Tempered windows

[JIM MURPHY]

1978 house with single pane windows without muntins that measure 20X 40, 32 X 40 and 36 X 40. These are measurements of the bottom window not the combined top and bottom. The windows are less than 18 inches from the floor. I know the 9 sq feet rule and ect. but how does it apply to this age house. My clients are concerned about their children doing a head first into them.

Thanks in advance!

Jim Murphy

[Raymond Wand]

If the clients are concerned about little Johnny and Sally going through the window I'd be informing them to upgrade the windows and reframe the wall so the sill is higher.

[Markus Keller]

I don't know what Code SC is under now or was in 1978. We have lots of single pane glass here in older buildings. No Code that makes people change them, thankfully. From a safety perspective obviously there is an issue.
Around here the windows are usually deteriorated enough to warrant replacement. You could also recommend replacement from an energy use standpoint.
The windows are what they are, either live with them or replace them. They could also install various types of wood or metal railings or screens across the bottom.
Now in rehab it's another story as the attached pic shows.
Not tempered glass, regular 1/4".

[wayne soper]

As a rule inspectors should get away from the code aspect and look at these areas strictly from a safety point of view and recommend repairs or upgrades. After all, we are here to protect our clients, not the sale of a house.

[chris mcintyre]

IMO The best solution would be to replace the sashes with tempered sashes, which is fairly simple and affordable. I would be careful recommending reframing windows smaller or putting permanent restraints in place due to egress concerns.

The fact that the house is over 30 years old negates any relevance to what the code was when the house was built (I am talking about real word relevance). The builder (if he is still in business or alive :)) is not going to pay to have them replaced, the sellers are not liable and are not obligated to replace them. If the buyers insist that the sellers pay for this, it will be up to the sellers on how bad they want to sell the house, not because it was code 30+ years ago, which my guess is that it was not.

[Jerry Peck]

On safety items, accidents do not read the code to see when they are allowed to happen or not. The only thing the code does is acknowledge when enough otherwise smart people got off their butts and finally agreed that ENOUGH PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY been injured to include it in the code.

That NEVER meant that it 'was safe' before it was put into the code, only that the code finally recognizes it as 'safer' with the new requirements (which also does not mean 'it is safe', only that it is 'safer').

Be careful how you use the code, which I believe all home inspectors should be familiar with, but don't use the code to imply something is 'safe', anything and everything can be 'unsafe' under various conditions, the code simply reduces the safety risk to a level considered acceptable "today", but that may well change over the next 20-30 years or so when it is recognized that it was still 'not as safe' as it could have been and the code changes to reflect the 'new knowledge'.

[JIM MURPHY]

Thanks to all! I have not been on her not much recently. Have been busy with a new company! Again thanks to Jerry for all of his wisdom. I miss that part.

Jim

[Jim Robinson]

She's not going to be happy about your new company.

[chris mcintyre]

She's not going to be happy about your new company.

:D :D