We all complain about the bad companies and bad individuals in our industry, and for good reason. Whilst I suspect most of us are professional people running professional businesses, there are always a few out there that spoil the party for the rest of us and we all get tarred with the brush that says we’re all cowboys and rogues and that the general public should hold us at arms length. I’m sorry to say though, that this is the way it will remain, as there is no effective way to police this industry.
Organisations with no teeth
If an industry really wants to behave itself, it has to be scared of the bodies that oversee it. Right now we have bodies like FENSA, Certass, Network Veka for example that companies can choose to be part of. Most are FENSA registered, some are Certass and a few are Network Veka. These are self certification bodies that check the work of installers then send a certificate to the homeowner to say that the work is good and legal. These are the types of bodies that are supposed to make our industry work better, and work to a legal standard. Yet in reality we all know that there are plenty of companies out there probably bending the rules, if not breaking them altogether, knowing they will probably get away with it. And why do they do it? Because they know they can get away with it.
Organisations like FENSA won’t like to hear this, but companies are not scared of them. They know that in reality they can do very little, even with the new MTC legislation. Double glazing companies who want to get away with rule breaking can do so, as inspections come so few and far between each year, that the chances of being caught doing something that shouldn’t are slim to none.
Trading standards not interested
Away from voluntary self-certifying schemes, there is Trading Standards. This is the Government body that is supposed to make sure that businesses, not just the window and door industry, play fair. Yet I am hearing more and more often now that when both customers and companies from this industry go to trading standards to report issues, either they are referred to other bodies like FENSA or the GGF, or little action is taken at all.
A symptom of an industry with a pasty reputation, or a Government body that needs an overhaul?
Industry too big
Lets face it, as a policing force, the schemes and departments aren’t anywhere big enough to be able to police this industry. There are around 14,000 window and doors companies in our industry. Then consider the number of builders and DIYers out there, they probably number at least 30,000+.
How do you keep a close eye on that many people and companies installing windows, doors and glazed extensions? In reality you can’t. It’s silly for any organisation, Government or otherwise to be able to say they can actually keep track on all companies.
Is it time to change tack then? Does there need to be a change as to how our industry is regulated? There are far more laws and regulations in existence now, what with MTC cards, CE Marking etc. Does FENSA/Certass need to be given more funding and more powers so that their reach and choice of punishments gives them more teeth? Any option which involves more money is unlikely to happen.
So, in the end, I guess the only realistic thing to do is for us good guys to keep our heads down, do a good job, and hope that karma comes round to bite the arses of the companies who tarnish our industry and eventually go bust.
Do you have any ideas on this subject? Should something more be done to give our industry bodies more to help enforce the laws being broken? All comments welcome on this in the section below.
To get daily updates from DGB sent to your inbox, enter your email address in the space below to subscribe:
[wysija_form id=”1″]
Jason, you raise many good points. It is a complex situation – many of the products need Building Reg compliance ( like window installations and solid roof replacements) and there is the policing offered here by Fensa, local LA building inspectors or Approved Inspectors like Jhai we use for LivinROOF and realROOFs. Consumers who visit our web site have the option to partner with a BBA vetted/inspected retailer – inspections every other year of office procedures and site installations goes some of the way to ensuring a good job is done. We support many of our customers/dealers with site inspections… Read more »
I guess the best way to self-police this is for all us manufacturers (Glass/frames/roof etc) to simply insist on registration evidence before we supply them- This would cover retail installers , and if the trade suppliers did likewise, the cowboys would have no supply route-That truly IS an industry self certifying! However- as with most industries, if someone wants our products, and we need the business (!!!) then they will get supplied!
I think the only way this will ever improve if is trading standards get more involved with the double glazing industry, although the chances of this happening anytime soon are pretty grim!
You may have seen that we have been doing a campaign based on CE marking of components for structural use i.e. load bearing bays etc. and have encountered some similar attitudes to that mentioned in your post. However, from the 1st July 2014, it became mandatory to CE Mark all structural steelwork and structural aluminium under the European Standard EN 1090. The EN 1090 standard is a mandatory requirement for all Execution Class 2 (EXC2) structures – i.e. all steel structures and/or aluminium structures must carry a CE Mark to ensure the conformity of structural components within buildings. As far… Read more »
In a word Sarah, yes! I still know of some window fabricators (smaller ones) who have not CE marked yet-But this brings us back to the main point-No Policing=No deterrent. It is the competent companies who lose out-The other way of addressing this is for FENSA/CERTASS to do a TV advert that makes HOMEOWNERS ask for evidence of legality of the product- Unlikely to happen, though!
This post reminds me of the missed opportunity in 2002 which FENSA had – to become an industry lead organisation, as indeed Nigel Rees at GGf indicated at the time was the eventual aim. However, as we know GGf changed their mind, and wanted to hang on to what was then a very profitable business. When I dared suggest at the time that this was the way forward (see NFG website), I was subjected to some pretty nasty criticism from members of the GGf. The GGF put profit before the best interests of the industry, sadly. Now, as legislation (some… Read more »