Faulty windows & No FENSA -Help needed plz!

sisi_3

Hi?
We brought the flat in 06 as FTB and the previous owner purchased it in 05. After we moved in, we found there are problems with two of our double glazed windows (one of them won't close, one of them has been jammed and won't open). The freehold owned by a housing association replaced them back in 04 as part of improvement scheme. After months and months of chasing, they just confirmed to me that they don't have a fensa certificate and the company installed it has gone out of business. The freehold told us to get the certificate from the local authority and take the matter to the manufacturer ourselves. After we checked through the purchase paperwork, our solicitor asked the vendor solicitor to confirm " In the event that the property benefits from replacement windows/doors please specifically confirm when these were installed and provide us with a copy of the guarantees. If replaced after April 02 please forward a copy of the FENSA certificate/building regulations along with confirmation that the originals will be forwarded to us on completion". The vendor’s solicitor states "NO" at the time. This is clearly not the case, as now with the confirmation from the freeholder the window was replaced in 04. However, the vendor’s solicitor has failed to answer this correctly and my solicitor has not sought for any further verification from the freeholder at the time.

My questions are:

Is it legal to replace double glazed windows without the FENSA certificate or the building regulation approval after 2002 as the freeeholder has not got any paper works relates to the window replacement in 2004?

Our solicitor did not advise us the need for the FENSA certificate or the indemity insurance policy at the time of the purchase. Is this a normal practice or has the solicitor breached the duty of care in this case? As it is a leasehold flat, if the leaseholder wishes to replace the windows, surely they need to obtain the consent from the freeholder first. therefore, should our solicitor have asked the question with the freeholder as well?

The vendor solicitor answer was not clear and did not fully confirm if the property had placement windows or not.

We feel this should has been at the vendor's cost if we were told the faulty windows & the consequences regarding the lack of FENSA certificate & indemity insurance policy by the solicitor. Clearly, the vendor has decided not to tell us about the faulty windows at the time.-VERY NAUGHTY!

My questions are:

Is it legal to replace double glazed windows without the FENSA certificate or the building regulation approval after 2002 as the freeeholder has not got any paper works relates to the window replacement in 2004?

Our solicitor did not advise us the need for the FENSA certificate or the indemity insurance policy at the time of the purchase. Is this a normal practice or has the solicitor breached the duty of care to us in this case? As it is a leasehold flat, if the leaseholders wish to replace the windows, surely they need to obtain the consent from the freeholder first. therefore, should our solicitor have asked the question with the freeholder as well?

The vendor solicitor answer was not clear and misleading, it did not fully confirm if the property had placement windows or not.

We know that the less hassle way is to get this all sort it at our own cost. However, it took us 6 months chasing to obtain the informaiton (ie. the year the windows was replace, the name of the company installed windows & confirmation there is no FENSA certificate or building regulation approval) from the freeholder so far. It just does not sound right to have faulty window installed & arranged by housing association (the freeholder) as their IMPROVEMENT SCHEME and they don't think it is their responsibility for the QUALITY of the replacement & to COMPLY with the relevant govement regulation (ie. FENSA certificate or building regulation approval).

However, I wonder if anyone could point me to the right direction to pursue this matter with all parties involved to get the windows repaired/replaced and obtain FENSA certificate for future selling of the property.

Thanks in advance

Doozergirl

It's not exactly illegal not to have a FENSA certificate.

FENSA is not a guarantee. It's a body set up to confirm that those affiliated will install windows meeting Building Regulations.

If it is an issue when you come to sell, you purchase an indemnity policy.

Presumably the windows weren't faulty when they were installed so FENSA certificate/Building Regs means nothing.
An indemnity policy covers the subsequent owner against the cost of enforcement action by Building Control (which simply won't happen). It is not a guarantee of quality either.

It was your vendor that said they hadn'treplaced windows. Your solicitor isn't psychic and therefore not negligent.

It was your responsibilty to check that everything worked before you moved in and either demand problems be rectified or negotiate a discount. "Caveat Emptor" It has nothing to do with negligence by your solicitor, the vendor's solicitor, lack of building regs or FENSA certificates. If the vendor lied, the vendor lied about the replacement windows but again, that is nothing to do with the fact that they don't work.

The property isn't devalued so the only loss you might incur is the cost of an indemnity policy - there's no point suing because the cost of an hour of your solicitor's time is likely to cost more than an indemnity policy that you may or may not need in the future.

The lack of building regs is not as muhc of a deal or worry as you seem to think it is.

So, to advise you - don't worry about building regs. You should have checked that the windows worked before you bought and unfortunately that is solely your problem; you are going to have to pay for them to be fixed or replaced, no one else is responsible for that. When you come to sell, you might have to purchase an indemnity policiy for the virtually non-existant chance that building control request that all the windows are replaced. After 12 months, they can't take enforcement action without going to court so they really don't have the time or resources to chase up after a set of windows.