Roger440

This is exactly the approach that causes ever increasing amounts of flooding. Having lived in a flood prone house the willingness people have to ignore Suds, for that is what you are doing, im well aware of what goes on, and how useless most of the schemes, signed off as they are, are. All your attenuation tank needs is a one way valve on the outlet so it cannot "back fill". They cost a tenner. I see no excuse here for just dumpng the rainwater straight to the brook. Which is what Suds is supposed to prevent. You may be able to persuade the BCO it is OK, but that just highlights how useless the system is, becuase you will have circumvented Suds,.

Absolutely this. Putting your house, things in it and other things you have at the mercy of organisations whose only motive is profit. Have we all forgotton rings little expoilts. Once you invertor is built in, whats to stop them taking control, and demanding £5 a month for having it working? Im afraid its a no from me. As Nailbiter says, without consumer pushback, we will see more and more of it. Sadly, i doubt we will see consumer pushback, people seem completely relaxed about it.

The problem is you go can never really know how good response will be. Yes, some compnies reputation is better than others, but quite often that counts for nothing, or its some bizarre fault they dont understand. Id rather not put myself in that position in the first place.

Im with you 100%. If i cant fix it myself, or at the very least, identify the defect myself, then it isnt getting fitted. Well, certainly not for anything important, like heat and power. Being reliant on "support" likely means whatever it is wont be working for extended periods if it goes wrong. I get that limits my options, but so be it.

Because the internet always fails. Its what the internet does. Everone has the internet drop out from time to time. If i want something to work reliably, the last thing id do is connect it to the internet!

Indeed. Why would you want them connected. Its only going to fail.

Depends who they complained too. Its it was to you, thats fine, if it was to the council, that, effectively, stops the clock. Though if they take no action, thats debateable.

Im inclined to agree with this interpretation.

Within 4 years. After that, you are in the clear, like most other planning breaches.

If you insulate externally, the floor will still be connected to the ground, and the arches connected to that. So the arches will still be a cold bridge regardless. Unless you clad them.

I cant speak for the small print on your warranty, but you have no comeback on building control. They are protected by law from any responsibility. (which is why i always question what actual use the whole process is?) The advice to persue the builder would seem correct. Trading standard wont be much use as houses are not covered by the normal consumer protections.

Where are these 3-4 apprenticships? Like i did in fact. Nowhere to be seen. Which is no doubt part of the problem.

Sorry, i dont understand this?

Thats interesting. Does that mean you are effectively exporting at the same cost as purchase. I ruled out exporting, partly because i have a spinny wheel meter.

Doesnt work like that. You get what you are given. Which will be the square root of bugger all.

You have my sympathy.

Unless you specifically asked for something breathable, its almost certain its conventional render/pebbledash. But if you dont have any damp, thats good news. Its not a given you would have. The leaving a small cavity approach can work, but it will need ventilating, and needs to be done such that the cold fresh air doesnt leak into the house elsewhere.

A damp house will always feel cold Damp walls are a thermal disaster. Fix the damp (as suggested above) then worry about the heating. Sadly, its a minefield.

Jesus, i shouldnt have looked at that link. There is no hope is there?

Easy to identify those on the grant harvesting gravy train. Alledgedly................

I dont have any answers, but i had the same issue with DVLA and their ombudsmen. They point blank refused to refer me, despite having reached that point in the process, whilst at the same time, point blank refused to deal with the issue. Not sure what the point of an Ombudsmen is if you are reliant on the fcompany that has failed to refer you.

Im not sure its weird. Just some "chums" have influenced policy such that they can make out like bandits. Im expecting that £7.5K to go up a lot more yet.

Agreed. It is outrageous. And a timely reminder whilst still in the early planning stage, a very good reason not to bother with an ASHP. Because im not allowed to fit one! Yes, i could apply for planning (though i prefer not to involve the council in anything as only pain lies down that path) , but i think we can be pretty confident what the conditions will be. Indeed, as seen on this very forum, asking for conditions over and above what MCS would sign off.

You maybe right. Thats not how i read it though.

I know, but devildamo said it would need BR because its oak frame. That makes no sense as a criteria. At least not that im aware of.