Open Letter to FENSA

Dear FENSA

As you are probably aware, the discussion on Twitter and my blog today has been about the illegality of windows with uni-blinds/integral blinds as according to a FENSA inspector yesterday, they don't meet the correct energy requirements.

The subject came up yesterday as the company I work for had one of our scheduled visits from one of your inspectors. He mentioned to one of our installers that windows with blinds within the unit, even if it has argon gas, warm edge spacers, low 'e' glass and low iron glass, don't class as energy efficient due to the small aluminium strip at the top which houses the mechanism. The problem with this, and something which has been brought up on Twitter, is that units with integral blinds come under the same EN1279 tests, just as units with Georgian bar and lead do - are classed as energy efficient. So why not Uni-Blinds?

As you can appreciate, there are many companies, including the one I work for, that will be concerned about this. If I take what your inspector told us seriously, that would mean we would be unable to sell integral blinds in our windows - something which we do sell a lot of, as I'm sure many other companies do. I understand that this issue doesn't apply to doors and conservatories with integral blinds. But because many sell their windows with the option of integral blinds, this is a problem which requires immediate clarification and clear guidance for installers.

A reply to this question will not only be appreciated by myself, but also by the many other window companies which are just learning of this problem.

Yours Sincerely

DGB

Uni-Blinds And Energy Efficiency

Well, today the uncertainty of what was classed as energy efficient and what wasn't reared it's head again today, thanks to the chance visit of a FENSA inspector on one of our installations.

The topic of Uni-Blinds, the Pellini Italian blinds within double glazed units, came up between one of our installers and a FENSA inspector. According to the inspector, to which I don't have his name yet, said that windows with Uni-Blinds in them aren't classed as energy efficient and would condemn the whole installation.

When questioned if when the unit had low 'e' glass, low iron, argon gas and super spacers, the window would still be condemned.

The reason? The aluminium strip which houses the mechanism causes a cold current which acts against the heat insulating properties of the unit - making it inefficient. This, even though Uni-Blinds are classified under the same ruling as Georgian bar in the EN 1279 tests. Leaded units are also classed as efficient - despite lead on the units.

Up to press, I am lead to believe that FENSA are unable to prove how units with Uni-Blinds are inefficient, yet units with lead and Georgian bar, classed under the same testing, are efficient. 

Doors or conservatories with integral blinds are exempt from this ruling.

My main gripe with all this is the damage it could do to the product. We, like many others, have used the product for years and personally I think it's fantastic. So many selling points, it looks great, it's modern but fits in totally with the look of any window or door. Window and door companies need every excuse to be able to sell their products, and I can say from experience that by having these Uni-Blinds at our disposal, we've managed to secure sales because of this great and unique product.

I invite all to input their thoughts on this, and any ideas on how installers can get round this issue in a way that will satisfy FENSA and allow units with blinds in them to be sold legally abiding by the energy efficiency guide lines. I also invite FENSA to officially confirm what their position on this is.

My personal opinion is that this is all a complete load of BS, and has no solid ground until some concrete proof can be given to prove that this is truly inefficient. But until then, we should all carry on selling them!

Making A Stand

There are a lot of 'yes men' in our line of work. Those who say yes to things, but have no intention of following through on their promises.


Take FENSA for example. It was alerted to them that there was a company selling their certificates for £80 a piece. It was totally against their ethical code and when they spoke to me about it they said they would investigate, find the company and rectify the issue. So far I have heard absolutely nothing! Selling these certificates for such a large amount of money really does abuse the trust and faith of the customer in that company. Hence it was an issue I felt strongly about.


Then there is the GGF. The Green Deal is being threatened to be swallowed up by massive UK chains entering the double glazing industry for the first time, Tesco and Homebase for example. Weeks and weeks ago they promised that every company, no matter how big or small they were, would be able to have good access to the benefits the new scheme would bring. They said they had plans either in place, or being developed to make sure the boost would be shared equally. Again, so far, other than a debate about the scheme, I've heard absolutely nothing, despite the GGF assuring me they would be working hard to make sure we would all see a benefit.


So, FENSA and GGF. What are you going to do about it? This is a challenge to both of you. Either email me, or come on here and show how you are going to sort out the issues I've mentioned above. I won't let this drop and I won't let this go away. Both are important issues in my opinion and both deserve a speedy resolution.

Homebase Windows!

Here's the 'I told you so' moment!

As well as Tesco launching their own double glazing company, Homebase have now decided to enter the fray and have also launched their own double glazing service.

Having a very quick look through their online brochure, it looks relatively well set out, clear - easily explaining the order in which a customer can go about ordering their new windows. They make it clear which products are what and the brochure itself has a fresh and modern look to it. I was also particularly impressed with the price on the very back page. They quote £2900 including VAT for four casement windows and an entrance door. This to me is what four windows and a door should be being priced at, given the economic conditions right now.

So, both Homebase and Tesco look to be similarly priced, both with slick and professional sites (though Tesco's is more in-depth, but given time I'm sure Homebase will expand their site also), so look set to go head to head once the Green Deal is implemented in just eleven months time.

If you're involved in any way with these two giants of the commercial world, this is probably good news, especially if you're the companies supplying the windows and doors to them. However if you're one of the 14,000+ specialist double glazing companies in the UK hoping to get a slice of the Green Deal pie when it's put in place, it's probably just become a little harder to make the most of it. The whole reason why these companies, which have never ever sold windows before until now, are now selling them know that once the Green Deal starts, there's probably going to be a pretty sizable boost coming to the double glazing industry and they want to make the most of it. Problem is, most of us will most likely be shoved out of the way in the mean time.

Message to the GGF: don't let the commercial juggernauts swallow up what could be a potential big boost for the genuine double glazing community.

Homebase, according to their website, claim to be FENSA accredited installers. Though it's more than likely that they will be using a home improvements company, like Tesco use AJWD, to install the windows on their behalf.

As I get to know more details about this I will post them on here! 

Potential Green Deal Disaster

The more you look at the Green Deal, the more you realise that small window companies (which make up a lot of our industry) are going to struggle to be able to take advantage of it. But first, some clarity on what the Green Deal is and how it is going to work:


According to the GGF: Green Deal is the Coalition Government's flagship policy for improving the energy efficiency of existing buildings in Great Britain. It is a new market framework and is based on a key principle that the cost of some energy efficiency measures pay for themselves, in effect, through the resulting savings on fuel bills.


Green Deal Finance: Green Deal finance will not be a personal loan on the householder or building owner but will in fact be a debt held on the property. Future owners of the property will take on the remaining elements of the Green Deal until payment is complete.


To be part of the scheme, you have to register to become a Green Deal Provider. To become a Provider you will be subject to strict assessments apparently. As a Provider, you will be responsible for providing the finance. Here's where it becomes a little bit more difficult for the really small companies. Providers will be responsible for carrying out an energy assessment on the property. The assessment will identify what measures the homeowner needs to take to improve the energy efficiency of their home. Also, the Provider must also then carry out another assessment to judge how well the measures that have been taken are doing, and provide feedback. 


The Green Deal loans will be re-paid by the homeowner via the respective energy bills. Crucially, if that homeowner moves, the loan stays with the house, not with the tenants. So the new home owners will have to pick up that bill. 


The Golden Rule: Above all, the expected savings to be made on any Green Deal project must be greater than the cost of the work done.


Big multi-national companies such as B & Q, Marks and Spencer and British Gas have been mentioned as possible Green Deal Providers. We already know that Tesco has positioned itself ready to take advantage of the deal when it comes to pass. 


I have two concerns regarding the deal. Firstly, with all the massive companies being mentioned as being possible providers, is there going to be any room for the small guys in our industry. In comparison, even the large companies within this industry would be dwarfed by the other companies mentioned above. The GGF has worked hard to include windows in the Green Deal, the worst thing that could happen is for companies like Tesco to go a steal all the business.


My second worry is that the amount of checks, assessments, tests, and all the other extra work involved in being a Provider will be far too much for the smaller companies to cope with. For the larger businesses with the staff and financial backup, this won't be a problem. But if the WHOLE industry is to benefit from the deal, then our large organisations, the GGF and FENSA need to have plans in place to make sure that everyone gets a piece of the pie.


The plan isn't due for another year. So I hope that plans for everyone will be announced and explained well before October 2012 so that everyone can ready themselves for what should be a significant boost for our sector.

£80 For A FENSA Certificate? Really?!

I really could name names on this one. But I fear that if I do, I'm going to start to receive threats, so I'm not going to.


However, what I will say is that those who work within the West Yorkshire area will know who this company is. This particular company has reportedly been telling their customers that a FENSA certificate will cost them £80!


We don't charge customers a single penny for their certificates and I'm sure many others of you don't. So why is it that this particular company thinks £80 per certificate is OK? 


Personally for a company to so openly charge for such a menial think I think is disgusting. Or am I just being a bit over sensitive to this? Am I in my own little bubble and does everyone charge for certificates?


What I would like to add at this point is that this information has come to me via various customers telling me pretty much the same thing. If only one customer had told me then I probably wouldn't have said anything. But when you start to get more than one telling you the same thing, then it's clear that there's something more substantial to the story.


If there are members of staff working for this company that read this, you know who you are. I ask that if you can, leave a response on here to justify why you carry out such a policy.


Things like this don't help to shirk off the sleazy image of the industry. I think the sector has been working hard over the last couple of years to show that it's transparent, professional and trustworthy (of sorts). So ridiculous money spinning ideas like this are only going to fight against that progress.

Another Ombudsman Joins The Industry

Looks like we're going to be dragging up the ombudsman issue again, as a GGF and FENSA backed scheme enters the fray, with their main rivals of course being the DGCOS. Here is the statement on their website:

The Glazing Ombudsman Scheme has been launched for the Glazing Industry covering the installation of replacement windows and doors, conservatories and roofline products. The Scheme, known as ‘The Glazing Ombudsman’, will use the services of The Property Ombudsman to provide the Ombudsman facility.

The Property Ombudsman (TPO) is a Member of the British and Irish Ombudsman Association (BIOA) and has been providing an ombudsman service for 20 years. The Ombudsman is completely independent of his scheme members and is accountable to an independent Council, ensuring that The Glazing Ombudsman scheme can provide a free, fair and, above all, independent service for dealing with unresolved disputes between customers and members of the Scheme (registered businesses).

The Glazing Ombudsman is sponsored by the Glass and Glazing Federation and FENSA to provide financial stability, but in the medium term the low fee structure for registered businesses will provide sufficient funds for the scheme to prosper.

Members must follow the Code of Practice set out by The Glazing Ombudsman and provide customers with a fair and clear Contract of Sale in addition to Deposit and Work in Progress Insurance and several other commitments of service.

The process for customers to complain to the Ombudsman will be simple and hassle-free providing a final award, if appropriate, of up to £25,000. The award will be binding on the members but customers will be free to refuse the award and pursue their complaint through the courts. Customers may only use the TGO Scheme to complain about the goods supplied or work performed by members of the TGO scheme.

The Ombudsman service is to be undertaken by Mr Christopher Hamer who has been The Property Ombudsman since 2006. Prior to this he held, over a number of years, a series of posts in various ombudsman schemes, such as The Personal Investment Authority Ombudsman Bureau. He therefore brings a wide breadth of experience to The Glazing Ombudsman Scheme.

The Glazing Ombudsman is a ‘no-frills’, straightforward Ombudsman Scheme which aims to provide the customers of registered businesses with a means of redress in a fair and ‘hassle-free’ way if things go wrong. Insurance, such as Insurance Backed Guarantee (IBG) cover, can be imported from a TGO member’s existing supplier, subject to minimum requirements being met. Consequently, the TGO member has a financial commitment to pay for the Ombudsman Scheme and does not have costs associated with other fringe services.

As with anything new, I like to question it. I ask why has this ombudsman been set up when we already have the DGCOS? My natural response would be that because this is one that is GGF and FENSA backed and sponsored, it will have more respect within the industry. It's also more likely to carry more confidence with a customer as they're already more likely to have heard of FENSA or GGF than the DGCOS - despite their marketing strategy.


Why would companies want to join? The ombudsman is funded mainly by FENSA and the GGF, which means there is apparently a low cost fee for joining. Markedly lower than some of the reports I've heard about how much the DGCOS want from you!


The vetting process might raise an eyebrow with some. The DGCOS said that they had a robust vetting system, yet serial phoenixers managed to slip through the net, so I guess we'll have to wait and see how successful that part of the business is.


The ombudsman sets itself out to show that it has teeth. DGCOS failed somewhat in following that promise up, lets hope that this one does manage to deliver on all fronts.


I'm sure I can count on some of you putting your point of view across!

Guest Post: The Most Successful Of All Competent Persons Schemes

Someone has been kind enough to write another guest post to mark this site's second birthday! This one is from Letitia J Smith:

The most successful of all Competent Person’s Schemes by Sheit Lan Man, FENSA

Now we at FENSA are not ones to boast, but we did just want to let you know about a report by the Communities and Local Government which considered FENSA to be one of the most successful Competent Persons schemes to date across the UK.

Self certification schemes were introduced by Government in 2002 under the Building Regulations. The report, which can be found here, was made a year on in 2003 and found that FENSA is making a significant contribution to compliance with building regulations.

So how do FENSA ensure compliance? Well firstly every installation by a FENSA company has to be notified, and then a proportion of all jobs are inspected for compliance. Secondly, FENSA provide technical seminars, a technical Guidebook (revised issue being published soon) and a helpline to help installers stay up to date with compliance changes to the building regulations. In the report, FENSA was found to be the most successful of the 4 compliance schemes looked at.

Since that report in 2003, over 9000 companies are now registered FENSA Fitters. FENSA registered businesses who are undertaking consumer-facing, domestic contracts must be registered with an Insurance Backed Guarantee (IBG) provider. IBG’s provide added protection to the home owner should the installation company cease to trade and be unable to honor the terms of their own guarantee.

The FENSA Fitters are a major part of the glazing industry and FENSA is always looking for ways to improve the industry, and the work of FENSA further. A key way that we do this is through our focus groups, where we invite fitters to have their say with FENSA. Focus research groups are organised annually to help us better understand fitter’s views and perceptions on the industry, and the next on is on Thursday 17^th March in Manchester. During previous focus groups, installers have requested for help with saving money on petrol and last minute purchases from DIY stores. Subsequently FENSA has negotiated an exclusive deal with B&Q and developed a fuel discount card for its Registered Business. If you would like to attend the next event, please email sman@fensa.org.uk or telephone 020 7645 3715.  

Thanks Letitia!

Bent Industry Organisations

I have tried desperately myself to keep optimistic about the WER scheme and it's enforcement on October 1st. But after finding out what I have over the past 48 hours, I've lost all faith I had in it. The more the BFRC's plan has unravelled, the more it looks as though it has just been a money making scheme from day one.

When WER ratings were introduced, this looked to be a great new selling tool. It would help companies differentiate themselves from their competitors and try to boost sales. The industry had a shiny new toy, yet most didn't want to play with it.

Then, at the beginning of this year, the BFRC announced the option for installers to register their products in their own name so they could obtain an energy ratings certificate with their name on the top. Obviously there was a price to pay, hundreds in fact. So as you can imagine, there wasn't a massive uptake from that initiative. But there was never going to be. Having an installers name on a WER certificate was never going to have any selling advantage.

So, come Summer, we had the Part L decisions to digest. And lo and behold, the decision makers thought it would be a novel idea that for installers to show energy efficiency compliance, they HAD TO HAVE one of these WER certificates. How handy is that!? Just weeks after the BFRC announced the option to put installers' name at the top of their certificates, it's suddenly announced that it's now law, and we would have to pay for it!! Who's been scratching who's back I ask!

Still, we seemed to handle that OK, and just got on with the business at hand. But a few started to look at the science behind it all, and how the BFRC had come up with their results. Champion of this was Kevin Ahern. His main quarrel was with how the solar gain factor was calculated, and especially how north facing areas were factored into their equations. But, after repeated requests to Giles Wilson, his questions returned unanswered. This for me is where this whole scheme started to unravel, and quickly. The whole credibility of the scheme was brought into question and the very fathers of the scheme couldn't come out and defend it.

This rumbled off for a while, and was replaced with the short, sharp rejection of the DGCOS - another ombudsman scheme a tired, clogged up industry didn't need. But before long Part L changes were the main topic of discussion - mainly doors this time and how they were going to be passed. We thought that doors 50% glazed or more had to have a U-Value of 1.8 or less. Hence the rush and panic to get all the industry's doors tested in time.

Then, over the weekend on the GlassTalk website, Quorn Conservatories received this letter from FENSA:

Compliance Against a Minimum U Value
a) Simple Method


If you are installing a PVC or a timber and the frame is fitted with sealed units which make use of soft-coat Low E Glass, warm edge spacer (minimum 16mm) and 90% argon gas, Then FENSA will consider without further evidence that the U value of 1.6 has been achieved i.e there will be no need to provide further evidence to the consumer or to the FENSA inspector, providing there is no evidence to suggest that our assumption is incorrect. (In timber windows the depth of the frame from front to back must be a minimum of 70mm).

Up until this, we were all under the impression we had to either have a WER certificate showing a C rating or better, or a similar piece of paper showing a U-Value of 1.6 or better. But according to what FENSA have said above, we don't need any sort of paperwork to prove this, we just have to let them know we are fitting windows to that standard if they want to drop in for one of their checks.

So, where are we now? Basically, thousands of companies have spent thousands of pounds testing dozens of products to obtain certificates to show compliance, only for FENSA to tell us right at the very last minute that we don't need all that!

What message is this going to send out to all the clowns and cowboys in this industry! They are still going to be able to get away with fitting a load of old shite, passing it off as efficient and get away with it. While others have been playing to the supposed new rules and gone down the certification route, for it all to be a waste of time money and resources.

BFRC, GGF, FENSA - you should all hang your heads in shame. You've conned money out of the companies that you were supposed to be helping. I've been in this industry for just over four years full time, and have heard about some of the things that have gone on in our proud industry. I kept faith in industry bodies that everyone was saying were corrupt, but I ignored them, and it turns out foolishly. Your actions and handling of this whole episode show a complete lack of understanding about the industry you represent. The industry was never ready for this sort of upheaval, but you knew that. You knew that if you made certification law, installers would just simply hand money over to line your pockets.

All I can say is well done. You've managed to piss off an entire industry, and to alienate it even more. If you were to tell me a million times that what I have just alleged is wrong, I still would not believe a single word. You've lost yourself a member of the younger generation that will one day soon take the place of those in position now.

I Hate Lintels

One area of this work that had always annoyed me has been the need for lintels.

As we understand it (and based on what FENSA said in it's last handbook), the ruling is if a window or door doesn't have a lintel when it comes to replacing it, then the company doing the replacing has to install a lintel. This cost then obviously has to be passed on to the customer. This is all fine is it's just a single window or door. But say you come across an installation of 10 windows and 2 doors, non of which have lintels, but because you are a company who wants to fit the job right and leave the customer happy, you have to quote for them. The frustrating element here is the other local companies and cowboys won't be quoting for them, because they know they the likely hood of a FENSA inspection catching them out in minimal.

What makes this situation even stickier, is that it's not clear if this is a set in stone requirement. The wording from FENSA says it's their 'reccomendation', but does that mean this is something you HAVE to do, or not. Because it also says that they are required if the brickwork becomes loose and unstable. So does that mean if when the window or door is removed and the brick work is solid and doesn't move, it doesn't need one?

You can see what I'm getting at, just like many other things in this industry, it's not completely clear. It's also very frustrating. Lintels on mass can add a lot to the cost of a quote, while remaining competitive, we also want to make sure that we comply with the rules.

This Is Why The Industry Is A Joke!

I've just read an e-mail sent by FENSA setting out information about the coming changes to Part L. On the last page of that e-mail it goes on to say: "It is generally anticipated the revisions will require at least a BFRC 'C' energy rated window and probably an equally demanding alternative method to demonstrate compliance".

So there we go. We can just about guarantee that we are either going to have to register and pay for certification, or go back to showing U-values to show that everything is above board and legal. But, because the A-G energy rated scale is recognisable to the general public, the BFRC can almost guarantee that nearly everyone will sign up to their method of compliance and make an absolute (and devious) fortune.

But it goes on. FENSA are nicely putting on a whole host of seminars to aid businesses into this transition, ready for 1st October. But you have to pay £25 + VAT per delegate. What a rip off! So they want us to pay hundreds of pounds for a certificate that hasn't even been proven to be accurate yet, then pay through the nose to be told roughly what we already know already! Frankly I think some piss taking is going on round about now. With the money the BFRC are going to make, it would have been nice to have a few free seminars, or at least some shiny new booklets explaining everything to us.

A Problem With The Windows Scrappage Scheme?

It occurred to me while thinking of all the good that the scrappage scheme may bring, there could be one big problem with it. How would it be organised and policed?

It was easy with the car scrappage scheme as the DVLA have paperwork on every car on the road in the UK. So they would know when an old car was going in for scrap. How would the organisation running our scrappage scheme know when an old windows installation is being removed?

I think the most evident way would be to get FENSA involved and have them police the system. They already register all the new installations so there would be nothing new to do there. They would however have to inspect every old windows installation that comes out of a house, and then inspect the new installation when it is complete. The number of man-hours would dramatically increase, but could it also create jobs too? One thing I suspect would happen if FENSA were to police the scheme would be that they would charge for this service, and it wouldn't be a small sum either. Let me know if any of you think of any other ways, but to me this seems like the easiest and most readily available method to hand so far.