FENSA

[SALI]

Hi

I had some Upvc windows installed in 2007. Just recently I was gathering quotes to get the few remaining ones fitted. The salesman told me that the windows that were already installed should have had lintels. Now, being a layperson, I would never have known the lintels were absent or were indeed required.

I contacted FENSA asking them to confirm and after a bit email exchange, the original company came round and confirmed that lintels should have been installed and that I would have to pay for this work to be done.

Now, foolishly I thought that using a double-glazing firm that was FENSA registered gave me some kind of protection against cowboys.

I may be deluded but my expectation was that the original company would rectify their failure free of charge, FENSA would check the work - and I in turn would put up with the inconvenience whilst this took place.

FENSA's explanation is that lintels should always be invoiced separately and as this was not done in my case, (how the hell was I to know), the company have done nothing wrong and are quite within their rights. Seems like FENSA offer the double-glazing firms a get out clause to me.

Two questions:

What could happen if I do not have the lintels installed and could this effect the value of my property if I sell?

Can I do anything to make the useless bunch of pen-pushers at FENSA take action to ensure that other people who have used the same double-glazing company are not in the same position?

Thanks.

 

[vv2806]

I booked to watch this topic, very interesting what the knowledgeable people would say. I am puzzled, for some reason I imagined that all the windows should have lintels, including your old ones. If they were not removed, how it happened that the new windows don't have lintels? What is your house made of?

 

[zebedee2001]

FENSA are next to useless. I had an issue with a window fitting company where the new windows caused the curtains to flap about when it was windy. They were not interested & where on the window companies side!

In your case the window fitting company should have sent a surveyor round who should have noted whether you needed lintels. If they said you didn't they were not doing their job properly & therefore sold you goods not fit for purpose. You therefore have rights to compensation etc through the sales of goods act etc.!

 

[^woody^]

FENSA registration only covers the window (or door) installation into an existing opening

Anything else of a structural nature - lintels, altering reveals, removing brickwork under a window to make a patio door etc, does not come under the FENSA scheme, and will require a separate application to the council for b/regs approval

Whether the existing openings actually needed lintels as opposed to them being desirable, is arguable. Likewise, whether the original company surveyor should have pointed this out, or whether he made an assessment that lintels were not required, depends on the circumstances.

The contractor may have had a duty to notify you of a lintel requirement, and if there is subsequent movement of the walls above due to his failure to warn you then he may be negligent.

However, if there is no damage (and no loss) directly attributable to the window replacement, then the contractor may not be negligent.

The lack of lintels will not affect the property value, but it may (or may not) get picked up on a pre-sale survey, leading to negotiation with the buyer

 

[SALI]

Well, the house was built around 1920 and is normal brick construction.

The uPVC windows were replacements, ie. existing openings. The old windows were wooden, although I cannot say whether these were original at the time of the house build.

The double-glazing (different company) chap who came to give me the quote was just able to look at the existing uPVC windows and say instantly that there were no lintels, but that there should have been. The double-glazing company who originally did this work have admitted that lintels should have been installed...but I'll have to pay and suffer the inconvenience.

FENSA will do nothing as they say that lintel installations should always be invoiced separately. How absurd.

I mailed FENSA to ask how many times in the last ten years this double-glazing company had been 'checked' by them and what they are going to do to try to manage other customers who may have had the same lousy service/workmanship. Their response was that they had never had negative feedback on this company, which I interpret as that they have never done any checks at all. The other customers who may be in the same position? Well, FENSA doesn't comment. Nothing like burying your head in the sand.

I have read - and it may be an urban myth - that consumers can pay upto £50 extra per window for a double-glazing company which is FENSA registered.

So what can I do? Take the double-glazing company to court? Expensive and time consuming. Perhaps put a notice in the local paper naming and shaming the company and advising anyone else that has used them in the past X number of years to get their windows checked out by a competent builder? Maybe that could be deemed libel.

It may be that I just have to pay, because I cannot risk the lack of lintels causing extra damage (God only knows where I'd stand on insurance) and the possible effect on the house price in a future sale.

I am learning every day how completely useless this country is when it comes to the bodies and organisations that should exist to protect and defend us.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Fensa window fitters have an obligation to inform you that if in the course of replacing a window in their opinion if the structure may be compromised they have a duty to inform you. That is as far as they need go. They are not obliged to pay for lintels or their installation. Unfortunately as mentioned in bold above realistically their response is down to their knowledge and customer service. In this respect the Fensa system is flawed. You could be entitled to compensation to pay for the inevitable additional expense of having the lintels sorted now (rather than at the time) only if you could prove they knowingly deceived you, how you could prove that is the tricky thing.

The following is fensa's official response:

Here is a guide below to what Fensa does, once the installer completes the installation he will register it and we will supply you with the Certificate of compliance.

FENSA is a self certification scheme for replacement window/door companies to register to self certify that the replacement windows/doors they install comply to documents L1 and N of the building regulations that came into force in April 2002 and that the following Building Regulations are not compromised by the replacement, A (Structure) B (Escape in case of Fire) F (Ventilation) M (Access and facilities for the disabled) K (Protection from falling, collision & Impact) J (combustion appliances and fuel storage).

This is as far as our remit goes; it does not cover any other aspect of the installation, or any workmanship issues

FENSA is not a Trade Association or relevant body.

Regards
FENSA Administration JT

 

[crank39]

You'd have to question the 2nd salesmans motives for mentioning that your other windows need lintels, why did they have to have them, whats wrong with the exsisting windows, is the brickwork all cracked above now, is he qualified to give this advice or was it just his opinion because i bet my bottom dollar his company WILL fit lintels in their windows and they'll gladly give you a price to do the others, thats just touting for extra business IMO.

Having been in pvc fitting and repairing trade for 20yrs and the last 10 as a service engineer i can catergorically tell you it is NOT down to the installers to fit lintels, this is part of your building structure and is not included in the fitting of windows, they are responsible for making good NOT making better

I do however agree that it should have been picked up at time of survey and you given a seperate price but thats in an ideal world, but they have not done anything wrong. If your brickwork was cracking before they did anything then why is it their problem or resposibility to fit you lintels for free, if it required lintels after they finished then surely it must of required them before

 

[SALI]

Well, I have read somewhere - probably on FENSA's website - that FENSA members have a duty to inform on other members where they think the quality of the work is sub-standard.

The brickwork is not cracking. The other double-glazing guy - and you are right he may well just be touting for extra business but then do I risk future consequences? - could see just by looking that the lintels were missing. He also suggested it may well effect the value of the property, something which FENSA have conceded in their evasive, non-committal way.

I also think I read somewhere that the rules on lintels changed in 200?.

The flakey double-glazing company are agreeing that lintels should have been installed. There is no dispute that they got in wrong back in 2003. My bug bear is that they are making me pay for this, whilst I suffer the inconvenience the work will entail.

I'm going to ask the company for the original surveyor's report and take it from there. I have already written to the council's building regs dept, but they just informed me that they are setting up a recommended company list, a bit like CheckaTrade. However, what we really need is somebody to champion the consumer when they receive sub-standard service or workmanship.

 

[SALI]

Well, it seems I am not the only one who thinks double-glazing companies should be accountable when they fail in their profession.


http://www.ask-questions.com/yabbse/showthread.php?t=1403

Hopefully, I'll have the same luck.

 

[crank39]

My bug bear is that they are making me pay for this, whilst I suffer the inconvenience the work will entail.

They'd of wanted you to pay for them originally anyway and you would of had to suffer the inconvenience as well

They would expect you to pay because this is an EXTRA so why do you think you should get them for free now?

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Well, it seems I am not the only one who thinks double-glazing companies should be accountable when they fail in their profession.

Nobody in this thread has disagreed with this. However you have not made it clear how your existing heads are supported/why the lintels need replacing, why another window bloke thinks you need new lintels or why the installer should have known he must replace whatever is there etc etc. Or are the existing heads supported with magic? If you answer some questions we may actually be able to advise although it appears most of what we have said has gone ignored anyway.

As mentioned, please say why you think they should pay 100% cost of new lintels?

 

[SALI]

Apparently there are no lintels. Some 1920 houses were just built that way and the wooden windows were thought support enough. Now my house is supported by uPVC windows sans lintels and current building regulations seemingly consider this insufficient.

Now, forgive me but I was just hoping that a double-glazing company which was FENSA registered would offer me some peace of mind on the quality of their work - I was presumably paying more to avoid the cowboys and the incompetent.

I will have to take time off work whilst this work is being carried out, which should and could have been done at the time when the windows were originally fitted.

Furthermore, my property could have (in fact may have already, perhaps I should ask an independent surveyor to visit) suffered severe problems at some stage in the future.

I'm wondering whether the original company can be trusted to do a proper and professional job now anyway.

Yes, I absolutely think that the original double-glazing company should pay for the lintels to be installed free of charge. They messed up big time and this is the least they can do to make amends. What's really disappointing to me is that FENSA seem not to be interested in checking whether this company has failed in the same way on other jobs and the poor customer unaware may be sitting on a whole heap of trouble.

I'll close this subject now and pursue through the courts if necessary.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

You've not listened to a word any of us have said anyway.

 

[SALI]

freddymercurystwin. You need to be a less sarcastic. You obviously were not listening to me when I said that lintels needed to be installed - not replaced, but you pose the question:

"However you have not made it clear how your existing heads are supported/why the lintels need replacing, why another window bloke thinks you need new lintels or why the installer should have known he must replace whatever is there etc etc. Or are the existing heads supported with magic?"

I'm not pretending to be a double-glazing/building expert. You certainly are not either.

 

[^woody^]

Fighhhhhhhhtttttttttttttttt



FWIW, you don't even know if these openings actually need lintels - the outer skin may be tied to or supported off the internal lintel

To have any valid claim you must have suffered a loss. The brickwork is presumably still up, so there is no loss. All well and good if the original installer agrees to do some work as a gesture of good will, but if you tried to progress any claim to court, the onus is on you to prove negligence and demonstrate a loss as a result - and it seems that you wont be able to do this