Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi,


Thought I'd see if anyone here knows the answer to this question as the internet isn't very helpful and Southwark's planning department aren't answering their phones.


We're leaseholders and Southwark council are the freeholders. We don't live in a conservation area. We want to replace our single-glazed wooden sash windows with double glazed sash windows. They're going to be exactly the same apart from the double glazing.


We've got permission from the freeholder but they have said that we need planning permission as well. However, we've been advised by the window fitter that this can class as a repair and he will give us documentation as such which we can use for the conveyancing when we come to sell. I've looked at both Southwark's planning website and the national planning portal and they don't give a clear answer. The planning portal seems to indicate that planning permission isn't necessary, only permission from the freeholder, though they then go on to give a case study which muddies the water a bit (i.e. when we come to sell will Southwark say that their freeholder's permission was only granted if we had planning permission and will we need to produce evidence of that or will the window fitter's repair documentation be enough?).


Just wondering if anyone on here has had a similar experience/issue and knows the answer.


Thanks,


Andy

I think you could be getting confused with Buildings Regulation consent?


You need buildings regulation consent for replacement windows and they have to confirm to certain standards re energy efficiency. The simple way round this is to use a company that are FENSA registered. They can certify the windows for you - no need to get the council round.


The issue with wooden sashes is that if you replace them completely with other wooden sashes then its difficult to get them to comply with the new energy efficiency standards. Most people get round this by having the windows overhauled (new seals, glazed panels etc.) classing the works as repairs, not replacement - this means there is no requirement for Buildings Regulation consent.


I think that this is the "loop hole" your fitter is talking about. If he is just replacing the single glazed glass with double glazed glass then I would have thought this would be classed as a repair thereby not needing building regulations consent.

As a councillor I have sat on Planning Committees to make decisions about Planning Applications for uPVC double glazing replacing non uPVC windows - even though the orignial windows needed replacement.


What are the new window frames going to be made of - if uPVC then you'd probably need permissions.

Email me and I'll get a definitive answer from planning officers.

Providing the new windows dont alter the appearence of teh property then there wouldnt be problem in this as you are not in a coservation area. Yes, you can apply for permission but you dont need it and it is a waste of money and time. We went through a similar process and found out we never had to in the end.

Hi,


Thanks for speedy responses:


@trizza - the window fitter is FENSA registered so we don't need the building control approval. We are also fitting draft proofing internally so they meet the U value of the environmental standard. The fitter was talking about planning permission rather than building control permission.


@James Barber - the new frames are going to be wooden, the same as the existing frames. I think there's 2 issues here that we need answers to: 1) do we need planning consent at all for this change 2) if we don't need planning consent for the change do we still need to get planning permission to satisfy the Home Ownership Unit when we come to sell? Any help to these questions would be great. I'll drop you an email.


@edresi10 - Were you a leaseholder with Southwark council? I think the leasehold issue maybe the bit that's causing the problem

Under the terms of a Southwark lease the windows don't actually form part of the demise and therefroe officially they are not yours to replace. However if you have already got consent from the Home Ownership Unit to replace the windows then this shoudl be fine - but do keep the letter in a safe place as you will need it when you come to sell.


You do not need planning permission for new windows if you are not located in a conservation area nor live in a listed building.


You would need a FENSA certificate or buildings regulations approval if using a non-FENSA registered installer.

  • 1 year later...

I came across this topic whilst googling for a very similar problem and hoped someone may be able to help.


My property is GradeII listed and in a conservation area. The previous owner fitted uPVC replacements in some windows and the others which are still original timber sash are completely rotten and need replacing. He obviously did not gain planing permission for the uPVC windows. However, before selling the property to me he had submitted planning permission for the reinstatement of original single glazed timber sash (along with some other changes in the property) which was obviously granted.


We would like to reinstate the original timber sash throughout being faithful to the original design but would like to double glaze them to improve their thermal qualities. Do we need to make a new planning application or do we just need to obtain Buildings Regulation approval? We will be using a FENSA approved fitter who will provide a FENSA backed guarantee.


Any advice is much appreciated

Hi


I would suggest ringing the planning department and talking to them because you're in a conservation area and your property is listed. However, a word of caution, I rang the planning department to ask them about this issue twice and got 2 different responses from different officers so unless it's in writing be careful!


Thanks,


Andy

Also becoming a member of the Southwark Leaseholders Organisation (volunteer run by very caring other Southewark Leaseholders who do a lot of useful work), which is called LAS2000. Then in the future they may also be able to advise. Google LAS2000 for the address.

@moe


A grade2 listed building needs special permission. Also repairs will be VAT free.

I have installed pvc box sash windows into a grade2 listed building in reigate. It took pictures and meetings but approval was given as the home owners could not afford timber windows and they were an improvement on the current windows they had.


Regarding planning permission in other areas this is not needed if the company replacing the windows are either FENSA or CERTASS registered. In a conservation area it is not needed if replacing like for like but any material change or style change would need planning consent.


To the op. no planning permission is not needed but you will need a certificate from fensa or certass showing the windows have been fitted and registered correctly. It is also true if you only replace this is classed as a repair and no proof of anything would be required. It's never the best solution though especially if your present sashes are pretty rotten.

I've looked into the Zero rated VAT issue and it turns out that only alterations to a building are zero rated, not repairs. Furthermore in the recent budget announcement zero rating for listed buildings was scrapped altogether.


We certainly don't want to install uPVC under any circumstances. We want timber sash in the exact style of the original but double glazed. I'm still unclear as to whether this will require planning permission. I will give the planning department a call later.


Thanks for all replies

Hi moeispro!

Replacing like for like, even if double glazed replaced single glazing, shouldn't need planning permission.


Ending VAT on listed buildings is probably as much about not subsidising country houses etc by charging VAT to te likes of you and me. Charities obviously claim back the VAT so this shouldnt affect the like of English Heritge properties, etc.


If you need any help just ask.

Moeispro,


Sorry if i offended mentioning pvc windows:-$


As far as i am aware a grade 2 listed building does not come under fensa or certas and needs separate approval from the council. There is no way around it and if you make alterations without approval they can make you put it back as it was. I have only worked on 3 grade 2 listed buildings in last 20 years of being a window installer but have found in general with the right approach planners are more sympathetic to change than one might think. However i have never dealt with southark or lambeth regards to listed buildings.


The final answer i believe is you need planning or listed buildings consent


:))


I do realise james is councilor saying you don't but this is only for conservation or areas without any restrictions.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Last week we had no water for over 24 hours and very little support from Thames Water when we called - had to fight for water to be delivered, even to priority homes. Strongly suggest you contact [email protected] as she was arranging a meeting with TW to discuss the abysmal service
    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...