Facebook | Double Glazing Jobs | Guest Contributions | Contact | Terms

Renegade Conservatory Guy

Join RenegadeClub and get FREE email updates from me...

Archive for the ‘Guest Posts’ Category

Response to Rod Appleyard by Tony Pickup (DGCOS)

Friday, August 27th, 2010

Mr Appleyard, we have already answered most of these queries elsewhere on this blog, but I will attempt to do so again.
 
Not only is DCGOS’s mediation, arbitration and adjudication process free to installer members and homeowners, the Ombudsman’s awards are in fact legally binding and are recognised by the courts.

The key points here are:

1) Consumers can request investigation completely free of charge and installers must enter this process and be bound by its decisions. They are contracted to do this at the point of entry into the scheme. They cannot refuse and opt-out if they don’t like the potential consequences.
2) The costs of all of above and any inspections are covered by DGCOS
3) The Awards are legally binding on both parties (under The Arbitration Act 1996)
4) Any awards not complied with are covered by the members pooled Compensation Fund. This ensures any awards will be paid. Normal awards of the courts or arbitration awards do not have this protection in place.

Dr Barham has dealt with hundreds of cases of mediation involving inspections and in his capacity as QA Ombudsman. He has also dealt with and made over 200 legally binding Arbitration Awards in the construction industry in this same capacity. All are binding on both the complainant and respondent.
 
The Ombudsman is supported by independent inspectors who are highly qualified and who have direct experience of the window industry. You can request a copy CV of the senior inspector from: tony@dgcos.org.uk.

The Ombudsman himself, Dr Ronald Barham, is, like yourself, a Fellow of The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators but in addition is a qualified lawyer and was formerly in practice as a chartered surveyor and consulting engineer and has been a Fellow of the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors and of the Rating & Valuation Association; the Chartered Institute of Building; The Architects & Surveyors Institute and the Construction Surveyors Institute as well as a Member of the International Real Estate Federation and the Society of Engineers. He is registered as a Professional Engineer (UK).

He is also a member of the arbitration panels of several professional and government bodies.
 I am not sure what further qualifications you think would be required but if you require a copy of his full CV please do get in contact on: tony@dgcos.org.uk

Ombudsman Schemes:
 
There are a number of Ombudsman Schemes in the UK. Some Ombudsmen are Government appointed, for example, The Financial Services Ombudsman, The Heath Service Ombudsman, The Police Ombudsman, whereas others are optional schemes where interested parties group together and set their own scheme up to protect consumers eg, The Surveyor Ombudsman, The Estate Agent Ombudsman, The Telecommunication Ombudsman etc. The Double Glazing & Conservatory Ombudsman Scheme (DGCOS) is a similar optional scheme protecting consumers who buy from its members.

The points of this scheme Mr Appleyard, are:
1) to give consumers confidence that they are using good, honest, professional installers in the first place (see www.dgcos.org.uk –accreditation)
2) if any disputes do occur they will be dealt with swiftly and robustly with no additional cost to either the consumer or installer for mediation, adjudication, inspections or arbitration (see www.dgcos.org.uk – Ombudsman)
3) These decisions are legally binding on both parties and are backed up with a Compensation Fund if either party is non-compliant (see www.dgcos.org.uk – Consumers- Compensation Fund)
4) the customer is fully covered should any member installer go out of business. Every customer using a DGCOS member has a robust underwritten guarantee in place (not just the ‘offer’ of one) [see www.dgcos.org.uk – Consumers- Deposit Protection / Insurance Backed Guarantee]
5) members of the scheme benefit from addition consumer confidence, point of sale material, the endorsement of Nick Ross, enquiries from consumers wanting to use DGCOS members (see: www.dgcos.org.uk –Installers)

I’m sure you’d agree Mr Appleyard that the current trade bodies cannot offer all these things to both consumers and installers and that if this level of protection, accreditation and investigation had been around for the last 20 years consumers would have a much better impression of the industry.

If you would like to find out the real information about DGCOS may I suggest you visit www.dgcos.org.uk or apply for a ticket to our first national conference at The Ricoh Arena, Coventry on 11th Nov 2011.

Getting trapped in a Dispute is no fun or is it much ado about nothing

Thursday, August 26th, 2010

It is a matter of fact that a considerable number of companies are suffering from acute cash flow problems. This is not all down to the poor state of the economy but a large part can be squarely laid at the door of the “I do not want to pay” brigade.

Rod Appleyard

Now it is easy to reach for the solicitor or run off to the small claims courts. The first option only runs up a hugely disproportionate bill and the second option is as reliable as a roulette wheel. So just hang back a second and read on, I might, just might, be able to save you not only money but, in some cases, your company.

In recent months there have been considerable column inches (sorry, centimetres) covered on the matter of alternative dispute resolution and, in particular, mediation and ombudsmen schemes.

Given that there will be the inevitable confusion about how they work and other more legal aspects, I believe it is time to put keyboard to work and prevent any misunderstanding that may arise.

So, let us look at the five routes of ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) mechanisms.

Firstly, we have Arbitration which sits just under the courts and is a legal mechanism which can only be appealed through the Court of Appeal. It is long- winded, expensive, (although not as expensive as court) and can become most complex. This is ideal for really big cases which are both complex and multifaceted. There springs to mind at least one case in fenestration history that would have done well to go to arbitration, but became driven by the legal system and ended up in court, much to the cost of the parties. I am sure there are many more up and down the country that I do not know about. I have seen cases where costs of the parties are very much a multiple of the disputed sum, in one case it reached almost a multiple of ten. Who says proportionality is alive and well – I do not think so. Big cases go to arbitration it makes so much sense: unless you want a quick fix then read on.

We then look at my favourite, Adjudication. It is legally binding, the courts almost never overthrow a decision unless it is incorrectly conceived within the law or there is a conflict of interest. You get the answer in 28 days and if a party does not pay or perform within the stated period, usually 7 days, it can be enforced through the courts like any other court decision. The great thing about adjudication is that you get an adjudicator that knows the discipline and not someone who the day before was listening to why the boat that was sold sank two days after the purchase date. Another advantage is that you can ask for costs of, not only, the adjudication but also the costs of getting to the adjudication. Just remember, you do not get if you do not ask.

Costly? Well considering the time allowed, definitely not. Good for small disputes and domestics? Very much so, just make sure that it is in your terms and conditions that in the event of a dispute either party may go to adjudication as described under the JCT Home owners’ and builders’ contract if it is a company against a householder. This mechanism can be used also after the event if both parties agree or, for larger disputes, under the Scheme for Construction Contracts. Adjudication is my favourite route for dispute resolution because you get a fenestration expert looking at fenestration disputes – this just cannot be beat. The adjudicator will be legally trained and recognised by the courts and by his professional body as being competent and fair. I have yet to find anyone, either claimant or respondent, that does not agree that it is an open and fair mechanism that works. Did I say that it was behind closed doors so there is no publicity? It just has to be good for the PR people in the company. I can hear it now ‘Yes, we put this clause in so that if a dispute arises our clients know what to do’, followed closely by ‘It never gets used but we feel that it indicates how fair we are as a company’. Just remember in both levels of adjudication if you do not ask the adjudicator to decide something, he will not even down to who pays the parties costs and interest, it is all down to you, 28 days and it is all over. A very much overlooked and extraordinarily simple means of settling the most smallest of disputes in an economical manner, and as I have said before it is legally binding. A further question that may arise, is that of on what it can be used on. Hob adjudication can only be used on disputes between home owners and builders (contractors). The main adjudication system is mainly geared to construction issues under ‘The Act’ or as I have said ‘The Scheme’. These block the parties ability to litigation if it is in the contract. However, anything can be adjudicated as long as both the parties agree.

Route No. 3 – Expert Determination. This is where you get an expert in the discipline of the dispute, in our case, fenestration and they will listen to each party, read all the documents submitted and make a decision. This is a binding decision and carries the weight of the courts; all done very quietly and without fuss. Has a decision ever been overturned? Not to my knowledge, but then it is without publicity, so I would not know. Enforceable in the courts? Yes. Is it as good as adjudication? As much as it hurts to say, yes, almost. Expert determination has the same privacy surrounding it and, as with adjudication, does no need solicitors representing the parties in small claims, although it helps sometimes.

Mediation. This is the big buzz word at the moment within legal circles. So what do you get? You get anyone from a solicitor to an accountant who runs between the parties and encourages them to make a deal. No one wins and the optimum is that no one loses. Mediation is all about brokering a deal between the two parties and the best bit is that there is a better than even chance that the mediator has not a clue what a spandrel panel is let alone a mullion so this is a very costly exercise, that is, unless the parties fall for the manipulation of the mediator. It will either fail or be a compromise that has cost a considerable amount of money and achieved at eleven o’clock at night through sheer exhaustion and a loss of the will to live.

Is it legally binding? Well, I suppose it is unless one party shouts foul afterwards and will not honour the agreement even if it is in writing. Does it cost much? Well, I have been told recently that a fourteen hour mediation meeting where the parties, through sheer fatigue, reached a settlement and the bill for just the mediator was £2,500.00, plus VAT, of course. Staggering, but true. On that basis, the mediator, being a solicitor, confirmed that he had not a clue what the subject matter was but that did not matter as the parties reached a decision and the £2,500.00, plus VAT, was just for that day not all the other hours that had been clocked up.
Another person round the table openly admitted that he was an accountant and regularly did construction mediations although, apart from watching his extension being built, knew very little about building works. I pointed out that this could be a bit frightening and I was frowned on as being a little sensitive on what cases a person should, or should not, act as a mediator.

I pointed out that surely the parties should have confidence that, not only is the mediator competent, but is also knowledgeable of the terminology of the discipline. You see, the mediator cannot use his expertise to help the matter along, but I believe that he needs to know what the parties are talking about – but apparently not – poor parties, such misguided trust!

The answer came back as, ‘not one bit’. So, next week, I fancy being a mediator on a medical dispute – anyone out there? I know nothing about it but that would apparently not matter. Mediation is an expensive way of, what we call, either ‘doing a deal’ or ‘making a commercial decision’. Go to mediation at your peril. It may work but you will have to compromise, along with paying for the benefit of that compromise. Costs? Well, invariably, you meet your own and half the mediation costs. It is a bit like court system really, where you never fully win or lose, just kind of make the system go round in a jaundiced manner.

An Ombudsman. This is a new kid on the block to the fenestration industry and, to be quite honest, in this case, it is a name only. From what I can gather there is no named ombudsman in our industry, it is done by a group of people. Do they have legal standing? Not to my knowledge, but then I may be wrong. Are they totally independent? Well, if you disregard how the ombudsman is funded then, perhaps, to a blind, deaf man living on Mars, it could be. Is the ombudsman open to anyone or just a select few? From what I can discern, the answer is both no and yes, in that order.

The big question is ‘Does it have legal recognition and legal gravitas?’. Sorry, Mr. Ombudsman, your decisions are neither supported by the courts or, from what I can gather, made by a suitably qualified person. One of the board of directors of the outfit that is operating the scheme, is not sufficient to demonstrate that there is not a conflict of interest. To be quite honest, is this not just another scheme that tries to appear independent but is, in fact, a trade association supported by its members? Now let me think, where have I seen this before?

Well, unfortunately, this article may ruffle a few feathers but then it needs to. We have more than sufficient ADR mechanisms that will do the job, if used correctly. These are supported by legislation and the courts, without pseudo- ombudsmen popping up offering non-legal or unenforceable decisions. Times are hard and work is, to say the least, tight. If you get into a dispute, put your money with either adjudication or expert determination and do not forget to get that clause into your terms – you are then protected against litigation and, like many insurances, it is hoped you will never need it but it is there if you do.

Much ado about nothing? That just depends on your position, does it not?

Rod Appleyard works as a fenestration expert with many years experience in the industry and dispute resolution. He is a Chartered Building Surveyor, Fellow of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors and a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators. He practices as an Adjudicator and Arbitrator along with his work as an independent expert surveyor to the fenestration industry. He can be reached on either 01274 569912 or 07785232934

A website even worse than GGF’s

Tuesday, May 18th, 2010

Following on from RCG’s last post where he mentioned that the GGF website was outdated and needed a complete overhaul, I thought that the GGF could do with sorting out the FENSA website whilst they’re at it.

The FENSA website is even worse, much worse! It looks more like something from 1990 with no design consideration whatsoever.

Most of us are FENSA members and I think it’s important that a major governing body of the double glazing industry should present themselves in a manner that deserves respect and maintains credibility in the eyes of the public.


Guest post by David Bingham of ConservatoryLand

Good salesman or Rogue Trader?

Monday, March 8th, 2010

Guest Post by David

Sat a lead yesterday with a frail old lady in her eighties. She had already had a few windows done by one of the Nationals.

After a chat she revealed what she had paid for these windows and even showed me her invoice. The reputable company in question had charged the poor soul £2080.00 for one 1800×1200 window with 2 opening casements. The maximum retail we would charge on this would be about £500.00 max.

I do feel that they had taken advantage somewhat of a fairly vulnerable old lady.  Any company with less of a reputation would be classed as a rip off merchant and rogue trader. What are your renegade thoughts. Am I just too soft?

Regards

David

The two classic mistakes business owners make

Friday, March 5th, 2010

Guest post by Roy Vassie

Following my comment on the recent blog posting ’should I close down my window company’ the RCG asked me for a guest posting outlining some of the classic errors I have seen companies in our sector of industry make on a regular basis.  After my first thought.. ‘there’s a series of books in this, how will I find the time to write them ‘. I gave the question some more thought and decided that rather than individual examples, of which I could literally quote thousands. I would go for the errors that cause the multitude of problems I see.

For those of you who don’t know me I will explain that through my work with Adminbase, I have been in the fortunate position to have been privy to the inner workings of hundreds of window and Conservatory companies over the years. I am as a result of this work acutely aware that many have succeeded in spite of their efforts rather than because of them.

In reply to the question ’should I close down my window company’ RCG outlined a number of issues that would need to be looked at in detail and addressed to ensure a company worked and operated profitably. The very fact that it was necessary for him to do this highlighted to me the most obvious problem I and my colleagues at Ab Initio see. The scenario goes something like this.
 
‘I’m too busy getting the work done to spend time analysing my business activity’s.’ or ‘I know I need to, but I just don’t have enough time to change things right now.’

This position is expressed by ones fortunate enough to have a full order book, the flip side of this being when the company is struggling with short lead times due to a shrinking order book, then we often hear.

‘I am too busy finding new, customers, reps, methods of generating leads to take time to spend time analysing my business activity’s.’ or ‘I know I need to, but I just don’t have enough time to change things right now, because I am too busy finding new, customers, reps, methods of generating leads.’ A truly self perpetuating problem.

So the most common mistake I see business owners making, is that many never make the time to stand back take a long hard look at their business and get in control. A simple but fundamental mistake, but one that I see made time after time, often by otherwise very intelligent capable people.

Then when the time comes or is forced upon the owner, or the company to take the ‘long hard look’ comes the second most common error.

They have taken a look at something that is very familiar and comfortable for them… their own business, and frequently draw the conclusion. ‘I have always done things this way and it’s worked just fine up till now’ or ‘Its not just my business that’s struggling everyone is in the same boat’

Different perspectives that both lead to the same point of view, that being to resolve to hang on in there, continue to do the same old things in the hope things will pick up.

The problem with this position is that the more radical thinkers amongst the competition, will steal the march on the guy that thinks this way, and in time our owner who is always too busy will be back in the ‘I am too busy finding new, customers, reps, methods of generating leads to take time to’ etc. etc. scenario.

I believe, the very competitive nature of our industry reinforces this problem. We dont have many who talk on a regular basis to their competitors, and of those that do, only a small minority will be honest about the issues they currently confront, especially the negative ones.

The strange thing is that the companies I personally know, who stand out as shining examples. (most of whom have done so for as long as I can remember) are the ones that buck that trend. They are willing to talk to virtually anyone about their businesses in an open and candid way; and they do so because they have found that this exposes them to new ideas and teaches them about others mistakes and as a result of this discourse they flourish.

As a company Ab Initio have held a number of seminars for our users over the years, to which we have invited customers from all over the country. The experience of meeting and discussing their businesses in detail with us and each other, has always been beneficial for both those companies and also for us, helping us as it does better understand the needs of our users.
 
So I guess that would lead me to conclude that the classic mistakes are.

1 Being unable to see the need for change within your own business or worse still being unaware of the need for change because you only have you own experiences to draw from.

2 The reluctance to make the changes that are needed, even when you know that change you must.

Roy Vassie
Ab Initio Software

http://www.abinitiosoftware.co.uk

WER scheme still has a long way to go before it can work

Friday, February 26th, 2010

Mark Hickox, Sales Director at Thermoseal Group discusses the requirement for ‘exchangeability’ of products in the Window Energy Rating Scheme (WER) and his view that the WER Scheme still has a way to go before it can work to the advantage of the whole industry.

 

mark hickox thermoseal

The EN1279 Euronorm for IG manufacturers allows for the ‘exchangeability’ of one brand of spacer for another one, so as long as a spacer is proven to provide the same or superior performance to the original test unit spacer, manufacturers can exchange products without the requirement for a re-test. This is the same for other IG unit components including sealant and desiccant.
We currently supply over half of the UK’s spacer requirements in the form of aluminium tube. This tube is sold with full details of its technical composition and proven performance information which means that insulated glass (IG) manufacturers can assess it in line with the current brand of aluminium spacer they are using and exchange the brand for a similar or better performing product.
 
Although we all agree that this system of ‘exchangeability’ must be regulated and controlled effectively to ensure that high standards of double glazing are encouraged and maintained, it ensures that the market remains open for new products. ‘Exchangeability’ will stop the market being dominated by a few organisations with plenty of available cash and big enough budgets to pay for hundreds of brand-specific tests.
 
‘Exchangeability’ also means that new products can be brought to market with the relative criteria proven by test data. This avoids component Manufacturers, IG manufacturers and window installers having to go through masses of red tape to change their products.
 
The Window Energy Rating (WER) scheme doesn’t currently allow for ‘exchangeability’ because simulations are performed based on IG components of which many are stated as brand names rather than a given specification of a technical data and a minimum performance standard.
 
This results in certain brands of WER products becoming successful because they have been included in more simulations than other products of equal or better technical composition and performance ability. This then leads to a crazy situation whereby a window installer cannot chose to install a superior product because it does not conform to his brand-specific WER.
 
Aren’t Window Installers entitled to choose a better performing product for their money?
 
There are many arguments for allowing ‘exchangeability’ of products which should be considered carefully. In particular, we must consider the fact that the financial stability of any suppliers into the IG market is not guaranteed. Over the past two years alone we have seen massive swings in exchange rates and commodity prices which have resulted in many seemingly solid businesses under-performing.   Therefore, it makes sound business sense and encourages a more stable and competitively priced market to allow for some flexibility. Besides, if the marketplace changes very quickly to warm edge as legislation suggests, then no single supplier will have the capacity to meet demand. This will leave IG manufacturers no choice but to use whatever they can get. The public, who will not notice the subtle differences between spacers, will be none the wiser.
 
Currently, WER scheme simulators are encouraged to use the branded products with the best performance figures to ensure that their customers can gain the highest possible Window Energy Ratings. Although the scheme is admirable in that it aims to improve the standards of double glazing in the interests of the homeowner, we’re concerned that it doesn’t seem to be working with IG businesses.
 
Only 38% of IG manufacturers positive about the WER scheme
 
We recently carried out a customer survey across our database of almost 2,000 IG manufacturers across the UK and only 38% of those who completed the survey were positive about the WER scheme. We also asked for their opinion as to whether they support the view that ‘exchangeability’ should be permitted in the WER scheme. Over 70% agreed that it should (the majority of the rest were undecided).
 
Over 70% agreed that product exchangeability should be permitted
 
Like many other suppliers into the UK window market, Thermoseal Group is planning to launch a new spacer tube (Thermobar) and several new products in 2010 which will have proven equal or higher thermal efficiency values than many of those currently available. However, operating under the current BFRC WER scheme guidelines, these products would have to be re-simulated by all users in all pre-registered WERs before they could be used.
 
We suggest that products should be selected by WER scheme simulators based on key performance indicators with relative criteria proven by the technical composition and test data of the product. This will put an element of the decision-making process back into the hands of the IG manufacturer who has the real experience of making sealed units. It will also help to retain a competitive business environment for suppliers.
 
As members of the GGF, we have invested a great deal of time and effort into attending many meetings around the UK so that we can join in the debates that we are assured will shape the future of our industry. So far there seems to be a lot of talking but the action remains to be seen.

Respect your customer’s time

Monday, February 15th, 2010

Guest post by Dave Blakeman of RPS

When a salesperson visits a customer, I believe they should show respect for that customer’s time. It’s remarkably simple (but rare) for a salesperson to put themselves in the customer’s shoes. This invoves doing simple things:-

Arrive when promised
Don’t out-stay your welcome
Do what you promised by when you promised it

In addition, I have a suggestion for the retail conservatory sales world. As a gesture of respect for the customer’s time, why not send them a small box of chocolates (or an M&S voucher) along with your quotation? And a small note saying “your time is important to me – please accept this as a small token for taking the time to see me”.

Say this costs £10/customer. Benefits would be:

1. The customer will be amazed – this is not how double glazing companies are expected to behave!
2. It’s almost inconceivable that your competition would do the same thing, so you’ve already ticked a “special” box that people didn’t realise existed!
3. If you don’t win the job, you’ll be in a great position to ask why. That feedback is invaluable – you’ve already given something special to the customer, and they will feel obliged to give you an honest answer back, rather than just fobbing you off with “the other quote was less” (price is a great excuse, but rarely the main reason to choose someone else)
4. Whether you win the job or not, you can be pretty certain the customer will tell others about it.
Sounds like £10 well spent to me (especially in the current climate). I’m not sure it would have the same impact in trade-trade sales, but we might well try it anyway!

If anyone decides to try this, let me know how it goes!

Dave is the MD of RPS (Roofwright) and has his own blog which is definitely worth following at:

http://daveblakeman.wordpress.com/

Are our windows environmentally friendly?

Friday, February 12th, 2010

Here’s the Environmental Friendliness Test from the Integrity Windows new product development lab which clearly demonstrates the windows that we are fitting are not the most environmentally friendly.

Guest post by David Bingham of ConservatoryLand

Are your windows unleaded?

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

Guest post by Roger Hartshorne in response to Martin Randall’s recent post

I agree with all of your comments and sentiments, and congratulations on your new appointment within the GGF. I have read this website over the last 12 months and noted the comments without a response, however I think now is the time to make one or two points.

lead-free-windows

One of the major developments in recent times must be Lead Free Profile. Some system companies have either avoided the change or just chose not to do it. Lead Free petrol was launched to reduce pollution, everyone who buys petrol now buys lead free because its the right thing to do, some systems companies still supply lead stabilised window profiles, why?????. The only reason can be commercial gain for short term profit. Just imagine if you had to put the green skull and crossbones on your adverts for windows and imagine the conversations to explain this to Joe Public.

The systems companies have been guilty of not supplying new products over the last 3 or 4 years due to the constraints of reccession. Innovation has stalled, but this has been fed by the fabricators just wanting to buy cheap. I have met numerous fabricators who know that the system they fabricate is outdated, lead stabilised, restricted in terms of thermal performance, but cheap. This just allows the system companies to avoid expensive change of either tools, raw materials or both. Ultimately, who will lose out?

If you look at other industries then change and improvement is driven by the customer, everyone now accepts that their new fridge has an energy rating, every one accepts that your new fridge is fully recyclable without any nasty gases inside, yet why oh why do some fabricators keep knocking old outdated windows with no energy rating, made with soon to be illegal metal inside? Come on lads rather than moan about the market, look forward and embrace change and help push it forward rather than being dragged along.

Regards
Roger Hartshorne
http://liniar.co.uk/

All window fitters to be ‘on the books’ and no one seems concerned

Tuesday, January 12th, 2010

Occasionally, very occasionally, the industry seems to suffer from a lack of communication, total disinterest or a general malaise, especially when there are things on the horizon that set out to fundamentally alter the way the Window Industry works.

Over the last couple of months the GGF, direct and through its FENSA subsidiary, have communicated to all their members/registered companies about the impending desire by government to change the tax collection methods in the industry. This call was first taken up by the Construction Industry Media, and followed by press releases from the Get Britain Building organisation and the GGF. They have all been pushing the message to anyone that would listen, the need to sign up to register objections to the proposed changes via the No 10 Web site.

These new tax changes are said by the government paper to affect some 250,000 – 900,000 individuals.

Going by the number of respondents to the petition on the No 10 web site, less than 1,800 people seem to be interested.

The conclusions we get from that are:

No one actually cares.
No one actually reads anything from their trade representatives.
No one takes their trade media out of its poly bag when it arrives.
No one believes that the No. 10 petition site has any relevance.

People believe as they are already signed up for ‘The Construction Industry Scheme (CIS)’ on self employment it doesn’t affect them.

Or there is just a general malaise, and they have to accept the way the world is changing around them.

The government paper on the subject is full of the usual spin, and contradictions. It tries to say one thing then clouds the issues with double meanings. Slide into law something low key and leave the real meaning to later.

Trying to paraphrase some of it and how it might affect the Window Industry:

Self-employed, even those that are registered via the CIS scheme, will no longer mean just that. Tax & NIC will have to be collected by the Window Company on behalf on the Window Installer unless certain criteria are met. I have tried to outline them in a Window Industry context.

The contractor will in future be seen as self employed for tax purposes only when:

1 the contractor supplies ALL the plant – (in the window industry) tools and van – (corporate identity?).
2 the contractor is responsible for all the costs with the client (customer), they would have to buy the frames in, with the final balance going into their own bank account. (Everest & Anglian will love that).
3 they do not have continuity of work with one company, which in itself would imply regular employment (they would need to be seen to work for more than 1 company).
4 they pay the wages, i.e. Main Installers pays his own mate (presumably by PAYE).

In other words if the proposal goes through all window fitters could in effect finish up on the books, with pay and conditions similar to all other employees. Just think of all the tools window companies will have to start buying – fitters will probably no longer be able to offset them against tax. Then there is the holiday pay, then the pay for sitting around because they can’t get to site because of the weather. So on and so on.

The real surprise is that no one seems overly concerned about these changes to the status of the industry and that all the trade press in recent months has failed to get the message over.

Or is it that everyone is so busy chasing the next order they haven’t had the time to register the information?

Guest post by Ian McDougall
Fenestration News

  • Sponsors

  • image widget
  • image widget
  • image widget
  • image widget
  • image widget
  • image widget
© 2010 Renegade Conservatory Guy