AliG

Thanks for everyone's help. I gave the Latham door details to the builder to order.

The second quote does look much better value. It would still need most of what is in the first quote for heating/distribution pipework. Googling it the Hitachi ASHP looks to be very expensive, not clear why. I would probably get a quote for a LPG boiler and UVC also. I would guess it will come in at around £4000 including connecting the boiler to the UVC etc. There will still be the cost to connect it to the UFH as in quote 1. Then you can compare capital costs vs running costs. If your house is very well insulated and has low heating requirements then the premium for LPG will become less of an issue as you won't be using as much gas. One thing to note is that the ASHP will take a lot longer to heat up hot water than a boiler. Now when you get up in the morning with a full hot water tank that isn't an issue, but if you do have a lot of people staying and a few people have showers it will take a long time to reheat the tank with an ASHP.

Hi, I spent weeks on garage doors, so know most of what is available. Do you mean a sectional door, they don't do roller doors in the style that you are talking about. Timber sectional doors are considerably more expensive than metal sectional doors. I looked at the Cedar doors you are talking about. Garage door systems make a coach house style sectional door like the one below, or do you want it to actually be wood stained finish?

Heating hot water to 50-55 will certainly hit the COP. It should be around 2.5 in that scenario, so you could definitely see an overall COP below 3, although I think that would be poor. I am interested to know what people with heat pumps are actually seeing. However 5 minutes on Uswitch will tell you that 18p is a ridiculously high price to use for electricity and we know the price that is being quoted for LPG is higher than in the table. It could be that the cost per unit comes in at around 4.5-5p including hot water, I think it is unlikely to be above this. To calculate the right figure would require a lot more information on water use vs heating use etc. The other thing that affects the COP is the outside temperature. An ASHP should run more efficiently in the south of England than in the Highlands. Then of course we don't know the cost of an ASHP versus the £500 the LPG people will give towards a boiler. I would guess it might cost around £2000 more. So I think that there will be roughly a 5 year breakeven between an ASHP and LPG but would require a lot more information to say more exactly.

Someone who has an ASHP might chime in, but that table is based on 18.5p/kwh electricty price and 270% efficiency for an ASHP. I can buy electricity for 13p and efficency of an ASHP should be nearer 4:1 so I would think an ASHP running costs is nearer 4p/kwh The price @s2sap has for his LPG is 7p/kwh. However he is only locked into that for 2 years, I don't know if the price would fall after that. Indeed if your energy usage is low, the £500 offer to be locked in for two years could be quite advantageous as it may be based on much higher energy usage of an older house. My cost comparison was based on 15-20000kwh energy usage per year and a 3p/kwh saving If @s2sap does not plan to stay in the house for more than 5 years then the yearly saving is unlikely to pay the extra cost of an ASHP.

I had to look up what a unit of LPG was. At that price you are paying around 7p per kWh. The lowest price I got for mains gas in my area today was 2.307p per kWh plus 26.25p per day standing charge. The lowest electricity prices were in the 12.5-13p area. Assuming an average COP of around 4 then an ASHP will cost the equivalent of around 3p per kWh so be cheaper than buying LPG without any incentives. So I would not discount an ASHP. It could save you around £500 a year depending on exact energy use and heat pump efficiency. A 2600 sq foot house in the spec you suggest should have pretty low heating requirements. I would guess around 10000kwh per year and no more than 3000 at any one time so heating requirements will be low(it could well be less than this depending on exact specs). You will probably require a similar amount of energy to heat water as to heat the house. An ASHP efficiency can fall when heating water, you would perhaps need to upsize the UVC and keep more water at a lower temperature. You might have to factor into your calculation the value of a free boiler versus paying for an ASHP, I have never heard of Vokera so can't comment, they seem to cost around £600 to buy. When you have lots of people staying a larger UVC will be useful, you could turn up the temp so it effectively stores more hot water at that time. No matter what you do though it is difficult to heat water for 10 people if they all take showers one after the other.

Are those like Dilithium crystals captain?

I wanted to do that, but the builder and architect both reckoned it was better to have a fall on the garage floor with a drain outside along the front edge of the doors.

Thanks @PeterW. Good to hear some first hand experience. I will also be putting the alarm panel behind a locked door. Our neighbours were broken into and where we live currently all the burglar alarms were installed by the builder in the understair cupboards. The burglars knew this and simply disabled it by ripping it off the wall. We will have various bits of security, my wife has become a bit paranoid after break in attempts in our house and lots of break ins in the area, all car related. We always put the cars in the garage now, I reckon they'll just move on to a house where they can see the cars and know they are there. The neighbours who were broken into, despite knowing there have been a recent spate of cars being stolen went on holiday for two weeks leaving their car in the driveway and no security lights or any other lights in the house making it very obvious they were away.

Hi, Many of us have integral garages. My architect just assumed that we would use a fire rated internal door between the house and the garage. The door has to achieve three things though - fire resistance, security and insulation. Insulation - The garage and garage door are insulated and in my current house that tends to keep the garage temperature above 10C even when 0C outside. Thus the temperature differential between the two sides of the door will be low so heat loss will be less than on an external door. Fire resistance - Has to be 30minutes as per regs. Security - I have commented on many threads re security. In this area the main reason for house breaking is to try and steal your car. The garage has no side doors. I have sectional insulated steel doors being installed. These will use Sommer motors with a magnetic lock which can withstand 300kg of pressure. I am also having shot bolts put into the frames that I can lock if we are on holiday. But what about the door between the house and the garage. I believe that physical security is best. If you can't get into the garage you can't steel my cars, simple. I priced up Hormann steel integral garage doors the H3D and WAT40. They came in at £900 and £2300 which was a shocker. I could get a steel security door for around £300 as linked below. Or am I overthinking it. The door opens inwards into the house. If I use a 44mm solid core wooden fire door, other than maybe protecting the hinges and making sure the lock is secure is this enough as the door will be held against the frame on the garage side so hard to kick nor break through? Any thoughts? http://www.ajsteeldoors.co.uk/en/products/steel-security-doors/high-security-doors.html#/hinge_side_viewed_from_outside-lh/opening_viewed_from_outside-outwards/side_panel_1-please_select/fixing-brick_block_concrete/side_panel_2-please_select/overhead_panel-please_select/rain_drip-yes/security_trim_kit-yes/colour-ral_9003_signal_white_available_from_stock/letterbox-please_select/extra_keys-0/security_upgrade-level_2_stainless_steel_handles_security_cylinder/size_mm-895x2020

This is why I would be more inclined to pursue Durisol than the insurer. The insurer can rely on common sense says that you don't build an unsupported wall. They are insuring unforseen circumstances, this could be easily foreseen. I undertand @JSHarris argument that they might pay out to save hassle, but the real culprit here is Durisol not the insurer. Already this is bad PR for Durisol, an insurance company isn't really worried about bad PR, everyone hates them.

Unless Durisol specifically recommended propping up the blocks then I would hold them responsible. The Durisol Practical Building Guide makes no mention of propping them either, other than bracing for the concrete pour. http://www.ecomerchant.co.uk/productattachments/index/download?id=59 If this was the instruction the builder received from Durisol it is hard to hold him responsible. However, I can see where the insurance company comes from, how did Durisol come up with this advice - "The weight of the blocks holds them in place" You wouldn't build a blockwork wall with no mortar in it and expect it to stand up in the wind. It seems like crazy guidance where for marketing purposes they are creating a possible problem for their customers. Hence again I would be looking for them to take responsibility. I would also question how they can give this guidance on a blanket basis, some places are much windier than others. So yes, you need to get on with building, but I would be much more inclined to fight Durisol than the insurance company. In fairness to insurance companies they are supposed to be insuring unusual and unexpected events. Most people would expect an unsupported wall to fall over in wind.

Unfortunately as the house is three storeys high I need 60 minutes. Wee added a third floor games room as there was an enormous amount of space in the roof. This room is also open to a double height second floor room. What over time has become apparent is that the BC regulations for a three storey house are enormously more onerous and expensive than for a two storey house. I have had to have a fire report written, install sprinklers in the third floor, require more fire proofing, a more robust alarm system etc. I still await the costs of fire rated glass doors which won't be pleasant.

Thanks @Ian I checked and this does exclude all the steel in the roof. The house ended up with way more steel than expected. Partly driven by my requirement for concrete upper floors. The lintels for large windows are all steel beams and I also have an overhanging landing that is supported by a large amount of steel. @Mikey_1980 as you say I did a bit of work on Google and found a paint supplier who will specify the exact amount of paint required for each steel and then provide a certificate. The builder should then be able to get his own painters to do the job and not a specialist. Waiting to discuss this.

There is a ridiculous amount of steel in the house. Yes I looked at the price of the paint and couldn't see why any painter couldn't do it. It seems like a few days work so the price looks absurd.

Hi, My builder says he sent out for 5 contractors to quote on intumescent painting of the steel in my house. Only 1 returned the quote supposedly the others were too busy or the job was too small. The quote came in at £150 per square metre for 78 square metres. I cannot find a suggested cost for this on the internet, but it seems ridiculously high. Has anyone had any similar work done? Thanks for your help

I had great plans to fill up a NAS with music and movies to stream around the house, but now it is so easy just to stream things. I found an article saying that Sonos found 92% of users streamed 2 years ago, it is probably 95% now so unfortunately they won't be in much of a hurry to help people using a media server. Sonos gave us 12 months of Deezer Elite+ which uses FLAC 1411kbps sampling (not quite the level @Alphonsox is looking for but Cd quality). I liked it, but when it ran out I allowed it to go back to 320kbps, I can tell it is less detailed but no one else in the house seems to care and it is cheaper. The same way that a lot of people struggle to notice the difference between HD and SD TV which I find pretty glaring.

This is a lot simpler although not as neatly integrated. I have to preface that I am a Sonos fan as it is just easy to use and set up. If you out a play 1 at each end of the room or 3 play 1s in the room then you can give each a name and make it a separate zone. You can then pair them to provide stereo or combine them all if you are having a party. 3x£180 and just plug them in, all sorted. You can also then unplug them and plug them in in other places if you want to. When looking at all these options for a new house this was one of the most attractive things to me. I thought about putting speakers in the hall for parties, then thought why not just unplug a few of the Sonos speakers and move them in these instances when they are only occasionally used. Thus you can cut the cost of a system considerably.

What would be ideal in this situation would be a multichannel amp that switches on the channels automatically when it senses an input. I have managed to find a few such products but they are so expensive it would be cheaper just to buy an individual amp for each pair of speakers or active speakers. The cheapest I found is this which could do six pairs of stereo speakers around the house. There may well be others available. https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/Hi-Fi-Home-Audio/Dayton-MA1240a-Multi-Zone-12-Channel-Amplifier/B003DKVZHQ

That' fair. That is kind of the problem I have at the moment. When we move I am putting speakers in the bathroom ceiling. At the moment my wife puts a Play 1 outside the bathroom and whacks up the volume so that she can hear to through the door. This means everyone else in the house gets the pleasure of her music. You could use Raspberry PIs or Google Chromecasts, three Chromecasts could each be connected to a a couple of powered in ceiling speakers creating the three zones. I don't know what speakers to recommend, I'd just be Googling them. This would seem easier than putting amps in the ceiling, getting a multi zone amp controlled remotely would be more difficult. You might have to watch whether the ceiling is fire rated and if putting speakers in it would be an issue.

You'd never listen to two different things in the room at once. How about just getting front facing speakers at one end of the room rather than lots of ceiling mounted speakers. You could position 2 Sonos Play 1s at one end, I am guessing the lounge end where you would most likely be listening. You could use turn them up if you wanted to hear them in the kitchen end. My wife uses a Play 1 when in the bath and the sound permeates most of the house, one single room should be fine.

I have never used a PCP as the interest rates tend to be high so if you have the cash available it is an expensive way to buy a car. If you have cash available earning next to no interest then it is not a great way to buy a car but as most people have little savings then I guess it works out similar to a personal loan. Apparently, however, 87% of all car sales including fleets were on finance last year. The non fleet percentage still seems to be around 80%. Someone at work was telling me that someone came up to him the other day and said of his Audi S3, "nice car, how much a month". It's an odd question as it all depends on the deposit etc but it seems this is basically how almost all cars are sold.

Looking up the data, the average age of a car at scrappage is 14 years and the average age of cars overall in the UK is 8 years. I think people here may be unusual in how long they keep their cars. To build a car only takes the equivalent energy to around 250 gallons of fuel or drive 10,000 miles(I have not had time to fully check this but it seems about right). An electric car is maybe a quarter more. Thus driving a car for very long periods is not particularly saving the environment. Cars have been getting more reliable and longer lived. The days of cars failing to start seem to be behind us. However, things may start to change. One reason that that the lifespan of something goes up is a lack of innovation. Fridges last a long time, there has not been a lot of innovation in fridges. On the other hand the average life of a mobile phone fell when smart phones were introduced then rose again as the number of changing features fell. I suspect that we are in for a period of faster change in cars so shorter lifespans. Devices with high levels of fast evolving electronics are unlikely to have a long lifespan. This will indeed be costly when they are in a high cost item like a car. Electronic items are also often expensive to fix. Even though the electric motors and batteries could run for 200,000 miles imagine the touch screen control running with the smoothness of a 10 year old iPad or simply breaking down. At the moment that is a round a £2000 repair, a big ask on a 10 year old car. On the other hand emissions systems repairs will be a thing of the past and they can become costly on older cars. I wold be interested to know the lifespan of smaller simpler cars versus larger more complicated cars. I would think that something like a Mercedes S-Class gets very expensive to run eventually and so doesn't have a practical life much over 10 years. Actually one reason I will buy a Tesla is they give you a guarantee of 49% of the original price on a 4 year PCP at 1.5%. I have always bought cars for cash as I don't like paying interest but I would not take the risk of depreciation on such a fast changing item and the interest rate is very low. In 4 years advances in batteries and other technology as well as more competition could seriously drive down the price of the first electric cars. I would think you want to run a car 10 plus years I would stick to something with less gadgets and Japanese such as Dave's Subaru.

I often hear the range thing from people at work. In fairness one of them has family in France and sometimes drives there during the school holidays so does do longer journeys. I am currently considering a Tesla Model X. You can have a 75D with 237 miles range and a 100D with 295. These are the EPA ranges which are a lot closer to real life range than the longer NEDC ranges in Europe. The EPA partly take into account using AC. The hit from AC is driven by the difference between the outside temperature and in care temperature. In the UK it is likely to be around 5%, in Texas it might be over 10%. If you drive at a steady 40 the car would actually beat the EPA range handily, driving at a steady 75, a UK type speed, the range would be 10-15% less than the rated range. 65 seems to give around the rated range. Like any car lots of accelerating hard will hit the range. The worst case scenario is winter driving. The heater uses a lot of power and you may be running lights, windscreen wipers and AC as well. Also wet roads have 30-40% higher rolling resistance. In this scenario you might lose 30% of the rated range. What range you need becomes a very personal decision. The people most vociferous about it are understandably the people who drive the most. The last time I drove 200 miles in a single day was the last time I drove from Edinburgh to Aberdeen which was close to 10 years ago, so that was a round trip with plenty of time to recharge. My parents would have similar use. Ex that I never drive over 100 miles in a day which takes me to Glasgow and back. I found this from a piece of academic research n the US where trip lengths tend to be longer than in the UK. 95% of all trips are under 30 miles and 98% are under 70 miles. thus for the majority of people, the majority of time around 200 miles of range is plenty. 100 miles a workday is 25,000 a year, hardly any cars do over that mileage. By the way, I often hear people talk about battery degradation. Batteries now degrade at around 1% a year. Frankly the car will be junk long before the battery gives out. Actually I often hear people on Tesla forums talk about how they will run a Tesla for 10+ years as without an engine it will last much longer than a normal car. They are kidding themselves. I doubt many cars are scrapped due to the engines giving out, instead it is the electronics and this will be just the same. 10+ year old cars have very little value compared to new cars. The new cheaper Tesla Model S (£35-50000ish), so not cheep but in the range of a 3 series, has 220 miles of range in the base version and 310 in the long range version for an extra $9000(£9000ish). Looking at falling battery costs, within 5 years I would expect the extra price of 300 mile range to be around $3-4000. Actually the cost will be around $2000 versus $5000 now but the car maker needs to charge for options like this to make money. It will take longer for smaller cheaper cars to become electric as they have relatively cheaper drivetrains. It will work its way down from the top of the market. Tesla have been pretty clear that they don't intend going much over 300 miles for range. As batteries get more efficient a better idea is to make them smaller. Thus the car gets more efficient and the battery weight penalty reduces. We might see range drift up toward 350 miles, but as that covers well over 99% of journeys then that is it and long journeys will require charging. Tesla's next generation of chargers should take a 200 mile charge time down to around 15 minutes. This is similar to what companies such as VW are aiming for. There are two limits to charging time, the batteries and the actual power available at the charger. Current Tesla batteries are limited to around 30 minutes for a 200 mile charge. Newer batteries will be faster. At the 15 minute point, stopping to charge will only take 10 minutes longer than filling up with petrol and the charging/range issue should really start to go away. There will also be chargers everywhere. Even today there are circa 5000 EV chargers in the UK and 8500 petrol stations. There are expected to be more chargers than petrol stations by 2020. One issue will be if they plan to make electric trucks these should be quite buildable but they would require a massive electricity supply at a single point for charging. I think people have to consider how fast things change both in technology and use cases. Battery prices are falling all the time and energy density is rising. They should reach cost parity with combustion engines in around 5 years (part of this is driven by the big tax saving in electricity versus petrol which is artificial and will go away eventually). People will get very used to the charging times etc. Frankly I am looking forward to never having to go to a petrol station which is a waste of my time if I forget to fill up.

Hi, I need to pick a material to clad the underside of a balcony and porch roof. Would there be a problem using composite wood cladding boards or deck boards. Some cladding says it was not made to be fitted horizontally. The boards seem to come as hollow or solid, although solid might be stronger for decking, I would think lighter hollow boards would be better fitted to the underside of a roof. I have been looking at WPC, Hyperion and Duraclad among others. In general these items seem to come in at around £45+ a square metre, has anyone seen cheaper prices? I want something that looks like wood but doesn't require maintenance. In my current house the wood under the porch has shrunk and requires painting every few years despite not actually being directly exposed to the weather, although I suspect this is due to the fact that the builder used softwood painted white. Thanks