Hi all, sorry as this has probably been asked 1000000 times before. I have had a summerhouse built out of timber that comes in at 18.5m2 and is only 300 from our fence. Doing some research now shows that is a bit of a no no with building regs. Has anyone had this issue before and how have you got round it with BCO ?
Over 15m2 and within 1000 mm
- Thread starter TomTom01
- Start date
Sponsored Links
It should have had B regs, no doubt someone is going to point out that interpretations of "substantially non combustible" vary, however I would interpret this as not being exempt as has every LA I've worked for in 4 counties and approx 60+ BCO's I've worked with and every LA where I have carried out private work.
You can apply for retrospective approval (Regularisation Certificate) however you will have to satisfy B Control it complies with the BRegs applicable at the time the work was carried out, you may need to open up some of the work and carry out any remedial work. By the letter of the law you should have plans drawn of the work and this should include details of any remedial works, although I have never requested these nor am I aware of anyone else requesting this, but check with your LA.
Please note this work cannot be carried out by a private inspector.
The obvious issue is the amount of timber close to the boundary, this may need replacing or treating to reduce the surface spread of flame.
You can apply for retrospective approval (Regularisation Certificate) however you will have to satisfy B Control it complies with the BRegs applicable at the time the work was carried out, you may need to open up some of the work and carry out any remedial work. By the letter of the law you should have plans drawn of the work and this should include details of any remedial works, although I have never requested these nor am I aware of anyone else requesting this, but check with your LA.
Please note this work cannot be carried out by a private inspector.
The obvious issue is the amount of timber close to the boundary, this may need replacing or treating to reduce the surface spread of flame.
Thank you for the reply's, DevilDamo, 18sqm is the external, the internal wont be far off that as the walls are only 63mm thick. Frutbunn, I think everything else is exempt except the fire bits as you said. what i'm hoping is that I could coat the side along my boundary to comply with this. On a general note, what seems silly is that I can have the same length of shed along the boundary but 600mm thinner, and the reg's wouldn't even apply. The same amount of timber would run the same boundary but not pose a risk!
Sponsored Links
Probably best to keep quiet and wait for enforcement to lapse....is it 4 years, I can't remember off top of my head.
A B/regs app + cost of replacing the cladding with Marley eternit or rendboard etc etc could cost you well over £1k
If your summerhouse is nowhere near your house or a neighbours the fire risk isn't really all that great in practice. Do the neighbours have a building the other side of the fence?
A B/regs app + cost of replacing the cladding with Marley eternit or rendboard etc etc could cost you well over £1k
If your summerhouse is nowhere near your house or a neighbours the fire risk isn't really all that great in practice. Do the neighbours have a building the other side of the fence?
- Joined
- 1 May 2018
- Messages
- 1,623
- Reaction score
- 473
- Country
https://www.rawlinspaints.com/home/...kUStsIx8sIqhH22oMX6QMIcssPY6naIcaAqQGEALw_wcB
If as the literature says, this product provides fire protection to BS & EU standards, then you could use it and not inform anybody on the basis that BR are not required for buildings 15<30sqm <1000mm from boundary and made from non-combustible materials. If action was subsequently taken IMHO the LA would not only be challenging you but also the certifications of the product.
If as the literature says, this product provides fire protection to BS & EU standards, then you could use it and not inform anybody on the basis that BR are not required for buildings 15<30sqm <1000mm from boundary and made from non-combustible materials. If action was subsequently taken IMHO the LA would not only be challenging you but also the certifications of the product.
Its 1 year in this particular instance, however these things have a habit of resurfacing on sale of the property so it will probably have to be resolved sometime in the future.
With domestic type buildings fire spread between buildings in the same curtliage is not considered, only in proximity to the boundary, whether or not there is another building on the boundary is not a consideration the same regs are applied regardless.
Sorry I would disagree with that interpretation, its still a combustible material, the treatment is for surface spread of flame and not fire resistance in any case.
To comply it requires class O surface spread of flame and the internal face requires 30 minutes fire resistance as well
- Joined
- 1 May 2018
- Messages
- 1,623
- Reaction score
- 473
- Country
As you say an interpretation, but again I draw attention to the manufacturers data sheet of that coating " upgrading new and already coated timber and wood related surfaces & UPVC to BS476: Part 6 & 7, Class 0 & 1, UK Building Regulations"
If the OP says nowt and doesn't make any application at all, a BC wanting to make an issue of the situation has to pick a fight with both the householder and the manufacturer. I can't see them bothering unless there were really being pushed by someone. There's always interpretation, so in my book the best way is to deal with grey areas is to keep the worms tightly in the can.
If the OP says nowt and doesn't make any application at all, a BC wanting to make an issue of the situation has to pick a fight with both the householder and the manufacturer. I can't see them bothering unless there were really being pushed by someone. There's always interpretation, so in my book the best way is to deal with grey areas is to keep the worms tightly in the can.
I would highly doubt any LA is going to take that interpretation,I only mentioned it to prempt others, even if you were to accept the treated timber on the boundary as being non combustible, the remainder of the other walls and all of the framework is timber. You avoided any mention of my comment that the treatment is purely for surface spread of flame and NOT fire resistance in spite of the fact this is what you have referenced.
Due to the length of time involved enforcement is unlikely, it actually has to be in court 1 year after the work was completed. Any arguments to the contrary of the LA is for the owner to justify, most likely this will surface at the time of a sale, however the LA will just state that it is not exempt and leave it at that. You either lose the sale, drop the price or accept it has to be done. No appeals, determinations etc or other avenues that can pursued as is the case with current legal work I'm afraid. As the LA are statute barred from enforcement due to the time elapsed, all they have to do is state it would have required B regs and take a step back and forget about until a Reg Cert app is appliede for.
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 1,955
- Reaction score
- 321
- Country
Planning is external and BR’s is internal, hence why I mentioned it further up.
That is another way if you erect an internal frame and board it to reduce the floor area, that a very novel approach not something I've seen done in 40 years in BC !!!
If it ends up under 15 sq m.
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Sponsored Links
Similar threads
