Aimée L Felton 2012

15 defective building components and the potential ensuing prosecution. This varied and diverging response to few definitions and obligations as set out in the UK legal framework already identifies the need for an enhanced obligation and duty of care framework to accompany ownership of historic buildings in order to prevent ‘seriously diminish[ing] its authenticity, and significantly reduc[ing] its value as a source of historical information’ (Brereton. 1991 as cited in Worthing, D. 2002:p11). In common with almost all definitions of maintenance conservation is the background ethos of rigorous and routine maintenance. From English Heritage’s seminal Power of Place document (published in 2000), to PPS5: Planning and the Historic Environment (DCMS: 2010) which emphasises this statement in the strongest manner and later goes on to admonish the owners of historic buildings who failed to act upon the implied duty of care married to the ownership of a listed building, with the threat of action by the local authorities. ‘Regular maintenance and repair are the key to the preservation of historic buildings. Modest expenditure on repairs keeps a building weather tight, and routine maintenance can prevent much more expensive work becoming necessary at a later date’ DETR, PPG15:1994 There is no questioning the rhetoric of the importance of maintenance throughout conservation literature and policy (see PPG15 1994, English Heritage 2000, Feilden 2003), but it is at this point important to clarify the ONE Chapter One - Introduction Aimee Felton