broken glass

Werdnal

silvercar wrote: »

Agree with this, but is this a case of betterment ie should the tenant have to pay for the cost of replacement like for like, but the landlord pay for the cost of improving to comply with current standards?

But I don't agree this counts as betterment. If the exact replacement is no longer available, then LL has to replace with the nearest available equivalent. In the case of this glass, the same glazing is no longer allowed under safety regs, so LL's hands are tied.

DVardysShadow

G_M wrote: »

The window may not have complied with current building Regs, but as long as it complied with the Building Regs in force at the time it was installed it is legal.

Since the glass now needs replacing, it must be replaced with glass that complies with today's current Building Regs. This is what the glazier means.

Building Regs only applies to new works, not to repairs, AIUI

lynzpower wrote: »

Hi Casper - HHSRS states:

I know that In HHSRS Collision and Entrapment identifies safety glass

"f) Disrepair to windows – disrepair of windows, frames and/or window furniture.
g) Windows location – windows opening across pathways.
h) Non-safety glass – in a door, low window or other vulnerable location.
i) Unprotected gaps – gaps of over 100 mm in banisters in which young children
could get trapped" etc

Page 164 http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/housing/pdf/142631.pdf

This document on a brief skim is not a mandatory standard for construction, it is a hazard assessment method. You can use it to argue the toss over how hazardous something is, and therefore that it is desirable for something to be done. But you cannot argue that because it is itemised in that document, it is mandatory that it should be done.

Werdnal wrote: »

But I don't agree this counts as betterment. If the exact replacement is no longer available, then LL has to replace with the nearest available equivalent. In the case of this glass, the same glazing is no longer allowed under safety regs, so LL's hands are tied.

But the exact replacement IS available. The question is whether or not the Landlord should replace to modern standards - and the extent to which this is mandated by legislation. I would say that OP should not have to bear any cost beyond the like for like replacement.

And I think there is an argument to be made here that had the Landlord put in glazing to modern standards in the first place, then it would have survived the incident and no repairs or repair bill would have arisen.