English Heritage approves uPVC? Surely not!

[ilikecobwebs]

Er, folks.....surely this isn't true?

http://www.yeswindow.co.uk/products/pvc.php

Vertical Sliding

Our Heritage vertical sliding box sash windows are beautiful and look exactly like the traditional windows. Developed with English Heritage these frames are the only PVCu windows to be agreed into grade 2 listed buildings."

Dont tell me the b*****ds have capitulated to pressure?

 

[Stephen]

I have asked contacts at EH and when I have a reply I will let you know.

Stephen

 

[Penners]

Oh dear...

 

[ilikecobwebs]

I have an email ready to go off, myself, but thought I would post here first for opinions, and before jumping in with both feet; knowing how well-informed most of the hard-core members are.
If it is true.....I weep. We would stand no chance of ever protecting our heritage.

 

[Stephen]

Am still awaiting final confirmation but the Email exchange today indicates that EH has never been involved with this company. My information is that EH are now pursuing this company. Thanks therefore for the heads-up on it.

EH do not sponsor or support any specific products and if you ever see a manufacturer making such a claim it is not true.

Stephen

 

[Gareth Hughes]

Given the number of unsuitable windows that do get into listed buildings, I wish this part of the sentence was true:

these frames are the only PVCu windows to be agreed into grade 2 listed buildings.

(Mind you, I wish that part of the sentence was also grammatical)

 

[jocelyn plummer]

I saw an advert making those claims a while ago, I think it was in one of the glossy house mags, couldn't believe it.

 

[ilikecobwebs]

"My information is that EH are now pursuing this company. Thanks therefore for the heads-up on it."

Well, I'm pleased to know that; I would not have wished to cancel my EH membership in protest, which I would have done without hesitation. I dont post on here often, just busy with life's stuff, but I know that there's a good knowledge bank to come to, about old properties.

 

[Penners]

I know that there's a good knowledge bank to come to [here], about old properties.

And a core of real professionals who can take action on matters such as this one.

Very well done for bringing it up. Let's hope the company gets the book thrown at them.

 

[Flyfisher]

. . . and the plastic window they claimed was installed with EH approval :!:

 

[biffvernon]

EH do not sponsor or support any specific products and if you ever see a manufacturer making such a claim it is not true.

Stephen

A few years ago I entered into a correspondence with the then boss of EH (or at least his secretary) over some paint that EH had endorsed. I seem to recall our exchange ended with him saying the matter would be reviewed.

Take a look at this:
http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/book-and-buy/partner-products/house-and-garden/paint/
and
http://www.thelittlegreene.com/

If that isn't sponsorship or support for a specific product then I'm a banana.

 

[Schoolmarm]

Ahh, I see. So as long as you pledge to pay a percentage, for each can sold, to EH it is ok. :lol: :lol:

 

[worms]

Interesting that EH also endorses a particular source of wine!

 

[Penners]

Well, in fairness that's a bit different. The wine page appears under "Partners" on the EH website, and makes no claim that EH endorses their product. But it does provide a little much-needed money for EH.

It's not really much different from B&Q advertising in the Daily Bugle - it doesn't mean that the Bugle endorses B&Q products.

 

[Stephen]

A little bit of an update.

It seems this company get their windows manufactured by another company who were the ones that had claimed to have them accepted by EH (or whatever term they used).

From what I can gather so far EH is often asked for advice on period detailing and of course they give this advice freely in the hope that it encourages people to do the right thing when repairing, etc. However, in the case of manufacturers they then use it to make a product, which may or may not be reasonably accurate in terms of detailing. What EH seem to have little control over is how the manufacturer then markets the product. I understand that they do regularly have situations where claims are made that are far removed from what actually happened. It may be that in this instance the fact that EH provided some information on period details was then taken to mean that in some way EH 'endorsed' the product. This is not so and EH are now pursuing the matter. They are grateful when this sort of thing is brought to their attention.

There are however some situations where EH may have been more involved in the research and production of the product for various reasons - not least of which is trying to ensure suitable products are available on the market for those wishing to undertake appropriate works. I am not saying whether it is right or wrong for such EH involvement, but in some instances the mention of EH involvement is accurate. Bear in mind that EH do have a research section and will therefore be interested in 'new' products coming onto the market.

Whether such modern products (e.g. these windows) are suitable is first and foremost for the Local Authority who have to make the decision on LBC being given (or not). As we all know this results in a wide variety of attitudes and therefore in some districts such windows might be deemed acceptable and in others not. EH only get involved in London or on Grade I & II* matters outside London. Therefore the majority of applications and cases involving windows would not normally come to the attention of EH.

This may prompt yet more debate on the wider issues it raises, but I hope it helps explain what is happening regarding the initial matter.

Stephen

 

[Penners]

Many thanks for the update, Stephen - very interesting.

Do you not think that EH should simply ensure that they have a legally constructed disclaimer, which is attached to any advice that they might give to commercial organisations, on matters of period detailing? To neglect this would, quite frankly, seem naive.

I'm no lawyer, but surely they should be making their position clear by saying something like:

"Where possible and appropriate, English Heritage may from time-to-time provide advice on period detailing to manufacturers who seek to emulate period design in their products. Such advice is, however, offered informally, and does not constitute any form of endorsement of any product by English Heritage. Commercial claims of such endorsement are strictly prohibited. Infringements of this prohibition will render the offender liable to pursuit by English Heritage of legal redress."

 

[Flyfisher]

I entirely agree about the disclaimer.

However, even if such a thing was in place but subsequently broken, what would be a practical form of legal redress, given that EH is not a commercial organisation. I'm sure EH could sue for breach of contract, or somesuch, but what would be the actual damage? There would be no financial loss and, arguably, no loss of reputation - though how that could be assessed in monetary terms I have no idea.

Could it be one of those situations where someone/body is wronged but can do little in practice about it?

 

[biffvernon]

What will happen when English Heritage ceases to exist (it is on the ConDem list of quangos to go)?

 

[Penners]

arguably, no loss of reputation

I'm not so sure about that. If EH were "seen" to endorse products that are clearly not consistent with their perceived philosophy, wouldn't that damage their reputation?

 

[Flyfisher]

Yes, I agree with that point, but I was thinking more about some placcy-merchant defending themselves in court against such a charge. First, wouldn't it be difficult for EH to prove a loss of reputation and, second, how could such a loss be valued anyway since they are not a commercial organisation and so could hardly claim for something more tangible such as loss of sales? I guess the lawyers would be happy though.