rotten lintel (bressumer) bay window

[lubilu]

the upper bay window on our 1927 semi is tilting fowards and cracks are eveident in the bay wall both on the rendering and the inside wall, we have had the window compnay back who installed the UPVC windows 6 years ago back, and we also appointed our own strutural engineer, a joint meeting revealed the timber lintel ( bressumer) is completely rotten. The window company argue the lintel could not have been rotten at time of installation asthey would have asked us to replace it first, becuase cracks were made in the rendering and poorly filled in could water have leaked in and caused the lintel to go rotten over the last 6 years? Is there anything else the window company may have done to casue rotting to occur since installation? We are currently trying to get the window company to pay for all the remedial costs , they refute negligence, they want to put in a steel lintel, take off all the rendering and tie in the bay properly to the brick work, and obviously take out the window and out it back in. They are offering 50% split of the costs, Any idea what would be a ball part figure to do this job? Last question!
Should we take legal action and try and win in court, we have no legal cover as its over 6 years and we have been led to beleive we cannot claim under contract dispute ?

the bottom bay is fine and the pre window survey we had done demonstrates its okay but does show the cracks in the rendering and upper bay are all new. Advice on best way froward much appreciated

 

[Jon Maine]

As long as the offer of 50/50 is based on a realistic cost I would consider given the time elapsed and no definate pointer towards negligence on the part of the window company that this could be a fair offer. It could go on for a long time and cost a lot of money to persue legally and you may lose. 6 years is however a sort time for the rot to have taken hold so do examine the window companies work because if they had left something leaking to let moisture in that could be the problem. I suspect the lintel was already rotten but just not as badly when they installed the window. So as they are emphatic that it was ok 6 years ago if you can find trace of a leak which could have caused the rot you have more of a basis to persue them legally.

Could you hose the outside of their window installation down carefully avoiding the recent structural cracks to see if there is water ingress around the window?

Good luck.

 

[Cloudscape]

They are offering 50% split of the costs

I would bite their arm off. Get that in writing. :lol: It's likely that nothing can be proven either way. Who knows when the rot really started? I'd really think hard before getting 'legal'. That could cost you a lot more than the remedial work.

 

[Gareth Hughes]

The vertical members of the (presumably timber) bay window you had removed in order to install the plastic ones probably performed a structural function. The PVCu doesn't, and this has allowed the bay to sag away from the building, causing cracks to open up into which the rain enters, rotting the remaining timber.
If this is what has happened, then it's the responsibility of the window company, for carrying out work in a manner which ignored the structural role of the windows they replaced.

 

[Jon Maine]

What Gareth says is a very fair point too.

Have you got legal cover on your household insurance? If so give them a call and discuss it with them.

 

[Lime]

No idea how much because I've no idea of the amount of work involved.

Wooden windows of older houses give a great deal of support to their surrounding structure.
In bays they often support the ornamental stone/brick work and keep the piers upright too.

Not quite clear where the rotten bressumer actually is.
There will be at least two (large) beams spanning the house wall openings running parallel with and across the house wall (up and downstairs) where the bay is attached.
Several more in the bay itself.
Also can't work out how the rot will have caused the bay to move away from the house.
The brickwork of the house and the bay will have been supported by brickwork directly down to the foundation level while the wooden beams would be supporting only the brick and other building material directly over the opening.
How will that have caused the top part of the bay to tilt forward?

Also can't quite understand the separation of the upper bay from the house while the lower bay remains attached.
The lower bay supports the upper I would have thought.

The argument that the wood became rotten in such a short time since the new window installation is nonsense of course.
Either the wood was rotten before they put them in or they left the bays in such a bad condition that water caused the wood to rot.
Either way it was their fault.

That they have agreed 50% suggests they agree it is their fault but won't admit it.
The problem you have is proving;
a. That the rotten lintel caused the bay to move.
b. That the movement is not an on-going fault that existed before the windows were replaced.
Render is often used to obcure brick cracks.
c. That they should have seen the rotten lintel when it was hidden from view to them.

 

[Feltwell]

After 6 years I think you'll struggle to get more than a compromise agreement if you went legal, and you stand the risk of costs.

What Gareth says re UPVC window not giving enough support to the upper bay is very true, I have seen examples of it. Plenty of bays have been replaced with UPVC without problems (other than it looking damn ugly), I believe the lower window should be reinforced when manufactured, not sure how this is done - presumably some steel in the uprights - I'm sure the method varies by manufacturer.

Just be careful that you don't fix the symptoms and not the cause, i.e. if your bottom window isn't enough to support the upper then you will likely face problems again in the future.

UPVC isn't a popular topic on here, other than it being cursed as a blight on our nation's older buildngs!

 

[lubilu]

thanks for all the replies so far, no we cannot use house insurance legal cover as only covers contract dispute. We are waiting for a break down of the job costs, I then plan to get some quotes to see how they compare, I see everyones point regarding the chances of getting more than 50% if we went to court. I will make sure the issues regarding the bottom bay window being adequate to support are addressed in the remedial work. Will we need to get building inspector , can I insist on it? Take Feltwells pont re ugly Upvc, we nearly had timber frames, too late and costly now.

 

[Lime]

Will we need to get building inspector , can I insist on it?

The way the law stands at the moment the obligation is on you to contact Building control or for you to get the builders to contact them for you.
At the end of the day the buck stops with the householder.

 

[AMc]

If the window installer is FENSA registered then they can certify their own work as complying with building regulations without plans approval or an inspection.
Obviously this has its advantages for a good installer but it can also mean substandard work isn't inspected and problems can slip through. Even work inspected by building control can't be guaranteed to be perfect, short of laying every brick themselves there is an element of assumption.

If the window was originally installed under a FENSA self certification and you're now experiencing problems I would expect Building Control to take a interest. If I were you I would call your local Building Control dept and ask them what they think, my local officers have always been very helpful when I have called them.

In your position I would be looking very favourably on a 50% offer from the window company - I agree is suggests a degree of acceptance of liability, but on the other hand it may be the most expedient way to resolve the problem if you can afford it. I assume you've checked your buildings insurance doesn't cover the other half?

 

[Gareth Hughes]

If the window installer is FENSA registered then they can certify their own work as complying with building regulations without plans approval or an inspection.

Only in so far as the Building Regulations apply to the thermal performance of the windows. Windows aren't (usually) structural, but the bay window issue is a problem where the elements being replaced have a structural role, which the installers may not understand.

 

[AMc]

That's a distinction I hadn't spotted but it makes sense esp. in view of the Original Poster's problems

 

[Gareth Hughes]

If the window installer is FENSA registered then they can certify their own work as complying with building regulations without plans approval or an inspection.

Only in so far as the Building Regulations apply to the thermal performance of the windows. Windows aren't (usually) structural, but the bay window issue is a problem where the elements being replaced have a structural role, which the installers may not understand.

Ooops! it appears the requirements have changed since I last looked:

http://www.fensa.org.uk/faqtech.aspx#bay

Bay Windows

Bay windows are included in the FENSA Scheme. This means that FENSA registered companies are able to certify and must ensure that bay window installations meet Building Regulations and do not compromise the load bearing ability of the bay. Therefore all appropriate poles and spreader plates must be in place to ensure conformance.

Bay windows and inspection

Bay windows are included in the inspection process. During installation inspections will include checking for steel reinforcements and header and spreader plates.

 

[lubilu]

i am going to get the buidling control involved, just for peace of mind. The surveyor from the window company is up tomorrow to measure up. He says the bay is not tied into the brick work, and feels 'this hasn't helped matters' , hence they want to take all the rendering off tie it all in aswell as put in a steel lintel. Just waiting to hear how much it will all cost £5000, £10,000, £ 3000??? I really don't know . Thanks for your help