Roger440

Sketch-up! You must have the patience of a saint.

If its on your drive, the council wont want to know. Your land, your problem.

Love this. Good luck with your build.

Thanks. However, doesnt help me at all as i couldnt meet those requirements in my ancient welsh stone cottage. Nor afford them.

Is it really that low? How are people doing these extensions with bi folds the full width and sky lights/lanterns etc?

As i understand its a money raising wheeze. You pay for it. Then after the max number of days they can, they then refund your payment in full saying they cannot supply. Do that many thousands of times, week in, week out, it a handy way of raising finance at no cost. There was a guy over on mig-welding forum (i think) that actually tried to buy one, and this is what happened.

WUFI assesment is an awful lot of money to do just a wall or one room though. As for BCO wanting things done that dont need doing, well im am surprised. Not. With you on the wood fibre.

Average of £22-28K per new house. Apparantly.

Just to resurrect this, I'm struggling to find a definitive answer. Basicslly, do I need to fit sprinklers if I build an extension on a house that currently does not, and is not required to have sprinklers. Anybody know?

Theres more than one video. I thought the one with the polycarb skylight formed of two bits was particuarly "special".

Say what you mean Nick 😂

A great Facebook post from the roofing outlaw yesterday on another eco4 job. It's scarcely believable. The skylight in particular is exceptional.

Under the ECO4 scheme, that would include ASHP. Im ok with that side of it, its the wall insulation that is my biggest concern. The front half of the house is a typical stone built, non DPC welsh cottage 900ft up the side of a hill. With a cavity wall extension. If these are not done right, it not an easy job to fix, by me or anyone. Then theres other issues like it currently pointed, internally with cement, which means wall are damp. Theres obviously no chance they will sort that, so need to do that first. Which i always intended to. In short, its all rather complicated at a practical level, but what you sayis certainly valid and something im pondering. As for building control, my view remains the same. Indeed, if the latest report linked above is anything to go by, building control oversight seems to be mostly absent given the work done in most cases is notifiable. But not my problem if someone else is doing the work. Ill be more use than building control in keeping tabs on the work.

I didnt suggest that it did.

If you think its not a real problem, id suggest, respectfully, you are out of touch with reality. These are being done by grant harvesters, most of whom only exist to harvest said grants. And will fold the minute the money stops. Quality work is not on the agenda. Especially, as we all know, careful detailing on such jobs is critical to avoid longer term issues. You are right these should be obvious to competent contractors. And therin lies the problem. I could have £45k of work done on my house under the ECO4 scheme at NO cost to myself. Financially its a no brainer, why work if i can just sit back and get free stuff. But, chances of it being done properly are near zero. Now if i could just get them to leave the materials and do it myself while they have a holiday at the taxpayers expense................ Seems they like a bit of fraud too.

O wouldn't entertain the idea, especially not on that house, and especially under the government eco4 scheme. As per BBC link posted earlier, 98% of ewi installations have an issue. 98%!!!!?! And no one has even mentioned that with a solid wall, is there even a DPC? Quite likely not, in which case, ewi will prevent the moisture on the base of the wall evaporating outwards. So there's only on place it can go. Just, no, no, no.

Im not sure i understand this post. You seem to be suggesting the work, the re-roofing that is, was done without your knowledge? That makes no sense. Surely you asked him to do some work on your roof? He didnt sneak up there and do it did he? As far as BC goes, homeowner is responsible. The scope of work you posted is notifiable. That the builder added some extra timber is irrelevant as far this is concerned.

Agree, that what id do. BC sign off at this stage doesnt actually change anything in practical terms. Yes, no BC equals easier life. Safe in the knowledge, the home owner is responsible if anything should come to pass.

Minor point, but Railways buy red diesel, so much lower tax. Of course this only affects diesel operated trains. Lots of electric trains out there. Essentially, all the heavily used bits. Its not really going to make any meaningful difference. Its the government thats buying it! If you charged airlines tax on fuel, they would simply, mostly, fill up elsewhere. Those other countries didnt get rid of their ability to build stuff. We did. Its not coming back. All the experience has gone. And Network Rail is an utter disaster area. No one wastes money better. Respectfully, if you want to understand the challenges, a subscription to modern railways mag would be money well spent. Written by sensible, knowledgable people. It will probably depress you, given how good we were at it once, but you will then understand why large scale increase in rail travel is simply impossible in this country.

I would urge some caution with retrospective application. Starting to see some nonsense creeping in. There are acouple of people in some groups im in that are being told by BCO to fit insulation to an existing house during roofing to current standards. Whilst we all know that the regs allow for common sense to be applied where current regs cannot be achieved, such as insifficent actual space, thats not stopping some BCO's from insisting on it. One was told to change the roof to comply, as in complete new roof structure! Whilst clearly wrong, you cannot appeal a BCO decision. They are also under pressure to take enforcement action now on stuff they know doesnt comply. Once you engage them, they know about it. Is the above likely, probably not, can it happen, yes.

I wouldnt worry. None of thats ever going to happen. Well not without charging the customer eleventy billion pounds for it. Its just PR.

Thanks for the explanation. If im honest, its probably beyond my comprehension from a maths perspective. The wind table is that where the wind is coming from or going to? The house is in a sizeable "hole" with big hills all around. Prevailing wind is, as normal (im in mid wales) from the south west, shielded by a massive bank of conifers, my barn, and behind that a 400ft high hill. Still 900ft up though. But, im not really able to interprete your excellent information to any useful extent.

So buy fuel? Petrol can degrade over time, so use diesel. Will pretty much last forever.

Im not sure it unfairly subsidised. Railways, which are infrastructure heavy, so have huge cost overheads. Aviation simply doesnt have that, by the nature of what it is. Railways are already massively subsidised. Multiple times what it was under BR. All acedemic, because our railway is mostly full. There is no realistic prospect of a big increase in capacity, because it is the size it is. Making it bigger, or more accurately, adding substantial capacity isnt realistic, see HS2 for details. There isnt going to be a big transfer of passengers from air to rail because rail couldnt cope. Air to bus or car, maybe.

Except for freight, we dont have a privatised railway. Network rail is owned by the state. The train operators that are left only do EXACTLY what the Dft tells them to do. In return they get a % margin. Until the franchise runs out, then it return to DfT. Its not privatised anymore at all.