Making new window openings, what's involved?

[Doug71]

Someone was asking me what could be causing the damp internally at the top of their window reveals.

I asked them a few questions about the windows and it turns out they were fitted about 8 years ago in new openings that were formed, the house is probably 20 years old. Apparently there were no windows in that end of the house originally but it looked out over some fields so they had some windows put in that elevation.

They said they were told by the builder they wouldn't need planning and they don't remember building control being involved

I'm not getting involved in this but just wondered what steps should have been taken to do what they had done and what work it would involve. I'm presuming at least planning and building control should have passed it off?

Should there be cavity trays above the windows, could that be part of the damp problem? Like I say not getting involved or even going to look at the place but would like to give them a few pointers as I expect it could escalate at some point, maybe when the end of the house falls down .

Thanks, Doug

 

[Woody2Shoes]

I think you're right. Building control should have been involved in the specification and construction of the new structural opening and the new window itself. The local planning authority would/should have a record of such. It's possible that planning permission could also have been necessary, if it's listed or in a conservation area etc.

The work would need a properly specified lintel to support the wall above the new opening, protected by a cavity tray (possibly with weep vents, to allow moisture to exit the cavity safely) - often just a piece of plastic DPM sheeting is used (but this isn't ideal), the cavity properly closed on the other three sides (to prevent moisture tracking across the cavity and to prevent "thermal bridging" from inside to outside - which can create cold spots which accumulate condensation/mould) (pre-made insulated cavity closers are available).

https://www.builderdepot.co.uk/ig-l1-hd-100-90-105mm-steel-cavity-lintel-2400mmhttps://creatingconstruction.wordpress.com/2017/04/23/a-guide-to-cavity-trays/https://www.insulationsuperstore.co...e-cavity-closers-and-how-do-you-install-them/https://1stassociated.co.uk/condensation-cold-bridging.asp

 

[Lons]

What woody said.
Building control needs to be involved whenever this type of structural alteration is made though unlikely to need planning consent unless at the front of the house. The only time they don't need to be notified is when replacing like for like or replacement via a FENSA or CERTASS accredited company.
I've been retired a few years so not up to date with current regs now so bear that in mind.

I came across this several times when I had my business and it's a typical cowboy job. The house owners will be asked some awkward questions when selling and will either have the offer reduced, sale cancelled or be asked to rectify the issue, they should have it inspected professionally.

 

[Doug71]

Thanks guys, I will pass that info on and yes a professional inspection would be a good idea, who knows they might find it has been done properly...........

 

[SimpleSimon69]

Sorry if this is a slight high-jack but this thread has got me thinking.
We are in the process of buying a new house that has had a ground floor rear extension that was done by a previous owner approx 6 years ago. (the current owners have only been there about 2 years)
There are records of planning permission being granted in 2015 but the current owners are saying it was done under PD and don't have any information on who done the work, when it was completed or if there is any guarantee. Their solicitors have provided an Indemnity Policy but I'm not sure how this may affect us moving forward.
So, with the above in mind, my question is this, even if they did go down the Permitted Development route (can't understand why if they had got planning permission) would they need to get this 'signed off' by Building Control and if so, how can I check this? This is a large extension to the kitchen across the whole width of the house so it is definitely structural and involved extending electrics and plumbing (not sure about gas).
Any insights or advice would be very much appreciated.
Many thanks.

 

[RobinBHM]

Sorry if this is a slight high-jack but this thread has got me thinking.
We are in the process of buying a new house that has had a ground floor rear extension that was done by a previous owner approx 6 years ago. (the current owners have only been there about 2 years)
There are records of planning permission being granted in 2015 but the current owners are saying it was done under PD and don't have any information on who done the work, when it was completed or if there is any guarantee. Their solicitors have provided an Indemnity Policy but I'm not sure how this may affect us moving forward.
So, with the above in mind, my question is this, even if they did go down the Permitted Development route (can't understand why if they had got planning permission) would they need to get this 'signed off' by Building Control and if so, how can I check this? This is a large extension to the kitchen across the whole width of the house so it is definitely structural and involved extending electrics and plumbing (not sure about gas).
Any insights or advice would be very much appreciated.
Many thanks.

Planning and building control are 2 separate requirements and have differing criteria.

however if you go to your local authority website and do a planning application search, you should be able to find any building control applications for the property. I think even the electrical certificate should be noted.

 

[Woody2Shoes]

Yes, building regs signoff would have been mandatory for this, and I'm fairly sure there is no time limit for enforcement. From a PP point of view, even if it was Permitted Development, a lot of people make a planning application for a 'certificate of lawful development (proposed)' which gives them written confirmation from the planning authority that the work does not require planning permission. Slightly weird but makes sense because the PD rules are complicated and contain traps for the unwary.
Looking at that app from 2015 you should be able to tell what type it was: full/householder or lawful devt proposed.

 

[Jake]

Yes, building regs signoff would have been mandatory for this, and I'm fairly sure there is no time limit for enforcement.

There is, 2 years for prosecution and 1 year for issuing a notice requiring rectification to standards.

 

[Woody2Shoes]

There is, 2 years for prosecution and 1 year for issuing a notice requiring rectification to standards.

Thanks, here's quite a good summary of the rules: Building Regulations Approval In Relation To A Residential Conveyancing Sale Or Purchase
Apparently though "Any contravention of the Building Regulations is a criminal offence. Under section 35 of the Building Act 1984..." Building Control enforcement policy | Shropshire Council

Interestingly, this link suggests that "...You cannot be served with a section 36 enforcement notice more than 12 months after the date of completion of the building work, but this does not affect a local authority's (or any other person's) right to apply to the courts for an injunction for the same purpose ..."
Which seems to suggest that - in an extreme case - there is no time limit on some kind of action. Welcome to the Building Control Partnership website

Also - if it's a listed building, there's no time limit - according to this: Planning Permissions and Building Regulations
"... However, be warned that there is no limitation period for enforcement action in respect of any breach of Listed Building control, so a property owner can be subject to enforcement action at any time, even if they did not carry out the alterations. Further, actually doing the work or arranging for it to be done is a crime. Tread carefully if you are planning to buy a Listed Building ..."

All in all, It's a messy area - especially when you think about things like Grenfell, and also the conflicts arising from attempts to "privatise" building control e.g.