Building control gone mad?

[Richard_C]

. I'm not allowed to replace the wooden single glazed windows in one of my flats with double glazing because it's grade 2 listed.

Isn't that the planning department, conservation officer bit? Planning is about what you are allowed to do, building control is about doing it right.

 

[MikeJhn]

Please excuse this drunken ramble vaguely on the topic.

I'm a landlord - how I hate that term

Building control necessary as it is sucks at times. I'm not allowed to replace the wooden single glazed windows in one of my flats with double glazing because it's grade 2 listed. It doesn't matter how good a quality window, or how ascetically pleasing it may be, so my tenants are stuck with ever increasing heating bills, I may not be allowed to rent out the flat if legislation dictates a minimum thermal efficiency ( as it should ). I have the money, want to spend it on this improvement - not a tax deductible expense but I'm not allowed to, as presumably it would damage the built environment. Rant over - please feel free to go back to your thread

The council preservation officer will not prevent double glazing being put into a grade two listed building, but will prevent inappropriate windows being put into a heritage building i.e. UPVC, if the existing windows are of historical interest then they may prevent alteration, but secondary double glazing will be allowed, grade two listing is mostly about external appearance.

 

[sawtooth-9]

This is a worldwide problem / issue
Building codes are supposed to ensure structures are sound.
So in Aus, you can build a timber home in a fire area - but you can't have stone recognised as a building material ,by our building code. You have to "pretend " it is brick - do a double skin and insulate between the layers !!!
I am all for sensible building practice but this is just plain STUPID - thought up by a bunch of wankers.
I wonder whether Windsor Castle would meet current building codes ?
The same question applies to the Queen Victoria building in the Sydney CBD.

 

[Jameshow]

Please excuse this drunken ramble vaguely on the topic.

I'm a landlord - how I hate that term

Building control necessary as it is sucks at times. I'm not allowed to replace the wooden single glazed windows in one of my flats with double glazing because it's grade 2 listed. It doesn't matter how good a quality window, or how ascetically pleasing it may be, so my tenants are stuck with ever increasing heating bills, I may not be allowed to rent out the flat if legislation dictates a minimum thermal efficiency ( as it should ). I have the money, want to spend it on this improvement - not a tax deductible expense but I'm not allowed to, as presumably it would damage the built environment. Rant over - please feel free to go back to your thread

That's a conservation officer issue not BC??

 

[Doug71]

Please excuse this drunken ramble vaguely on the topic.

I'm a landlord - how I hate that term

Building control necessary as it is sucks at times. I'm not allowed to replace the wooden single glazed windows in one of my flats with double glazing because it's grade 2 listed. It doesn't matter how good a quality window, or how ascetically pleasing it may be, so my tenants are stuck with ever increasing heating bills, I may not be allowed to rent out the flat if legislation dictates a minimum thermal efficiency ( as it should ). I have the money, want to spend it on this improvement - not a tax deductible expense but I'm not allowed to, as presumably it would damage the built environment. Rant over - please feel free to go back to your thread

The low sightline/thin DG units are normally accepted in grade 2 listed buildings.

 

[Lard]

I wonder whether Windsor Castle would meet current building codes ?

I didn’t know Lizzie was selling

 

[shed9]

The whole building control and qualified professionals is a bit of a misnomer in reality. As soon as the 'qualified professional' asks you what you want doing it legally becomes your responsibility to define the works. Technically speaking, the tradesman does what you ask not what the buildings regs define as it's the homeowners responsibility to comply.

Don't get me wrong, there are some very competent and decent professionals out there but a word of advice, get it in writing to any professional carrying out works on your house that you expect the work to comply with current building regulations and that if they feel that cannot comply then they should decline the works.

 

[MikeJhn]

"Professional" as in suitably qualified with a statute recognised body, i.e. RIBA an Architect, or MIStuctE Structural Engineer anyone with either of those qualification is under a legal obligation to ensure their work complies with current building regulations therefore taking the responsibility away from the home/building owner.

 

[shed9]

"Professional" as in suitably qualified with a statute recognised body, i.e. RIBA an Architect, or MIStuctE Structural Engineer anyone with either of those qualification is under a legal obligation to ensure their work complies with current building regulations therefore taking the responsibility away from the home/building owner.

On paper yes, in practice, meh not so much....

The responsibility always ultimately lies with the home owner in regards to building control.

 

[MikeJhn]

Not correct, the responsibility lies with the Architect who makes the building application and retains responsibility throughout the works until such times as new work is begun under a new planning application, but even then they are still responsible for the works carried out under the original planning application.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

I am not convinced that a black and white view of building regulation is effective.

Those who willingly comply with regulation will often take a responsible approach to the work, accepting professional advice and researching issues where they are less than confident. Regulation makes little or no difference to the quality of the work done.

The main risks to building or life arise where cost saving is all, combined with confidence to the point of arrogance about their ability to do the work safely. It is they who won't bother to get approval anyway.

 

[shed9]

Not correct, the responsibility lies with the Architect who makes the building application and retains responsibility throughout the works until such times as new work is begun under a new planning application, but even then they are still responsible for the works carried out under the original planning application.

See above ^.

 

[MikeJhn]

Building regulations are only there as a guide, if you can prove that what was carried out was above and beyond the requirements of the regulation that is acceptable in any investigation, this applies to all British Standards.

It is impossible to legislate for those that do not wish to conform to any of the statues.

 

[MikeJhn]

See above ^.

If you have any, check your Professional Indemnity Insurance which should state quite clearly how and when your responsibility starts and ends, mine certainly did.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

It is impossible to legislate for those that do not wish to conform to any of the statues.

Statutes?

 

[MikeJhn]

Damm predictive text.

Mind you I sometimes wonder about BC and the speed with which they respond, they may as well be statues.

 

[bansobaby]

Not correct, the responsibility lies with the Architect who makes the building application and retains responsibility throughout the works until such times as new work is begun under a new planning application, but even then they are still responsible for the works carried out under the original planning application.

I'm afraid not.

Since 2015 ALL construction work regardless of size, duration, man hours etc. comes under the CDM regulations.

Under CDM the ultimate responsibilities lie with the client, or their specifically appointed representative. This is primarily with regard to the aspects of the work relating to The Health and Safety Act and other related legislation, but also applies to matters such as planning, listing building consent and building control.

 

[MikeJhn]

Complete miss-interpretation of the CDM Regs, the Health and Safety Co-ordinator has only the responsibility for ensuring that the appointed persons under the CDM Regs co-ordinate matter in accordance with the CDM Regulations i.e. the Health and Safety at work Act, the Client has specific duties, but none of those relate to the Building Regulations, I know a little about them as I was a member of steering group seven that compiled the Regs in association with the HSE headed by George Ventris, I was also the London Chairman of the APS and sat on the main board for eight years.

 

[XH558]

Please excuse this drunken ramble vaguely on the topic.

I'm a landlord - how I hate that term

Building control necessary as it is sucks at times. I'm not allowed to replace the wooden single glazed windows in one of my flats with double glazing because it's grade 2 listed. It doesn't matter how good a quality window, or how ascetically pleasing it may be, so my tenants are stuck with ever increasing heating bills, I may not be allowed to rent out the flat if legislation dictates a minimum thermal efficiency ( as it should ). I have the money, want to spend it on this improvement - not a tax deductible expense but I'm not allowed to, as presumably it would damage the built environment. Rant over - please feel free to go back to your thread

My son lives in a flat where the facade is G II. Single glazed timber casements. Over the years owners wanted to upgrade to double glazed windows and the way round the issue was for the residents association to agree with planning, the style of fenestration to match the existing exterior. The units are double glazed 6/6/6mm and internally glazed. There is joinery company who do the replacements and it works perfectly. Quality job, all prefinished and they remove the old and install the new and it's all done internally. This is good news if you are on the 4th floor like my son as the scaffolding bill would be about £4k on its own.

 

[shed9]

If you have any, check your Professional Indemnity Insurance which should state quite clearly how and when your responsibility starts and ends, mine certainly did.

That's for legal cover, not the responsibility they have for your compliance to building regulations for your building. Indemnity covers you against legal action if your local planning authority serves a building regulation enforcement notice on you. It is meant to cover legal costs and all directly associated costs, it is not a document defining who is responsible for the building in question. Sure if you get any form of enforcement of any kind you can fall back on the policy to protect you, but you are the conduit in that enforcement, not the professional who sold you the Indemnity.

It is impossible to legislate for those that do not wish to conform to any of the statues.

What?