would be a huge issue impacting on every room
in the building, and involving moving loadbearing walls etc, and would
make the whole project non-viable, especially at this late stage.
Scary.

Regarding the window issue - one of the two windows in question is
actually already opens fully, inwards (I don't think she realises)
although it's a bit too low for current regs, at about 600 or 700 mm.
Rather than replacing the window having bricked up the bottom, is it
satisfactory to attach some form of barrier (a couple of steel rails
or something?) to the outside of the house to raise the effective
height? I'd like to be able to go back to my 'friend' with a possible
solution.

Ask her (in the form of a letter or e-mail) to state the applicable
requirements that your work needs to comply with, and wherever
possible, ways of meeting them. Don't however expect Building Control
to design your work for you; that's what an architect or surveyor is
for.


Are you saying I should ask her for a definitive written list of
whatever else needs doing, or just pertaining to the windows? If the
former, would that actually carry any weight if there are any more
changes of mind?!

I did actually have an architect involved at the early stages, he
submitted the planning application, and I used the same plans for the
Building Control application. As the architect had said there was no
need to apply retrospective buildings standards (which weren't shown
on the plans) I didn't feel the need to use him for building control,
as it all seemed pretty straightforward. Yeah, right. (I did the work
under a building notice though, rather than full plans submission,
although I did send in the architect's drawings along with the
submission.)

Sorry, I've gone on a bit there!

David
  #15   Report Post  
Hugo Nebula
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

On 3 Jul 2004 03:25:17 -0700, a particular chimpanzee named
(Lobster) randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

I think she's the boss of her dept actually!


Really! IME, bosses rarely go out on site. If she is experienced,
then you should expect consistency, and, if you've been forthcoming
with your proposals, she should have been aware of areas which were
likely to be problematic before they occured.

But where will all this stop? Eg, one of the properties has an
original dogleg staircase up the middle of the building, with
triangular treads where it turns the corner, and only about 1.8m
headroom at one point; both of which would be obvious non compliance
with modern standards. The BCO commented on it herself and said that
as it was an existing feature it would be OK - makes me think these
decisions are made rather arbitrarily (in which case, isn't there any
right of appeal or something?)


Which is why it's probably best to get in writing confirmation of the
requirements (i.e., ventilation, means of escape, etc) that apply, and
what is reasonable to achieve that requirement (ie, to the standard of
a new dwelling, or no worse than previously).

The decisions aren't arbitary, in that the Building Regulations make
it clear whether or not any particular requirement applies to the work
you're carrying out. What is more a matter for interpretation is
whether something meets those requirements. For example, with a
change of use such as yours, the requirements for ventilation apply.
Therefore, you could be required to fit extract fans in all your
bathrooms and kitchens, trickle vents to all your windows, and
ventilation to the soffits of the roof. However, it could be argued
that it isn't reasonable to install trickle vents in windows if they
aren't being replaced for instance.

There is a right of appeal to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister,
but it's a bit of a convoluted process (see
http://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/grou...024943-06.hcsp)

Regarding the window issue - one of the two windows in question is
actually already opens fully, inwards (I don't think she realises)
although it's a bit too low for current regs, at about 600 or 700 mm.
Rather than replacing the window having bricked up the bottom, is it
satisfactory to attach some form of barrier (a couple of steel rails
or something?) to the outside of the house to raise the effective
height?


Certainly, provided that the remainder of the opening is sufficiently
large for means of escape (0.33m², with a minimum height or width of
0.45m).

Are you saying I should ask her for a definitive written list of
whatever else needs doing, or just pertaining to the windows? If the
former, would that actually carry any weight if there are any more
changes of mind?!


Well, it would certainly be harder to argue that you need to meet a
particular requirement if she's previously said not in writing. It
will also help to clarify matters.
--
Hugo Nebula
"If no-one on the internet wants a piece of this, just how far from the pack have you strayed?"


  #16   Report Post  
Lobster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

Hugo Nebula wrote in message . ..
On 3 Jul 2004 03:25:17 -0700, a particular chimpanzee named
(Lobster) randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

The decisions aren't arbitary, in that the Building Regulations make
it clear whether or not any particular requirement applies to the work
you're carrying out. What is more a matter for interpretation is
whether something meets those requirements. For example, with a
change of use such as yours, the requirements for ventilation apply.
Therefore, you could be required to fit extract fans in all your
bathrooms and kitchens, trickle vents to all your windows, and
ventilation to the soffits of the roof. However, it could be argued
that it isn't reasonable to install trickle vents in windows if they
aren't being replaced for instance.


So things could definitely get worse then! (As another example of her
inconsistency; you mention extractor fans in the kitchen - she's
already told me that in the house where the kitchen remains unaffected
I *don't* need to comply with that. Presumably they regard the MOE
issue as more serious?)

There is a right of appeal to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister,
but it's a bit of a convoluted process (see
http://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/grou...024943-06.hcsp)

Thanks, don't think I'll be going there just yet...!

Are you saying I should ask her for a definitive written list of
whatever else needs doing, or just pertaining to the windows? If the
former, would that actually carry any weight if there are any more
changes of mind?!


Well, it would certainly be harder to argue that you need to meet a
particular requirement if she's previously said not in writing. It
will also help to clarify matters.


Yes, I'll give that a whirl I think. My only slight concern is that
if I go all formal and ask for it in writing, she'll then go over the
place with a fine toothcomb to cover her back, and end up throwing the
book at me!

Many thanks for all your advice Hugo

David
  #17   Report Post  
G&M
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs


"Lobster" wrote in message
om...
So things could definitely get worse then! (As another example of her
inconsistency; you mention extractor fans in the kitchen - she's
already told me that in the house where the kitchen remains unaffected
I *don't* need to comply with that. Presumably they regard the MOE
issue as more serious?)



Did you submit full plans for this work at the start ? If so surely all
these plans showed things like windows, ventilation and the like, and the
BCO should have accepted/rejected these things then, not now.


  #18   Report Post  
Lobster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

"G&M" wrote in message ...
"Lobster" wrote in message
om...


Did you submit full plans for this work at the start ? If so surely all
these plans showed things like windows, ventilation and the like, and the
BCO should have accepted/rejected these things then, not now.


No, did it under a building notice. I'd been led to believe by the
architect who was advising us at the time that this would be fine
since there would be no need for retrospectively applying the
regulations as it was an old property; the building notice therefore
referred to the reinstatement of the two original properties from one,
with specific mention of the two or three specific items which needed
BCO approval (we thought) - new doorways, new kitchen and bathroom in
one house etc. With hindsight, the full plans route would have been
better (and it might have been appropriate for the BCO to point that
out at the point of submission IMHO!)

David
  #19   Report Post  
MBQ
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

(Lobster) wrote in message . com...
"G&M" wrote in message ...
"Lobster" wrote in message
om...


Did you submit full plans for this work at the start ? If so surely all
these plans showed things like windows, ventilation and the like, and the
BCO should have accepted/rejected these things then, not now.


No, did it under a building notice. I'd been led to believe by the
architect who was advising us at the time that this would be fine
since there would be no need for retrospectively applying the
regulations as it was an old property; the building notice therefore
referred to the reinstatement of the two original properties from one,
with specific mention of the two or three specific items which needed
BCO approval (we thought) - new doorways, new kitchen and bathroom in
one house etc. With hindsight, the full plans route would have been
better (and it might have been appropriate for the BCO to point that
out at the point of submission IMHO!)


Why? How is the BCO supposed to know what you didn't include on the
building notice? She's only doing her job if she then tells you to put
right things you didn't mention that come within her remit. I wouldn't
expect her to spot things she's not looking for (or you haven't done
yet) on each visit. Hence you get the constant dripfeed of
instructions to put thing right. Come clean now with everything else
you haven't told her about and life will be a lot easier.

MBQ
  #20   Report Post  
Lobster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

(MBQ) wrote in message . com...
(Lobster) wrote in message . com...
"G&M" wrote in message ...
"Lobster" wrote in message
om...


Did you submit full plans for this work at the start ? If so surely all
these plans showed things like windows, ventilation and the like, and the
BCO should have accepted/rejected these things then, not now.


No, did it under a building notice. I'd been led to believe by the
architect who was advising us at the time that this would be fine
since there would be no need for retrospectively applying the
regulations as it was an old property; the building notice therefore
referred to the reinstatement of the two original properties from one,
with specific mention of the two or three specific items which needed
BCO approval (we thought) - new doorways, new kitchen and bathroom in
one house etc. With hindsight, the full plans route would have been
better (and it might have been appropriate for the BCO to point that
out at the point of submission IMHO!)


Why? How is the BCO supposed to know what you didn't include on the
building notice? She's only doing her job if she then tells you to put
right things you didn't mention that come within her remit. I wouldn't
expect her to spot things she's not looking for (or you haven't done
yet) on each visit. Hence you get the constant dripfeed of
instructions to put thing right. Come clean now with everything else
you haven't told her about and life will be a lot easier.


Come clean with what exactly? I'm hiding nothing. The point is I'd
been led to believe that I wasn't going to have to update the
properties to modern buildings standards, therefore I only included
things in the building notice that I thought needed mentioning, as
listed above. I'd have thought that if that was wrong, then the fact
that I also included "conversion of one property into two" might have
been a big red flag for Building Control to say "Oi!" at the outset
(or maybe after the first 3 or 4 visits?) if they disagreed with this.

David


  #21   Report Post  
G&M
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs


"Lobster" wrote in message Did you
submit full plans for this work at the start ? If so surely all
these plans showed things like windows, ventilation and the like,

and the
BCO should have accepted/rejected these things then, not now.

No, did it under a building notice. I'd been led to believe by the
architect who was advising us at the time that this would be fine
since there would be no need for retrospectively applying the
regulations as it was an old property; the building notice therefore
referred to the reinstatement of the two original properties from one,
with specific mention of the two or three specific items which needed
BCO approval (we thought) - new doorways, new kitchen and bathroom in
one house etc. With hindsight, the full plans route would have been
better (and it might have been appropriate for the BCO to point that
out at the point of submission IMHO!)


Why? How is the BCO supposed to know what you didn't include on the
building notice? She's only doing her job if she then tells you to put
right things you didn't mention that come within her remit. I wouldn't
expect her to spot things she's not looking for (or you haven't done
yet) on each visit. Hence you get the constant dripfeed of
instructions to put thing right. Come clean now with everything else
you haven't told her about and life will be a lot easier.


Come clean with what exactly? I'm hiding nothing. The point is I'd
been led to believe that I wasn't going to have to update the
properties to modern buildings standards, therefore I only included
things in the building notice that I thought needed mentioning, as
listed above. I'd have thought that if that was wrong, then the fact
that I also included "conversion of one property into two" might have
been a big red flag for Building Control to say "Oi!" at the outset
(or maybe after the first 3 or 4 visits?) if they disagreed with this.


The commencement meeting with your BCO when he walks around with you going
through the list of jobs on the plan you supply with a building notice would
normally catch most of the missed things on the list, and also things you
may have put on that don't need to be. But a building notice submission
does make you fully responsible for meeting the regs, not him.

Unfortunately as we see even on this group, different people interpret those
regs very differently.


  #22   Report Post  
Hugo Nebula
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

On 6 Jul 2004 15:20:28 -0700, a particular chimpanzee named
(Lobster) randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

Come clean with what exactly? I'm hiding nothing. The point is I'd
been led to believe that I wasn't going to have to update the
properties to modern buildings standards, therefore I only included
things in the building notice that I thought needed mentioning, as
listed above. I'd have thought that if that was wrong, then the fact
that I also included "conversion of one property into two" might have
been a big red flag for Building Control to say "Oi!" at the outset
(or maybe after the first 3 or 4 visits?) if they disagreed with this.


It's not for Building Control to assess whether or not an applicant is
cogniscent of the implications of their proposals, both legally and
'morally'. For the applicant, ignorance is no defence.

Your gripe seems to be against the Building Control Officer, when you
should perhaps be directing more of your ire against the architect who
advised you wrongly that your proposals amounted to no more than
alterations when a quick read of the Regulations would have made it
clear that it was a change of use. Building Control is not here to
bail out those who have been given poor advice or no advice at all.

In my experience, there are those people who will listen to advice,
and there are those who crash on regardless despite the clear warnings
that what they are doing is wrong or could lead to problems. You'll
have to take a look at yourself to decide which type you are.
--
Hugo Nebula
"If no-one on the internet wants a piece of this, just how far from the pack have you strayed?"
  #23   Report Post  
Lobster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Query;Upvc DG and building regs

Hugo Nebula wrote in message . ..
On 1 Jul 2004 06:38:04 -0700, a particular chimpanzee named
(Lobster) randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

Is this 'means of escape' rule the same for a property which is
rented? Or are the rules more strenous then?

If you do have a means of escape window, what are the rules about
height above floor etc; because presumably Building Regs are concerned
about toddlers etc opening them and plummetting from the first floor?


It's for any property.

For new work, a window opening should be no lower than 800mm above the
floor (600mm for rooflights in loft conversions). Restrictors to keep
the window from opening no more than 100mm are often acceptable if the
opening is lower. Again, there are no continuing powers with the
Building Regulations, so if the existing window doesn't comply with
the latest requirements for openings, there's no obligation to
upgrade.


I'm still sorting out my MOE windows (as in how many I have to fit)...
on that note, Hugo, I remember the following quote from another
thread(!)....

Hugo Nebula wrote in message . ..
Perhaps you should have just nodded your head and lied. It's a little
game we have to play sometimes, like, "Have you put a cavity tray in
above the new lean to roof?" "No, it's too fiddly and time consuming."
"Wrong answer, try again".


I asked my BCO whether I needed an MOE in the second upstairs room as
well, and she said, "No, not so long as it's not a bedroom, otherwise
you would". As the room is pretty obviously bedroom-sized, I strongly
think she's doing a Hugo here! My question is, if I play along, call
this a storeroom, and get the buildings reg certificate issued on the
property; would this bite me on the backside later? As in, could I
then not legitimately sell or let the place as a 2-bedroom house?
(and presumably I could be liable in the future if somebody managaged
to get trapped and fried in that room?)

Thanks
David
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Part L Building Regs Tim Jenkins UK diy 14 June 2nd 04 02:18 PM
Building regs re new structures troubleinstore UK diy 14 May 27th 04 09:59 AM
Building regs: 30 mins fire resistance Ben Schofield UK diy 6 February 16th 04 11:21 AM
Adherence to Building Regs... or not? Lobster UK diy 14 January 24th 04 10:15 AM
Taking out a wall and building regs... Adam UK diy 8 August 21st 03 11:39 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:50 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"