Triple glazed windows - middle pane cracked - Again!

selfbuildache

Hi,
I've posted on this before and now it's the 4th time (each time a different window):
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057808630

The middle pane is totally splintered, spider-webbed from top to bottom. Outer 2 panes are fine.
But now it's a much bigger window; approx 235 x 160cm, a weird shape (attached) and probably a lot more expensive.

I have a feeling it's pointless but I'm going to go back to the company (you'll see from the link that this has not been successful before) and try and state a case as this is getting ridiculous. I'd also like to report this - but to whom? Is there an overseeing body of window manufacturers?

Can you help with my case? What is it, if any? Are there any independent bodies that might be useful? I have vague recollections of being in contact with SEAI? Ombudsman? But all this has left my brain so am not sure where to start... Any advice gratefully received.

Although I'll give 'reporting' this a try, as the last resort, can a local window supplier supply a window like this?

(To try to preempt questions that were asked previously- 'Guarantee' (that was useless before anyway) is out. The window is in a totally different facing area to other windows. Individual unit. Not on a corner. No heat source near it. No blinds or curtains.)
Thanks as always.

VANG1

Go and stand outside their showroom with a sign displaying pictures of their windows and they may decide to help. Clearly there is a manufacturing problem, or else you are covered by sale and supply of goods act and get your solicitor to take an action against them. You need to play hardball

fatty pang

Could you post a photo taken perpendicular to what appears to be the point at which the cracks are radiating out from - the area highlighted in red. Take the photo from about 6" back.

BryanF

Nickle sulphate - Several large glassing companies I’ve worked with have it a specific warranty exclusion.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=glass+silicate+spontaneous+breakage&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart#d=gs_qabs&u=%23p%3Do3kBvhJWZaQJ

paying for heat soaked toughened glass which reduces the risk is expensive.

c.p.w.g.w

BryanF wrote: »

Nickle sulphate - Several large glassing companies I’ve worked with have it a specific warranty exclusion.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=glass+silicate+spontaneous+breakage&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart#d=gs_qabs&u=%23p%3Do3kBvhJWZaQJ

paying for heat soaked toughened glass which reduces the risk is expensive.

Is the nickel sulphate used in the frame?

BryanF

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

Is the nickel sulphate used in the frame?

No.

fatty pang

BryanF wrote: »

Nickle sulphate - Several large glassing companies I’ve worked with have it a specific warranty exclusion.

paying for heat soaked toughened glass which reduces the risk is expensive.

As you point out heat soak testing doesn’t eliminate the NiS risk therefore suppliers of glazing units will not provide a warranty that includes spontaneous fractures (there can also be other inclusions in addition to NiS that don’t react to HST). It’s similar with thermal stress fractures.
This type of failure is usually the of poor edge working prior to toughening but given the picture posted I haven’t dismissed NiS.

NiS induced failures happen rarely but when they do happen it will affect a relatively small batch of glass and unfortunately the OP has got more then their ‘fair share’ of a batch - if it is NiS.
HST is an additional expense (cost, production time, carbon cost) and given the rarity of NiS, IMHO, only justified as a ‘standard’ procedure when a failure could result in injury – high rise buildings with frequent pedestrian traffic underneath, or where replacement would require the provision of expensive access equipment.

Run-flat tyres are available for cars but I can’t justify the additional cost for my usage. Others may have different criteria.

selfbuildache

fatty pang wrote: »

Could you post a photo taken perpendicular to what appears to be the point at which the cracks are radiating out from - the area highlighted in red. Take the photo from about 6" back.

Photo attached.

fatty pang

selfbuildache wrote: »

Photo attached.

Apologies for the delay in replying but I have been getting a 503 error trying to log on for the last few days.
That breakage pattern is typical of a nickle sulphide event. You have been very unlucky. If it's any consolation the chances of a repeat with replacement glazing are very small.

selfbuildache

Thanks for the reply. At this stage I'm just pricing a new window .I had a quick look at the company's public profile as someone had suggested tweeting or approaching them through social media. But they do not have a high media profile and all I can see is complaints that are not replied to, so I don't think there's any avenue there...
As someone previously mentioned, short of protesting outside a shop there seems to be very little recourse with the company. Buyer beware.:(

cruizer101

Could you go down the small claims route, covers up to 2000 so should cover that window.

selfbuildache

Thank you. Might be an idea. Where do you start to see if you even have a case?

cruizer101

Others will probably know more or if you look in consumer issues forum, two links below with some info anyway.
That said I'd a look at your other thread and see windows are in nearly 10 years now, I'm not sure would there be any limit on how long you can take case from buying.

http://www.courts.ie/Courts.ie/Library3.nsf/pagecurrent/A9C6E93D70127EF38025810D0034EAD6?opendocument

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/courts_system/small_claims_court.html

fatty pang

selfbuildache wrote: »

Thank you. Might be an idea. Where do you start to see if you even have a case?

If it was a one-off event then in my opinion it would not be unreasonable that such a breakage is justifiably excluded from the warranty.
That you have had four similar episodes demonstrates what could be deemed a systematic failure and the issue of defective goods or fitness for purpose then becomes relevant. A consumer can reasonably expect to have insulated glazing units that are functionable for at least 20 years regardless of a suppliers warranty (warranties are designed to protect the manufacturer rather than the customer).


Given the circumstances I think it’s worth a punt with a small claims procedure. The process tends to favour the consumer particularly if you have recorded evidence of a defect. Four windows spontaneously ‘exploding’ in 10 years is hard to argue with and there won’t be an expert witness on the other side to contest that picture with the registrar.