GRP roof holding down strap

[goble]

Hi all

To cut a long story short our GRP roof was damaged while replacement windows were being fitted, effectively due to the roof not being supported when the window was replaced. This support was needed as there is quite alot of gravel on the roof so weight bearing down on it.

As part of the back and forth with the fitters they have said the roof was not fitted properly as they believe there are no holding down straps. They have quoted that this is part of building regs. The way they have written it makes me believe they are implying the the holding down straps should be done as a matter of course to comply with the building regs.

From what I have read the holding down straps are only required to stop wind lift and this is only required if there is not sufficient weight on the roof holding down, which there is due to the gravel.

My question is, am I correct in this assumption or are there parts of the building regs that I have not read that mean they will be required no matter what.

Thanks in advance

 

[oldbutnotdead]

Are these new windows below the problem roof? Pics?
Sounds as though they are trying to evade liability by looking for excuses

 

[noseall]

Hi all

To cut a long story short our GRP roof was damaged while replacement windows were being fitted, effectively due to the roof not being supported when the window was replaced. This support was needed as there is quite alot of gravel on the roof so weight bearing down on it.

As part of the back and forth with the fitters they have said the roof was not fitted properly as they believe there are no holding down straps. They have quoted that this is part of building regs. The way they have written it makes me believe they are implying the the holding down straps should be done as a matter of course to comply with the building regs.

From what I have read the holding down straps are only required to stop wind lift and this is only required if there is not sufficient weight on the roof holding down, which there is due to the gravel.

My question is, am I correct in this assumption or are there parts of the building regs that I have not read that mean they will be required no matter what.

Thanks in advance

They may include the lack of holding down straps as a way of pushing the whole shoddy roof thing. Seems tenuous. I'm still confused over what was damaged, how and why.

 

[goble]

Are these new windows below the problem roof? Pics?
Sounds as though they are trying to evade liability by looking for excuses

Yes correct they are below the roof see pics. Without doubt they are trying to get out of dealing with any damage caused.

 

[goble]

They may include the lack of holding down straps as a way of pushing the whole shoddy roof thing. Seems tenuous. I'm still confused over what was damaged, how and why.

The damage was caused by the roof dropping in the centre of the gap by 25mm when they took the window out because they did not put in any supports, especially given the amount of gravel on the roof.

Due to this the roof has lifted externally in the 2 front corners and also now when the roof heats up in the day cracks appear just below the ceiling line internally as the roof moves and then go away when it calls down.

They are saying building regs state there should be holding down straps which I presume they are implying would have stopped this issue, although my view is if they had done what they were supposed to then it would not have happened. However, if I can go back and say that buidling regs do not specify that the holding down straps HAVE to be in place and would only be required if there was not sufficient weight then it takes away one of the potential avenues that they can use.

 

[noseall]

The damage was caused by the roof dropping in the centre of the gap by 25mm when they took the window out because they did not put in any supports, especially given the amount of gravel on the roof.

Jezus! What's the roof built from? Scrap pallets and soggy chipboard?

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

If the roof dropped then it sounds like there is no lintel fitted, which is nothing to do with holding down straps, in theory the surveyor should try to ascertain whether a lintel is present or not during his survey but that's not always possible, the window fitters should proceed with care as to whether one is fitted, rather than just ripping the window out without a care in the world as to holding them to account that's easier said than done. You need to determine whether there is a lintel or not fitted. Presumably the joists run from the house wall to the wall above the window?

 

[goble]

Jezus! What's the roof built from? Scrap pallets and soggy chipboard?

Good question, it is a bit of a strange roof. I believe it is just made of fibreglass and possibly upvc round the edges. It is fairly bulky and weighs a fair but.

 

[goble]

If the roof dropped then it sounds like there is no lintel fitted, which is nothing to do with holding down straps, in theory the surveyor should try to ascertain whether a lintel is present or not during his survey but that's not always possible, the window fitters should proceed with care as to whether one is fitted, rather than just ripping the window out without a care in the world as to holding them to account that's easier said than done. You need to determine whether there is a lintel or not fitted. Presumably the joists run from the house wall to the wall above the window?

Not sure if you can see from photo 2 but there is no wall above the window From what I could see when they took out the window there is no lintel and the roof in that part just sat on top of the old window. Regarding the joists I have no idea it hasn't been mentioned.

Do you know whether holding down straps would be required on this type of roof as a matter of course due to the buildings regs?

 

[oldbutnotdead]

Looking at those pics it is hard to see where you'd put a wall plate never mind a lintel- not a lot of clearance between window top and roof top.Were the old windows timber?
As above, restraint straps would not have stopped the roof dropping at that point (you can't put straps down a window).
Their 'belief' is interesting, i did wonder how they had determined absence of straps.
The restraint straps issue is a dead cat or red herring or whatever.
The surveyor has failed to assess the suitability of upvc as a replacement for a timber window at that location.
The fitters have assumed structural integrity of the roof where there wasn't any.
Even if they had propped the ceiling before removing the old window you would (probably still are) in bother - standard upvc windows are not designed to support vertical loads. You would need a special in there- 3 windows with metal bay poles and jacks and some sort of spreader across the top.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Not sure if you can see from photo 2 but there is no wall above the window From what I could see when they took out the window there is no lintel and the roof in that part just sat on top of the old window. Regarding the joists I have no idea it hasn't been mentioned.

Do you know whether holding down straps would be required on this type of roof as a matter of course due to the buildings regs?

Then what did you or the fitters magically expect would happen to the roof joists now flailing around in mid air to do? A lintel should have been fitted irespective of whther they propped the roof and you are still obliged to have one fitted now. The holding down straps is a red herring.

 

[goble]

Looking at those pics it is hard to see where you'd put a wall plate never mind a lintel- not a lot of clearance between window top and roof top.Were the old windows timber?
As above, restraint straps would not have stopped the roof dropping at that point (you can't put straps down a window).
Their 'belief' is interesting, i did wonder how they had determined absence of straps.
The restraint straps issue is a dead cat or red herring or whatever.
The surveyor has failed to assess the suitability of upvc as a replacement for a timber window at that location.
The fitters have assumed structural integrity of the roof where there wasn't any.
Even if they had propped the ceiling before removing the old window you would (probably still are) in bother - standard upvc windows are not designed to support vertical loads. You would need a special in there- 3 windows with metal bay poles and jacks and some sort of spreader across the top.

The window in there before was also UPVC not sure whether the old one was one window or several. The window currently in place is 3 individual windows with 2 metal poles but not a spreader as far as I am aware.

I do not think the window is necessarily the problem now but more what has happened previously which has either caused any fixings to come loose or the integrity of the roof has been compromised so that now it moves more than it did previously.

Based on the posts so far I assume that the restraint straps are not a requirement under building regs but simply their way of angling to say it is nothing to do with them.

Therefore it really comes down to whether there is any liability for them to get the roof mended based on them not doing their job correctly or whether we say it is just one of those things and a combination of the original build not being adequate and their incompetence means we have been left with a roof that we need to pay to be fixed

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

On the face of it they are at fault as they ripped the frame out without considering if there was a lintel or not but as for getting any recompense is another issue. You would have to put a case together and go via small claims court if any agreement cannot be met any other way. But as mentioned you're still obliged to fit a lintel or ensure what has been built is adequate.

 

[goble]

Great thanks for you help