B52s

Just a wee update Nick, I followed through with your suggestion about the dummy cill and all windows look sooo much better now. The installer was quick to sort it out to my complete satisfaction. It's just a pity I had to go through the pain to get this done when this should have been included in the install, rather than having to get the installer back to complete the work properly.

Your point is noted Nick. We did have an amicable solution, it was me doubting the agreed solution that has prompted my post here looking for advice, and I'm glad I did. Thanks to you I can go back to the installer and advise that I have had a change of opinion and would like to suggest the uPVC dummy cill in lieu of the cement option. The installer was unable to proceed with the cement option because he was rained off and that's what gave me time to give careful consideration to what I had previously agreed to. This "thinking on your feet" business can disadvantage the customer (me) into agreeing to a solution in the absence of any independent technical advice. Thanks again Nick for your input.

Thanks for that Nick, that makes perfect sense. Not paid the installer yet, so still have a firm grip over him. The installer has been back and few times to sort out some other snagging issues, so he's a wee bit on the backfoot at the moment. The T&Cs are in my favour as payment is not due until the customer is satisfied. As I said above, the large installer has a proven track record in my area.

I'm looking for some advice to get the best technical performance and aesthetically pleasing solution to a problem, as I'm starting to lose confidence in the reputable window installer who may not be giving the best guidance and honest answers. I have recently contracted a local double glazing company (good local reputable installer), but I'm not happy with the actual install which has created a 25mm gap between the bottom edge of the uPVC window frame and the concrete sill. The previous timber uPVC windows had a discrete metal trim that fitted neatly between the window frame and the sill which made the windows aesthetically pleasing. The installer has given me two options; 1) Leave installation with the 25mm gap, which I'm told, will not result in water ingress as the window sits on the rear (concealed) raised edge of the angled sill inside the wall, albeit I think strong winds could drive rainwater under the uPVC sill, which is evidenced from 'capture 05' pic below. However, I'm also concerned about the impact this gap might create in terms of the thermal performance of the timber frame structure. Furthermore, the bottom edge of the uPVC window frame is straight where I would have expected this to be bull-nosed? Lastly, I just feel leaving a gap just looks bad. 2) At the moment, I have agreed to the second option, albeit I do have an opportunity to reverse this decision. The installer has filled the gap with expanding foam and it going to return with a builder to fill the gap with 25mm cement pointing positioned slightly behind the edge of the uPVC sill. I'm just not sure how this will look, but probably the best out of a bad situation? I'm increasing becoming concerned that what has been designed and installed (by the reputable installer) is not actually fit for purpose? Your thoughts on the best way forward would be very much appreciated, TIA

Thanks Gus Potter and ETC for your helpful input. I have received an updated structural drawing from the architect this morning (with revised Detail D1 and an elevation detail showing the flitch beam and goal posts). It would appear that things are now falling into place, if you can forgive the unintended pun.

Thanks Mr Punter, yeah, if the wider opening requires a flitch beam, then I can accept that. It appears to be over-engineered (in my opinion) but that seems to be the way of things in terms of today's structural design requirements. With regard to the Naylor lintel, I would have thought that the top of the doors might be better being been finished in timber cladding to match the existing window openings. See below photo showing the existing 1800 window which is to be replaced by the bifolds.

Guys, I could do with a bit of advice as I am doubting the structural details provided by my appointed Architectural & Structural Engineering Practice. My only point of contact is the architect who seems reasonable to deal with. The first issue I had was on Detail D1 (below) that shows a Naylot lintel across the top of the non-loadbearing block outer skin (timber framed house). The architect agreed with me that this was not required and said that this was merely a standard detail that has been added to the drawing by the SE and is not applicable in this situation. I can sort of accept that as a reasonable answer. The second issue was the location of flitch beam F1 positioned directly below the existing horizontal roof support (as shown in Detail D1). I pointed out to the architect that the flitch beam can’t be located below the existing horizontal roof support as this would be in conflict with the bifold door opening height. He said he would speak to the SE to see what could be done; I’m still waiting to hear back from him. He went on to say that the builder would sort this out on site, which puzzled me a little. However, in reflection, I’m now seriously questioning the reason for adding the flitch beam in the first place. The current 1800 window sits below the underside of the existing horizontal roof (truss) support as shown on the photo (below) of the existing arrangement. This opening is to be widened to 2850 to accommodate the proposed bifold doors. I can understand that 2 or 3 of the existing 95x45 vertical studs will have to be removed and therefore an alternative vertical support arrangement will be required, but surely this should not require the addition of a flitch beam, or am I being a proper “doubting Thomas” and should just accept that the SE knows best?, after all, structural calcs have been done which apparently support the need for a flitch beam with goal post supports. Any advice/thoughts would be very much appreciated.

Okay, that takes me full circle back to aluminium as suggested by JSH.

I don't think the concrete interlocked tiles are nailed down. It was my understanding that the tiles are merely laid (interlocked) on the roof? Because the gable end tiles are cloaked verge tiles I assumed that they were designed to suit various roof sizes and therefore will have a degree of tolerance/float to enable the cloaked verge tile to be positioned to suit each particular roof. But perhaps the interlocking tile profile does not provide the movement that I was expecting.

PeterW, I'm swinging back to your suggestion of moving the tiles. After doing a little digging I believe the tiles on the gable end are called concrete cloaked verge tiles. Do you think it would be possible to prise (drag) the tiles away from the current timber fascia board (gently using a bolster or pinch bar) by about 7mm to allow a 9mm uPVC fascia overcladding to slip underneath, or would I be in danger of stressing the tiles which might result in hairline fractures at some future date? Your further thoughts would be appreciated.

JSH, that sounds a good option that I hadn't considered! ...I would be grateful if you could you point me to any websites where I can purchase the required materials? I don't really want to cover the existing soffit boards, as over the 20 years + I have been in the house, they have shown no signs of deterioration, albeit I did re-paint them 2 years ago, although i didn't feel this was necessary at the time. I just want a returned lip on the over-cladding that returns about 20mm neatly under the bottom edge of the fascia board. PeterW, I don't want to touch the roof tiles as I feel this could lead me into problems that would be beyond my capabilities, also, I have this issue on all four of the gable ends so I feel this would be a mammoth task, for me anyway.

I'm looking to (DIY) install uPVC over-cladding on top of existing sound fascia boards in order to reduce future high level maintenance (re-painting every 3 years or so). I'm looking for some advice on how to finish off the over-cladding on the gable-ends where the over-cladding will butt against the underside of the concrete roof tiles. I see this as potential weak point which could result in rain ingress due to the uneven profiles on the underside of the roof tiles. I was considering a line of silicon mastic where the two surfaces meet, but I am not sure if this is the best way to tackle this issue, particularly given that mastic should be replaced every 5 years to maintain integrity, which seems to defeat my goal of having zero high level maintenance. For information, I have attached some photos which shows the existing timber facia and the underside of the roof tiles.

Just read an interesting article on US workforce fatalities. To para-quote; "The report also showed that 35% of all workers killed in 2015 were aged 55 or older. The largest federation of trade unions in the US said that over-65s were 2.5 times more likely to die at work than their colleagues".

Yeah, I have always been amazed to watch "good tackers" single handed fixing full sheets onto ceiling joists.

I believe "pressure" is being applied to plasterboard manufacturers to move to half sheet sizes, which again is sensible, but I understand this presents challenges in respect of modular timber framing, etc., ...but I'm sure it will happen in the fullness of time.

Pushing health and safety legislation firmly to one side... I recently had reason to reference Figure 2 below from 'Getting to grips with manual handing' a short guide by the HSE and thought self-builders might also find the diagram useful, as I feel, everyone tends to lift and move goods, building materials, etc. well beyond the weight limit guidance noted in the diagram. Might be of particular interest to those in their autumn years who suffer occasional back issues like me. Figure 2 Lifting and Lowering Use Figure 2 to make a quick and easy assessment. Each box contains a guideline weight for lifting and lowering in that zone. (As you can see, the guideline weights are reduced if handling is done with arms extended, or at high or low levels, as that is where injuries are most likely to occur.) Observe the work activity you are assessing and compare it to the diagram. First, decide which box or boxes the lifter’s hands pass through when moving the load. Then, assess the maximum weight being handled. If it is less than the figure given in the box, the operation is within the guidelines. If the lifter’s hands enter more than one box during the operation, use the smallest weight. Use an in-between weight if the hands are close to a boundary between boxes. The guideline weights assume that the load is readily grasped with both hands and that the operation takes place in reasonable working conditions, with the lifter in a stable body position. Twisting Reduce the guideline weights if the handler twists to the side during the operation. As a rough guide, reduce them by 10% if the handler twists beyond 45°, and by 20% if the handler twists beyond 90°. Frequent lifting and lowering The guideline weights are for infrequent operations - up to about 30 operations per hour - where the pace of work is not forced, adequate pauses to rest or use different muscles are possible, and the load is not supported by the handler for any length of time. Reduce the weights if the operation is repeated more often. As a rough guide, reduce the weights by 30% if the operation is repeated once or twice per minute, by 50% if the operation is repeated five to eight times a minute, and by 80% where the operation is repeated more than 12 times a minute.

In the screed, rather than below the screed? What is the screed depth?

CDM Principal Designer (Form of Appointment) The following must be read in the context that this is a legal opinion tendered solely to the person that requested legal advice. Another lawyer may of course offer a different legal opinion. However, I trust the advice goes some way to provide “comfort” in terms of the legality of using an APS Form of Appointment (FoA) on projects with domestic clients. As requested in the ‘Principal Designer Role’ topic (p9); I have obtained legal advice regarding the use of the APS FoA by domestic clients who wish to exercise their right (i.e. choice) under CDM 2015, to appoint a Principal Designer, rather than the duty falling to the designer in control of the pre-construction phase of the project. The lawyer advised: A “formal appointment” – could be anything in writing clearly stating who is being appointed in the Principal Designer role. However, it is best practice to cover the points in the FoA. There is no legal objection to tailoring the APS FoA to meet specific project requirements. It is a question of going through the FoA and agreeing what clauses should be omitted, added or changed, to suit the particular circumstances. Any changes should be signed or initialled by both parties. APS Form of Appointment (sample): http://aps.legallio.com/Documents/Agreements/83feca3a_4931_4221_8777_3d93fa1d8074.pdf

IP65 rated PVC junction boxes would probably be suitable (no resin filler required). I assume that you will be terminating the swa cables using appropriate swa glands and shrouds. I'm a little concerned about the flex leads provided with the spike lights - what voltage will be passing through the flex to the spike lights?

My view would be that "client" is defined as stated in the CDM2015 SI. “Client” means any person for whom a project is carried out. Yes, I will ask for legal advice on the application of the APS Terms of Appointment. This may take 30 days, but I will revert with a legal opinion.

Yes, the architect could do this. The outsourced PD service provider (organisation) would then become the default PD during the pre-construction phase rather than the role falling to the architect. This arrangement is not detailed with CDM2015, but it is accepted practice (i.e. acceptable to the HSE) and is entirely compliant with CDM2015.

It is quite normal for terms of appointment, contracts, agreements, etc. to be tailored to suit a client's specific requirements (even if it means "fine tuning the small print"). So long as both parties are in agreement with the "tailored adjustment" and then signed, this would be legally binding. Terms of appointment written by professional bodies like RIBA and APS provide maximum protection for domestic clients. On the other hand, a contract agreement scribbled on the back of a fag packet and signed will equally be legal binding, however, the terms of the contract (or lack of) might expose the client to significant risk. The use of the RIBA or APS terms of appointment provides comfort to the domestic client that the design organisation offering principal designer services meets with the professional QA standards set by a professional body, including having the necessary PI cover, etc.

The APS Form of Appointment as Principal Designer 2015 (digital copy) can be purchased from http://www.aps.org.uk/publications/aps-form-appointment-principal-designer-2015-digital?id=186 This is the recognised industry standard Form of Appointment between Client (commercial or domestic client) and Principal Designer. £12.50 Member / £15.00 Non-Member Apologies in advance if this is considered to be in breach of the BH forum terms of advertising, but I felt this important information was worth sharing as it may help self builders who require "comfort" in the process of appointing a principal designer.

I have attached a copy of the slides from the legal update provided by Gillian Birkby of Fladgate at the APS (Association for Project Safety) Conference on small projects that I attended in September. A keynote address was also delivered by Simon Longbottom of the HSE. There is not a lot of useful information in the slides particular to self builders. However, I did feel that one point worth noting was a "one liner" that appears on page 5. "Accurate Terms of Appointment". The "one liner" from the presentation does not give much away but the absolute requirement for accurate terms of appointment for principal designers appointed by domestic clients was highlighted by Gillian Birkby, Fladgate solicitor. I felt this was worth sharing, given the recent discussions on the BH forum in respect of the legality of appointments made by domestic clients. Gillian Birkby - Legal Update, Fladgate LLP.pdf

It is my understanding that self builders can appoint a principal designer if they so wish. As said previously, there are many reasons why a self builder would choose to exercise this right. The main reason appears to be that it is common place for architects working on domestic projects not to have the necessary CDM skills, knowledge and experience to undertake the principal designer role and therefore are unable to offer or accept this role. Under these circumstances and to facilitate commencement of architectural design, the domestic client will be required to appoint a principal designer. Architects can often assist the domestic client in this regard by suggesting organisations that would be able to fulfil the role. If the domestic client does not appoint a principal designer, this may well delay the commencement of design as the architect would be foolhardy to proceed “at risk” of being automatically selected as principal designer due to being the designer in control of the pre-construction phase. I fully agree with JSHarris in his clear legal definition of appointment. However, as JSHarris points out, "appoint" is used widely in construction circles to refer to "contract with". In the case of the contractual relationship between a domestic client and a designer, the word "appoint" means "contract with". The term "appoint" adopted in CDM2015 is no different. I feel it serves little purpose in taking the term “appoint” out of the context of the statutory CDM regulations that are applicable to the construction industry and have been since 1996. It is also to be noted that in the event of a serious accident, the HSE will focus in on the intentions of the “project team” in respect of compliance with the spirit of the CDM regulations rather than scrutinising the domestic client’s interpretation of “appoint”. The HSE have made it absolutely clear that it has no intention of pursuing domestic clients for breaches in CDM as it recognises that it is unable to prosecute domestic clients under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. Domestic clients do have a duty of care, however, I do not wish to dwell on this as I feel its best that I concentrate solely on CDM where I can provide meaningful assistance to self builders. Regulation 5 of CDM2015 draws attention to the absolute need for clients to make appointments in writing. This supports JSHarris’s comments regarding contractual relationships in respect of appointments. It must be pointed out that Regulations 5(1) and 5(2) are applicable to clients (i.e. both commercial and domestic clients). In terms of domestic clients, Regulations 5(1) and 5(2) are only extinguished if the domestic client fails to make the appointments. As discussed in previous posts, under these circumstances, the duties are automatically transferred to other dutyholders. So, if a domestic client [self builder] wants to appoint a designer with control over the pre-construction phase as principal designer, then it is a perfectly reasonable request and is supported by Regulation 5. NOTE 1: The appointments made by the domestic client (as outlined above) are time sensitive as the contractual arrangements require to be terminated at the point when the construction phase commences. The principal designer (and other designers) can be novated to (i.e. work to) the principal contractor to allow these roles to continue, however, it maybe far simpler, from a domestic client perspective, to terminate all appointments at this juncture. NOTE 2: If design work requires to be undertaken during the construction phase, regulation 7(2)(a) will apply by default. The effect of this means that the designer in control of the pre-construction phase of the project is the principal designer. The [second] pre-construction phase commences when the construction phase starts. Noting that the previous [first] pre-construction phase, where appointments may have been made by the domestic client, has been severed by way of agreed terminations of appointment/contract. NOTE 3: In respect of CDM2015, ‘pre-construction phase’ is not solely reserved for design work undertaken prior to the commencement of the construction phase. The reason for this is that it is widely accepted in industry that design work often continues during the construction phase (e.g. kitchen fit-out, designing electrical, plumbing and heating installations, etc.). As discussed in Appendix 6 (para. 6) of the CDM Guidance Note; As a result of a principal contractor taking on the client duties in relation to managing projects as detailed in regulation 4, the principal designer involved in the project will work to [be novated to] the principal contractor in their role as the ‘client’. If the domestic client does not appoint a principal designer, the role of the principal designer falls to the designer in control of the [second] pre-construction phase of the project. NOTE 4: CDM2015 does not use the terminology ‘first’ or a ‘second’ pre-construction phase of the project. I have merely added this to try and provide a line in the proverbial sand where the primary design work is carried out (prior to construction) and where further design work is undertaken during the construction phase.