MJNewton

With the ducting being fully lined I wouldn't expect it to be an issue, assuming the damage hasn't gone all the way through. If it were me I'd wrap it in duct tape just to be sure. Actually, I'd probably wrap it with aluminium tape first then duct tape as I like to over-engineer things..

And likewise with neighbour support.

I'd suggest going with the Shelly relay option acting as the boost controller with physical switch inputs thus giving 'standalone' functionality with no external dependencies. You could program different boost durations for short vs long switch presses if you wish. If you then wanted to add event-driven HA control later just get HA to request the boost via Shelly's HTTP API.

I'm Brian! (And so if my wife!)

In case you were being serious there (hey, you never know! ;-)) are there any similarities between your setups e.g. same OSs, perhaps one built the Pis for the other etc? MAC addresses can be changed and it might well be the case that your OSs are changing them (to a fixed value, which is a bad idea).

In theory, I suppose anything is possible. In practice it's not going to be the case. Occam's Razor suggests it is almost certainly a router issue, not least given the majority are built down to a price and are full of bugs.

They're all going to be different, otherwise you wouldn't be able to use them on the same network.

Does the router allow you to enter the MAC addresses manually? What router is it?

Most large suppliers will provide a national service so don't hesitate to cast the net wider unless there was a preference for a local supplier (which I could totally understand).

How are you discovering the MAC addresses? On the Pi's themselves (running ifconfig or similar) or is it from the router's view of the world? If the latter then it is likely getting confused and/or showing misleading information. The MAC addresses *will* be unique so keep persisting...

Aha! I was born and bred in Macc... (parents and other family still live there)

I'm not sure of the motivation for nighttime setback as the power consumption is relatively low anyway and with a well designed/installed system there should be no issues with noise.

Out Titon unit uses plastic framed filters that they sell direct for £12.75/pr: However they can be easily refilled with other filter media so I bought 1 sqm of 10mm G3 media for £8 which should do me for about 10 swaps. Not only will it save a lot of money but at 80p/service I figured it might make me less stingy about how often I do it too!

Howcome? I don't recall ever seeing double glazed units that require toughened safety glass to only have it in one pane. Even aside from what any regs my say (I don't know what they do say) it doesn't make sense to me one pane would be left untreated. I certainly wouldn't have overhead glazing without safety glass - I'm surprised it's even available.

I'm waiting for our Ideal Icos to eventually reach retirement (not a single fault in its 14 year life so far but I can't expect it to last forever) after which I'll be going for an Intergas. They appear to be highly specced but very low component count and easy to repair. As of 2018 they said they hadn't had a single reported failure of one of their heat exchangers. They fully support Opentherm too so give a good choice of independent controllers rather than tying you in to the boiler manufacturer's own offerings like many do (e.g. Worcester and Baxi) if you want fully modulating control.

I believe intumescent strips are only required on the top and sides of the door.

Okay, that's not sounding too bad at all in my view! The Vent Axia clarification regarding inlet-exhaust separation and the non-applicability of the straight exit pipe length are particularly helpful, and as I said I regard them as the expert witness in this case then you've got to go with that they say. Besides which, your 900mm separation is some way beyond the 300mm minimum and whilst it might not be all the way up to the supposed 'ideal' personally I'd be happy, and I'm a fussy bugger. Picking up the repair costs for the stone spalling is fair enough too, assuming of course whoever does it does a decent enough job and I think you've got to give them that opportunity to do so. Ideally the damage wouldn't have been caused in the first place of course but that ship has sailed and you've got to accept the reality of the situation. I am a little surprised about the ceiling plenum issue - I thought he was going to say he'd send someone out to improve the mountings as remedying that sounds fairly straightforward to me. Maybe the 'required information' is about who is going to come and do it? All in all though, I think that's a very good response. Polite, well reasoned, considered. And what's more - an actual response which can't be taken for granted these days!

I think it's a Linksys mesh WiFi access point (if that's what you mean). I suspect it's a 'TV' corner, although it's a very small room. I used to put in multiple doubles for my AV stuff but always found I'd still run out of sockets so realised I might as well just use multi-way socket extension leads, although I seem to have far fewer devices now that so much has converged and streaming taken over.

And to be fair I seem to recall someone recently posting a picture of a *combined* inlet+exhaust terminal. Sure, it was fairly directional in its construction but even so - if that is in any way acceptable then one might argue that 900mm lateral separation is too. Putting my Internet pitchfork away for a moment, it is perhaps the sort of thing that in theory having a 1500mm separation obviously matters but in practice it being less than this doesn't, particularly given we are where we are with this. It's a bit like the fall on my extension's flat roof - I won't open old wounds by dwelling on it too much but my builder didn't meet the minimum 1:80 guideline and whilst the roof seemingly works perfectly fine despite this it still haunts me to this day... but it probably shouldn't.

Rate-of-rise humidity detection addresses that, but I didn't spot any off-the-shelf solution to had to roll my own so I accept it might be undesirable for many. It does work perfectly though and, to my knowledge, has never suffered a false positive or negative.... It also doesn't rely on my family pressing boost buttons which they could but wouldn't in practice!

*Now* who's presenting false dichotomies? ? Only one of your variables is a requirement - the other is merely a capability. If the MIs said that you *should* drive at 120mph then you might have a point... Similarly if the MVHR MIs said the vents *can* (not *should*) be positioned upto 1500mm apart then the regs guidance of 300mm would be perfectly acceptable to comply with. Regardless of how we get there though, it sounds like we are in agreement in what the ultimate requirement that must be satisfied is.

Ah, yes, that muddies the water a little! That said, I would expect manufacturer's installation instructions trump any other guidance/regulations, just like they do with gas appliances, electrical items etc and so there's still hope yet!

I couldn't resist reading the compliance guide, and am not really seeing much relevance in it to be honest so it'll be interesting to see what bits they going to be relying on. Indeed, the only relevant bit I did spot was a piece of rope which might end up being used to hang them: Regarding location of exhaust vents, Table 7.0 Section 5c says 'The location of the external discharge terminal should ensure that the potential for recirculation of extract air through the supply air inlet is minimised.' and that is surely exactly why Vent Axia suggest a minimum separation of 1500mm (if not, what is the reason for it?).

My heart was a racing a little reading that response... and it's not even my issue! Been in similar situations before though (although not with MVHR) and I suspect it is triggering a Pavlovian response of feeling anxious when going into battles like this! Just remind yourself that they are human too, and whether you've got a case or not I am sure all companies get their fair share of unreasonable customers and complaints so you mustn't be too surprised or offended if they initially think you might be one of them. You didn't sound like one to me in your complaint though, so if you keep that calm and level-headed stance I think it'll work in your favour. You are disappointed that's all, and feel that the installation hasn't lived up to expectations of what you consider acceptable based on your understanding and interpretation of the manufacturer's instructions, which doesn't sound unreasonable to me. Their holding response sounds okay to me - at least you got one! Sure, it'd be nice if they just rolled over and said 'gosh yeah, that's not quite up to scratch is it - let's work out a plan how best to proceed from here' but if they really have got VA involved then that's a reasonable second-place position. If VA back down on their own installation instructions, well, I think you'd have to accept that. VA are basically the expert witness in this case and if they say some of the pertinent bits (i.e. the intake/exhaust separation and straight pipe distance) are actually okay and not of real concern then that'd be good enough for me. I'm not expecting them to though, after all why put stuff like that in their instructions if it doesn't actually matter either way? There's nothing stopping you from speaking with VA directly once you know the individual's name in order to challenge an about-turn, but I wouldn't do that yet - let things run their course and respect the effort the installers are putting in and that it is they that have approached this 3rd party. Or so they say, it might be the ventilation-world equivalent of 'having spoken to my solicitor...' which is actually a euphemism for 'having Googled a bit looking for ways to wriggle out of this...'. Regarding the compliance guide it's difficult to comment about that, mainly because I haven't read it all. If it is to become a relevant document to your case then the installers will need to be more specific with their references, just like you were against the installation instructions. It's a shame they put that line in really - feels a bit passive aggressive - but it sounds like it's going to be referred so get reading! Hang in there, and don't lose perspective. It's a situation that needs resolving, yes, but if you and yours have still got your health then everything is merely a bonus.

Yeah, they've both got their pros and cons, and quite often simple good customer service is sufficient such that it never gets as far a having to dig legislation and/or warranty Ts&Cs* out. My point really was these two legal backstops are not the same and we should be careful not to mix them up (retailers will often do that intentionally, pushing you towards the manufacturer rather than dealing with the issue themselves). Regarding the issue of consumer protection still being in place, that boils down to the statute of limitation being six years (five years in Scotland) and so that's the time window of protection you've got - but that's not to say everything should necessarily be expected to last that long. *Which as you say can be really restrictive. For example, we've got a Hotpoint fridge/freezer which has a 10 year guarantee! Yay! However, it's actually only 1 year for parts and labour, the remaining 9 years are parts only and there's a fixed-rate labour charge of £110 per callout....