Building Notices

[David Hearn]

Yup - "Have YOU done any building work?" ... "Not known."... ;)

D

[Will Dean]

Quite. And of those that do, I suspect that there are a good number who don't care. That's going to be an increasing problem as the building regs seek interfere more and more inside people's houses.

I don't imagine I'm alone in the idea that building regs are fine when building an extension or making some major structural alteration, but are completely ridiculous for replacing a hot water cylinder or a window. For a start, the costs are utterly disproportionate for small jobs.

The whole system is going to be brought into disrepute, and everybody will end-up refusing to answer that sort of question during a house transaction. Then they'll be no way to distiguish between a dangerously erected roof and a window with insufficiantly ethically pure glass in it.

Infuriating.

Will

[Peter Taylor]

Will Dean wrote

No you're not alone Will. The idea, it seems to me, is to maintain minimum standards for new HW cylinders and windows etc through the self-certification procedure open to CORGI and FENSA registered contractors. That way the impact on the number of Building Regs applications submitted to the LA is minimised. But I've already come across two new window installations by FENSA contractors which seriously infringe the regs, and FENSA seemed totally disinterested in doing anything about it - indeed, they didn't seem to understand the Regulations themselves! I was forced to bring in the LA, and they asked me to report the problems to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. I think unless the procedure is tightened up, the FENSA certificate at least will soon become scrap paper.

We should have some sympathy for Local Authorities - I suspect they don't appreciate these new regulations either. They're under enough pressure as it is now they face private competition (thank you Maggie). All the big juicy projects go to tender for Building Control and LA's often lose out, leaving them with all the non-paying dross jobs the private sector don't want. Now they have to raise enough in fees to pay their way, there's only one thing they can do.

Peter

[Will Dean]

Is it really the case that building control departments have to be self-funding in their own right? Not that I think it's a particularly severe burden, as they've got a statutory right to demand the money, and the level of the fees has no particular impact in terms of negative publicity for anybody. Sounds like an easy way to make a living, really.

TBH, I would think that the increasing trivialisation of the building regs would be a boon to them - it must be an awful lot cheaper to inspect a hot water tank installation (no wellys required, check that it has a part L sticker on it and leave) than a lot of other things which are already in the same fee band. And of course, soaking DIYers is a lot safer than putting it on the council tax.

Will

[Andy Hall]

Exactly.

These forms contain all sorts of stupid questions.

We are just in the process of selling my late mother in law's house and for the most part we know that major works were not done. However, there are some questions where we genuinely don't know and have answered as such.

AFAICS it's then up to the buyer to decide whether they find that acceptable or want to check further. As long as truthful statements are made, I see no issue.

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[Tony Bryer]

No, because Approved Inspectors can set their own fees and turn away unprofitable work. A LA has to accept every application sent to it. When I was a BCO a disproportionate amount of time went into dealing with small works where the BCO might be the only person involved who really knew about building, whilst the bigger jobs (which obviously had a whole team of professionals) needed much less. Also (though I may be wrong) LA's have to publish their scale of fees and (officially) stick to it, whilst AI's can discount for jobs they want (big uncomplicated sheds for instance)

[Aiden]

Am interested to know how far back would one have been expected to obtain Building Notices?

We've lived in an old Victorian house for 20+ years and in the first

5years installed a boiler, had rsj's put in where structural walls needed removing, windows installed and have even had the roof reinforced. All major works were designed/supervised by a qualified Structural Engineer - but the Council were never involved; never heard of these things before now. Is this likely to affect us being able to sell the house - which we hope to do next year?

[IMM]

I think, if a CORGI fitter does a boiler change then no building notice, as he self certifies the installation. They take his word for. he doesn't need to contact them either.

In reality this is rather silly. Changing a boiler is in no way going to alter the structure of a building, as long as maker instructions were followed in flue siting.

[Andy Hall]

This is all connected with part L1 (energy saving) and part J (fuel burning appliances, in respect of safety).

jag+=2; is your informant here.

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[Peter Taylor]

Will Dean wrote

Absolutely. Not sure about every council, but I was told this by the head of Building Control at my local DC 2 weeks ago.

Tony has answered this point better than I could

Possibly, but I bet the small fees for such minor work don't cover the whole cost of things like admin and archiving etc. I reckon there'll be thousands of new cylinders installed without formal permission - have you tried buying a cylinder that doesn't comply with part L?

It would not be possible, let alone fair, to charge council tax payers in general for the cost of administering the Bldg Regs. It is a legal obligation, not a choice, to charge fees to applicants (The Building (Local Authority Charges) Regulations 1998). Secondly, with other major cost increases and possible rate capping to face, LA's have great pressure on council tax increases and very strict budgets to follow.

As I said, I think we should feel some sympathy towards LA Building Control departments at present. There are many impracticalities with the current system and often too much pressure for under-staffed departments to cope with, which I'm sure the eggheads at ODPM didn't foresee, and I wouldn't mind betting we'll see them giving the system another major shake-up before too long. In my view this should include making CORGI and FENSA etc legally responsible for making good any defective or non-compliant work wrongly certified by their members.

[Peter Taylor]

Aiden wrote

Aiden - I'll have a go at answering this although someone more knowledgeable, Tony or Hugo for instance, might know better.

There is no legal obligation to comply with new regulations or changes brought in after the work has been completed. National Building Regulations were first introduced in 1966. They certainly included structural stability, and the requirements for this aspect have not changed since then, or only very little. But the regs for unvented HW & CH systems I think applied from 1992 and the regs for replacement windows and boilers were introduced in April last year. If you had this work done prior to these dates you can truthfully say on the solicitor's enquiry form that Building Regs did not apply. Reinforcing your roof structure does not require Building Regs approval unless it was done as part of a larger project.

So, of the items you mention, probably only the removal of structural walls should have had permission at the time. Strictly speaking you should submit a Regulating Building Notice (with a slightly increased fee) and allow the BCO to come and inspect the work and your drawings and calcs. You may need to expose small areas for inspection if necessary. If all is well, and it sounds like it, then you should receive a formal Approval Notice, and this will put you in the clear when you come to sell.

Peter

[Hugo Nebula]

On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 21:21:24 -0000, a particular chimpanzee named "Will Dean" randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

The Building Regulations fees have to at least cover the cost of carrying out that work. There are other functions of Building Control which are not fee-earning and are covered by the Council's general budget (dangerous structures, for instance). In recent years, with the building boom, most BC sections are net contributors to the Council's budget.

The Local Authority's Building Control section has to compete with Approved Inspectors for most commercial and new housing, so the level of fees have to remain competitive.

In terms of the amount of inspections, there can be as much work in a cowboy builder's kitchen extension as there is in a multi-million pound warehouse run by a professional building company with site agents, site engineers, project teams, etc.

BC don't generally inspect HW tanks unless as part of other work. Replacement gas central heating is covered by the self-certification for CORGI installers.

With replacement windows as an example, it costs a certain amount in admin time to register an application, the surveyor has to visit the site to check that the installation is correct (or not), and more often than not, to get into a half-hour discussion with the d-i-y-er about why such an application was necessary in the first place (which can vary from "cos it's the law" to a treatise on the Kyoto treaty, the unfair burden for reducing CO2 emissions on house builders, and whether or not the government is in league with Pilkingtons and the manufacturers of Celotex). And all for a fee of around £50.

Speak to any BCO, and the thing they would fear and hate the most would to reduce their job to a mere collector of certificates. Most want to be out on site, wellies and all (although ask me that again in the middle of a drain trench on a sleety February Monday morning and you may get a different answer).

[Ed Sirett]

They'd have to get the fitters to fill in the forms first! The vast majority of replacment boilers I see don't have the log book filled in. However I'm probably seeing a skewed situation since I would probably only get called in to sort out a problem thus I see the worse end of the installations, with faults and no paperwork.

[James]

I am puzzled by this statement. I thought that as a DIYer if I replace a hot water cylinder, I am required to submit a building notice, to ensure it is certified to meet Part L of the building regulations. Your comment suggests such a stand alone replacement (where say the original has started to leak) will not be inspected by building control.

James

[tim]

my BCO more or less said this to me. He was of the opinion that the requirement for 'control' of replacement vented tanks was a big PITA.

tim

[Peter Taylor]

Ed Sirett wrote

This makes a mockery of the complete system doesn't it! If I get a CORGI-registered firm to put in a new boiler for me and don't get any documentation, am I in the clear legally as far as the Building Regs go? How am I supposed to prove it to buyers and their solicitors, or to LA enforcement officers come to that?

Peter

[Hugo Nebula]

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 10:55:52 -0000, a particular chimpanzee named "James" randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

Sorry, yes you're right. Shows you how often we get applications for replacement HW cylinders.

[Andy Hall]

I suppose what would there be to inspect?

- Is there a building safety aspect to this part of L1 (unlike unvented cylinders? No.

- Has the punter bought a cylinder to British Standard mentioned in the L1 Approved Document? Almost certainly.

- Has pipe insulation been fitted to the first metre or so of hot water pipe coming from the cylinder? Somebody's going to inspect for that?

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[Peter Taylor]

Andy Hall wrote

Is this intended to save energy? The airing cupboard is now effectively outlawed, so either the tumble drier has to be used for longer to dry things out thoroughly (which makes it difficult to iron them so the iron has to be used for longer as well), or ironing is hung on radiators to air, making the CH system work harder and causing condensation. And all the time this is happening the CH system is trying to make up for the ambient heat not being contributed by the HW.

Fortunately, at present the Regs don't prohibit removing the insulation once the installation has been certified/approved. How much energy does it take take to manufacture, store, transport, fix, remove, transport again and dispose of the insulation at the tip?

Peter

[IMM]

As all cylinders sold have to conform to Part L this appear total balls.