Part L Building Regs

I wouldn't worry unless you're planning on selling in the near future. I doubt BCOs have time to wander the streets looking for dodgy glazing....

If you are just replacing the door, don't worry - it's probably better than the old one! If this is part of a project being overseen by a BCO, then ask his advice.

AIUI, this particular reg is only about 2 years old - so when you eventually come to sell the house, it will be very difficult for anyone to prove that it wasn't fitted before 2002 - unless the particular design of door was patently not available at that time.

These regs are largely cosmetic - so the UK government can claim it's doing its bit for global warming. Having a slightly non-compliant front door will make very little difference in the overall scheme of things - and you're very unlikely to get hounded by an over-vigilant BCO.

Snip No don't ask his advice that will only alert him to the problem!! Although it's better than the old door it would technically still be illegal oh and IIRC after a year (maybe two) they can't do anything about it anyway.. As advised to a builder friend by a BCO hacked off with trying to enforce all the new rules, " if the government thinks we are able to go out a look for every door and window changed they've no ******** chance"..

The Q

My understanding is that part L only applies to doors if the glazed area is more than 50% of the door and frame area. If I am correct your door falls outside the scope of the regulations

James

How much glass is in the door? From memory I think replacing a door only comes under building control when it is over 50% glazed.

Watching this thread keenly for definitive answer on the above.

If so, then wahoo - bin tacky white DG monstrosity, and lovely in-character-painted-wooden-door for us, then. And I'll be happy no regs broken.

If not, then best just employ a particularly slippery solicitor if I come to sell the place....

-- Richard Sampson

email me at richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

I can't find a specific reference for this in (certainly) the legislation or the Approved Documents.

However there are several industry references. e.g.

Personally, I'd bin the tacky monstrosity anyway :-)

All solicitors are slippery (the name is apt), in the same way that doctors practice - it's purely a matter of degree.

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

How about paragraph 2.2: "shall only be building work where that work consists of the provision of a window, rooflight, roof window, door (being a door which together with its frame has more than 50 per cent of its internal face area glazed),........"

Yep. Agreed. I missed that one.

Good.

The implication then, is to make sure that this is a standalone replacement and does not get wrapped up into anything else that would fall under building control.

Richard will be pleased because he can now have his proper front door and only need to employ semi rather than full scumbag solicitors.... :-)

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Hall" wrote | All solicitors are slippery (the name is apt), in the same way | that doctors practice - it's purely a matter of degree.

LLB vs MB ChB, you mean?

Owain

Ta everyone for the replies. Since the door seems to be in the "less than

Cheers.

If you measure it, you'll probably find it is probably around the 49.9% mark.

Christian.

How many buyers are going to ask about the U value of the front door?

How many buyers even know what a U value is?

MBQ

The possible scenario might come in a catch-all question in a buyer's solicitor's standard questionnaire which might ask a question about whether any controlled building activities had happened and if so, whether appropriate applications had been made.

A truthful answer to that, if the door had >50% glazing and had been installed since Apr 2002 would have to admit to same.

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl