Leaderboard

The aim of any business is to make a living for its owner and any staff employed. I sleep better at night knowing I have done a fair job for a fair price and know that my customers are happy with the work and happy to recommend me to others. In all trades there are good and bad. Electricians are no exception, we hear horror stories of poor work and extortionate charges frequently. I will finish by saying that it sounds like you are a reasonable person, and it is just such a shame that when I was looking, I could not find an architect that I would describe as reasonable. Perhaps it's time to talk more of the positives rather than negatives?

It's not the design that's copyright but the drawings. So for example you can't copyright a window shapped like a clover leaf. A new architect could also include a clover leaf shape window in the new design. What you can't do is give the new architect a copy of the first architects drawning and have him trace it. The issue is can a new architect make any use of the original drawings. A lot depends on the wording of the contract you agreed with the first architect and the terms of any license it contains to use his drawings. See bottom of page 14 par 47 (a) continued on page 15.. https://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAProfessionalServices/Practice/SmallPracticeConference/2010/2011RobertStevensonHandout.pdf and then ont the other hand (b)...

@Sensus: I have some sympathy with that, and I think the same applies to the term "self-builder". There is no typical architect or self-builder, and the ground each may need to cover is so great that we cannot expect that. It is not reasonable to expect any architect from the phone book or the local large practice to understand say the intricacies, how to use, and availability of types of oak frame or self-cleaning curtain wall glazing or CLT vs Timber Frame for a 4 storey house on a site on Gigalum Island; we can reasonably expect them to have the knowledge of how to find it out, and capability to make a sound judgement once they have found out, and experience/professionalism to refer us somewhere else if appropriate. Equally self-builders might be the person building a timber frame house starting, as Harvey Jones quipped of Morgan, with the standing tree and who learns how to shear the local sheep they have russled to make insulation for 4p per tonne. Or they could be a well-off person who just wants a Gin Palace with a swimming pool, who may be interested in the internal texture of his Quoins or just wants to move in asap. Or they could be a turbo-DIYer expanding their scope. There is a spectrum. The key skills on both sides are probably communciation and listening. Which is what we are about on this thread. In quantity, perhaps, but as far as I can see ALL of the longlisted houses in the RIBA House of the Year could be described as self-builders - people building or modifying their own houses. Perhaps one issue is misunderstanding of roles. And negotiating expectations and establishing particular roles and recognising what those are is perhaps the thing easiest to miss, especially as self-builders doing one or two projects may not recognise the vast zoology of architects out there - it is no use having a Hummingbird architect if you actually need a Termite Queen. Personally I think of the RIBA as being rather pompous, or (more colloquially) a little "up themselves" - the quintessential establishment. That is a view I share with several architects known to me. I think they would be more approachable after a few years were their headquarters to move to say Burnley, Haverford West or Cumbernauld. i am not sure if that is much different from eg the main membership organisation for Actuaries, but we see the products of architects every day when we leave our beds or our front doors whilst in our relationship with actuaries either us or them are dead by the time we discover it was a dud. That House of the Year is limited to "architect designed" is a good illustration of that somewhat pompous tendency imo. There's something Barchester Chronicles about it. I have views about the architect I would employ: 1 - I value people who put their money where their mouth is, so I would hope for someone who built or modified their own house and is able to communicate their rationale to me or talk about projects in that way. 2 - I expect my views in the areas I know about to be given equal weight. 3 - For the main part I prioritise practicality / pleasantness to live in, long term maintanability, simplicity and cost-effectiveness over artistic expression. But that does not rule out attractiveness, just white elephants. 4 - I would expect to see experience similar or adjacent to the project(s). Were I wanting a very effective 100sqm rental bungalow on a 250qm site I would not recruit Zaha Hadid or Calatrava; I would look for the person who designed the one built round the corner three years ago that the inhabitent likes living in.. 5 - I would expect to kiss several frogs to find my prince. But then one of my frogs could be somebody else's prince, as we are all varied frogs ourselves. 6 - As Client I get the final say having listened carefully, and specifically given my architect the right to challenge vigorously. I would hope to be billed monthly on the basis of time spent, to have the full electronic model, and a right for that design to be used on that site without further supply of spondulicks. But I have been around architects for a long time and worked in the commercial side of construction research for some time so can to an extent talk constructionese nearly as well as I talk gibberish. It is a similar dilemma to hiring an architect :-). A web designer has combine practicality and a limited selection of technology from umpteen options have to be combined with satisfying a client who does not understand all the areas (eg latest practice in accessibility design, video technology, online copyright law, traffic analysis etc) while being a designer with a desire for artistic expression (and probably higher fees than architects :-o ). I would be fascinated to hear how this goes. Ferdinand

Could you not plastic prime: http://www.autopaintsbrighton.co.uk/u-pol-1k-plastic-primer-adhesion-promotor-600ml-aerosol-upol-2579-p.asp a UPVC cloaking board after lightly abrading it then spray yourself? My local Spraystore will make up aerosols to RAL colours. I've also used HMG Paints in the past.

AFAIC theoretical nonsense, but its keeping them all entertained on a cold winters afternoon so was quite happy for them to carry on

Come on gents, it's the festive season. Let's all talk nice.

Sensus. ALL you are doing is exposing how bad architects and their contracts are. If someone PAYS the architect to design ONE house for ONE plot and provide all the plans, then I am pretty sure that 99.9% of people would think it perfectly reasonable if the plot changes ownership, to expect owner B to be able to build the SAME house on the SAME plot without anything more than a small administrative fee. Any attempt to "sell" the copyright to the new owner while possibly perfectly legal (if that's the ay the original contract was worded) it would be to most people very very sharp practice and extracting money for old rope. I am not talking about building multiple houses to the same design, or building the same house elsewhere, just the one house on the one plot as the architec designed it. Perhaps the ONE lesson from this, is when you appoint an architect, make SURE points like that are worded to YOUR satisfaction in the contract that you sign. And can I throw into the mix what happens when the OWNER designs his house and gives that design to the architect to detail (was the case with my present new build) There can be no argument that I own the copyright to the "design" the architect only owns the copyright to the details that he produces.

Don't know where you would find any off the shelf but an engineering company should be able to fold you a piece of aluminium and then just get it sprayed the correct RAL colour. PS, What's the RSJ for, a hoist point???

Change the akward to reach screws to hex or torx drive so there's less chance of them cam'ing out and getting stuck. Hex drive would be my choice here. The vado is a very nice looking tap, is the hard sale down to cost?

a) Fill it to the brim to simulate you sitting in it whilst it's full. b) Once solvent weld has gone off that's the end of the show mate. You'll be able to tow a car with that, a few knocks won't matter a toss. Adding glue will just create a skin which won't do anything whatsoever and will just peel away once cured. A bit more to this one. In your left hand you have the 'plughole', and two rubber washers. I usually ditch the upper one and make that up entirely out of sika. The conical one is where the thinking is applied. Does the conical one fit the profile of the bath reasonably well, or does it hold the waste off the floor of the bath a lot? If the latter, then I'd ditch that one also and pack out with sika. Tightening the fitting will displace any excess sealant so just load it up according to the gap you know exists + 25%. The only important part of that marriage is the underside of the 'plughole' being sealed against the upper face of the hole in the bath. The seals are a secondary consideration IMO, BUT, if the rubber seals just happen to match the bath perfectly you can get away with a sealant-free installation that doesn't leak. Doesn't happen very often btw as these are universal wastes . The rubber seal on the waste arrangement is a pretty good seal on its own. Hand tight, that probably wouldn't leak, it's just down to the accuracy of the finish where the underside of the bath has been ground down to create the seat face. I'd apply just a very thin smear of sika to the underside of that seal ( removing it from the waste to do so ) and then refit it loosely. Then apply another smear to the ribbed face ( which will be in contact with the bath ), with another smear on the bath underside itself, to soak up any imperfection in the casting. Once you've done that and are ready to assemble, the tricky part is to pass the plughole through the various openings / seals etc WITHOUT getting any sealant migrating to the inside of the plughole or waste. Look through the centre during installation to ensure this is so. LAST important note is not to allow ANY rotation of the waste during FINAL tightening. The reason for that is the rubber seal on the waste is now lubricated so it'll get pushed out of position by pressure and motion. Pressure ( created by the plughole getting rotated into the static waste during final tightening ) is fine, but movement during this process is fatal. Remember not to over tighten too, as the sealant will recreate the job of the seals it replaces, and do a better job. Just a smear on the ribbed face will be more than plenty. As this never sees any pressure / weight of water, it needs almost nothing other than the factory arrangement. Hand tight and nowt else. These are bombproof. Same with the plastic trap nut. Just be sure to de-burr the inside of the waste pipe at every joint to stop hair from snagging ( which I'll bet my left nut you've already done anyhoo ). Only thing I've ever had go wrong with these baths when new and out of the packaging is a leaking jet / inlet / outlet, where some goon has used it to lift the bath / struck it at some point. A soak test will show this immediately, ( over a couple of hours ). Running the pump with the bath full is the only way to check for leaks under pressure. Have some anti-foam droplets ready.

Sadly the VAT rule for wardrobes is incredibly tight. This explains why almost all wardrobes are just a shelf and a rail as that is basically all you can have to be VAT free. (c) basic wardrobes installed on their own with all the following characteristics: the wardrobe encloses a space bordered by the walls, ceiling and floor. But units whose design includes, for example, an element to bridge over a bed or create a dressing table are furniture and are not building materials the side and back use three walls of the room (such as across the end of a wall), or two walls and a stub wall. But wardrobes installed in the corner of a room where one side is a closing end panel are furniture and are not building materials on opening the wardrobe you should see the walls of the building. These would normally be either bare plaster or painted plaster. Wardrobes that contain internal panelling, typically as part of a modular or carcass system, are furniture and are not building materials The wardrobe should feature no more than a single shelf running the full length of the wardrobe, a rail for hanging clothes and a closing door or doors. Wardrobes with internal divisions, drawers, shoe racks or other features are furniture and are not building materials.