Temp

Difficult one the comment on. I've only done it once with my kids. I think the noise might bother me but I doubt it's a safety issue. Government policy tends to encourage rural land owners to diversify into other areas. Find out if your council has any similar local policies. Perhaps find out if there are any bats or similar endangered species living there. Google found mixed results... https://www.planningresource.co.uk/article/563420/casebook-appeal-case-leisure-entertainment-paintball-games-permitted-ancient-woodland https://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/17774373.skirmish-paintball-faces-action-harm-woodland/ You should look for more cases and the reasons others cite for rejection. I also found mention of a document.. "English Nature & European Paintball Federation (1993) Paintball games in woodlands: a guide to good environmental practice, English Nature, Peterborough" Probably worth finding a copy to see what that says.

Faulty foundations apparently... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cv2548v1dpyo

WPB is available in various grades ranging from absolute cr&p to the best quality boat building marine plywood. Some of the big timber stores sell more than one grade at different prices for the same thickness. Might be worth asking around. I bought some that claimed to be WPB from a big store beginning with W and it delaminated quickly. I suspect there is probably a CE, EN or UKCA standard that the best grades should meet but I haven't bought any for awhile. Plywood is sometimes specified to prevent racking so check with the designer before deleting any.

What I did was lay a flat concrete slab (excavate, compacted hardcore shuttering, sand blind, DPM, concrete), then two courses of engineering bricks, a DPC and timber frame (Mostly 2x4 and 4x4). Then on the outside WBP to prevent racking. A vapour permeable membrane, then vertical battens and horizontal cladding. I used oak boards but T&G also works. I extended the battens and cladding down over the bricks stopping about 25-30mm above the concrete. Gravel around the outside of the slab to reduce splashing. Ideally water running down the cladding would drip onto the gravel not the top of the slab but the engineering bricks keep out any water that does. The roof is pitched and tiled but flat roof with fall also possible. The front of my building has a stable like roof overhang to shelter the door. The wall plate of the timber frame was bolted down to the slab. I did this by pushing "bolts" made from threaded rod and nuts into the wet concrete slab. These were tall enough to go through the two courses of bricks and the wall plate, big washers and nuts. Caution: I tripped over and nearly impaled my head on one of these "bolts". After that I put 50mm plastic pipe off cuts over them. Scary moment. I also put some electrical duct/pipe in the ground before pouring the slab so that later I could run SWA cable up in through it. I used a so called "garage CU" which has 1 power and 1 lighting breakers. Electrician installed Earth rod etc. The inside was insulated between the frame and another layer of WBP painted white. I wanted it strong due to tiled roof.

We have a similar size utility room. It's slightly more square and 2.8m ceiling. We have a single 3600 lumnen LED batten in the middle. It's one of these... https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B07WMMLJFZ?psc=1&ref=ppx_pop_mob_b_asin_title Plenty bright enough. The only issue with that particular model is it's designed to be linked together so the power goes in via a socket on the end rather than just a hole on the top. I think you will be fine with two panels around 2000-2500 lumens each.

What we need is an organisation with teeth to set and enforce standards and quality in the building industry. Perhaps with powers to fine or disqualify builders and trades?

Depends how many you have to do. It's not my favourite job cutting and refilling but if the plasterer can't be put off it's not a nightmare. What does the electrician say? A bigger issue is running fat cables for an electric hob after the whole house is plastered.

No thats not what I meant at all. I'm not suggesting leaving a void. You need to know how much existing insulation you have above the rafters. Then put no more than half that between them. Suppose you had 100mm of PIR above the rafters already. Then you shouldn't add more than 50mm between them. That way the total is 150mm with 1/3rd (50mm) between and 2/3rds (100mm) above. As others have said it should really be no more than 1/3rd of the total R value but 1/3rd of the thickness is probably close enough. The vapour barrier would normally go under the rafters before you put the plasterboard back up but if you have downlights that are recessed into the plasterboard they would put holes in it. Consider replacing them with surface mounted LED lights and seal the holes where the wires come through.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/net-zero/heat-pump-planning-rules-overhaul-noise-pollution-fears/ Rules on installing heat pumps are to be overhauled to limit noise pollution, under government plans. The Government aims to install 600,000 heat pumps a year from 2028, and offers households a grant of up to £7,500 to do so. But local planning authorities “would not have capacity to cope with the increase in planning applications and noise complaints that would arise under current planning requirements” as the rollout expands to built up areas, according to a report from the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero. It found that one in four people living near a heat pump found the noise to be intrusive, with complaints “usually centred around disturbed sleep”. Last month the Telegraph revealed that millions of British homes could be unable to install a heat pump without breaking noise rules, as most available models were too loud to meet guidelines for noise disturbance. The report recommended removing the limit on the size of the heat pump unit to encourage manufacturers to prioritise noise reduction over aesthetics. It also urged regulators to provide clear guidance on what is meant by a “solid noise barrier” which must be in place between a heat pump and a neighbouring property, suggesting that hedges or “a fence with gaps” would not be sufficient. It also said installers needed to take into consideration “acoustic reflections from surrounding surfaces” such as walls that “can increase the resulting noise level at a neighbouring property”. However the report also said sound emission limits “constrain” the heat pump roll out, “particularly where there is a higher density of properties such as blocks of flats and terraced houses”. It recommended removing a planning rule which states a heat pump must be at least one metre from a property boundary, a restriction experts have previously warned would restrict large numbers of terrace homes with less space from installing a device. Jeremy Hunt committed to scrapping the rule in November’s Autumn Statement.

Yes with a warm roof all the insulation should be above the joists. It is possible to put some insulation between them as well but you should really get a condensation risk analysis done. I suppose some insulation manufacturers might do this free? I've got it in my head that there is a rule of thumb which says no more than 1/3rd between, leaving 2/3rds above. So if there was 100mm above now, you shouldn't add more than 50mm between. However I cant remember where I got this from. Adding a vapour barrier before replasterboarding might be worth doing but don't penetrate it with downlighters etc.

If you can afford it I would go for Engineered wood. The best are 14mm plywood with 7mm finish layer so 21mm overall. The top layer is thick enough that it can be resanded the same number of times as solid wood (eg until the T &G fails). Can even get it ready finished with hardware oil. Shop around as its colour and quality varies. Can go for wider boards with less risk of cupping.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/south-london-builder-beats-hmrc-1m-tax-battle/ South London builder beats HMRC in £1m tax battle Gary Ives accused of flipping properties without paying dues on his profits A builder from South London has won a £1m battle with HMRC after being accused of flipping properties without paying tax. Gary Ives renovated and sold three family homes between 2008 and 2013, but the tax authority said these activities amounted to a trade and therefore the profits should be liable for income tax. HMRC claimed he owed more than £712,000, plus penalties of over £283,000 – a total of almost £1m. It put forward a second argument that – if Mr Ives was not carrying on a trade – then capital gains tax should apply. Homeowners do not have to pay capital gains tax on their main house under “principal private residence” (PPR) relief, but the tax authority believed the properties purchased were not family homes. Had it won this argument, Mr Ives would be charged around £400,000 in capital gains tax and around £160,000 in penalties. Stephanie Sharpe, of accountancy firm Moore Kingston Smith, said: “HMRC had decided at an early stage that the properties were not lived in by the Ives family or if they had lived there, it was as temporary occupation and not as a family home. “The HMRC officer seemed to be influenced by the fact that Mr Ives had described his self-employment as ‘builder’ on his tax return, but he mainly undertook plastering and odd job work, not major property renovation.” Mr Ives told the tribunal that the type of large family house he and his wife wanted was always out of their price range or did not exist, so they set out to create the perfect family home instead. However, financial difficulties and the desire to live close to family meant the couple sold up shortly after. “The broad facts are that each purchase was intended to be a permanent home for the family, but circumstances got in the way,” Ms Sharpe added. In 2008, Mr Ives and his wife bought the first property in Fulham as two flats for £760,000. A large amount of work was needed to make the place hospitable, so Mr Ives and his son moved in soon after completion to start the renovations. His wife remained in their previous property. However, the renovation was meant to be funded by the proceeds from the sale of this former family home – and when a sale did not come through, the couple ran into financial difficulties. The couple sold the property as a single dwelling in 2010 for £1.8m and then bought another house in Wandsworth in a partly renovated state. Mr Ives told the tribunal it soon became obvious the purchase was a “disaster”. Traffic noise and a lack of parking drove them to sell up earlier than intended, he said. They sold it in 2012 for £1.5m, having bought it for £750,000. A third property – also in Fulham – was much better suited to them, the tribunal heard. They bought it for £1.7m in 2012. However, by the time it was renovated, their adult children had decided to leave Fulham and the couple decided to move in order to be close to them and their grandchildren. They sold it for £3.25m at the end of 2013. A number of friends and family members gave evidence that the Ives had furnished the properties, as well as holding dinner parties there and hosting guests overnight. The tribunal concluded that the properties were not purchased with a view to make a profit in the short term, but had been bought as family homes and therefore the transactions were not trading in nature. It then decided that Mr Ives was using the properties as his residence and therefore no capital gains tax was due. Jeremy Johnson, of inTax, the firm that instructed Mr Ives’ lawyer, said they had encountered a number of cases like this over the years. “We have also dealt with cases where HMRC has challenged whether an individual has occupied a property to the extent that private residence relief would be due on any capital gain,” he said. “However, in relation to property, HMRC is frequently also interested in undeclared income or gains on second homes or rental properties.” He added: “We weren’t overly happy about needing to take this to tribunal, as it was very stressful for our client, but we are pleased that our client got the right result.” An HMRC spokesman said: “We are reviewing the tribunal’s decision and considering next steps.”

Seen one triggered by carpet moth.

I don't see the attraction of wet rooms. Do some people like wet socks 😞

My guess is someone called building control and said you have started building the house or left it ambiguous what you are doing. The BCO looked up the address and gave you a call because he hadn't got any info on the site. I would write him a letter or email thanking him for the call about you site (address) and to clear up any misunderstanding. Tell him you are currently only doing site preparation work, and that you will of course be applying for Building Control Approval before starting work on the house (just as soon as you have the information he will need ready). Apologise if any of the neighbours have been causing mischief. Its good to keep on the right side of the BCO as they can sometimes bend the rules for you to get you out of a bind. They can also make you jump through hoops if you annoy them.

I'm in East Anglia. Lot of clay here and soakaway don't always work. The didn't on my site but there is a piped ditch along the edge of the road we were allowed to discharge into (after offering to install a rain water recycling tank). Fortunately we have mains sewer for foul water. Definitely ask the seller if a Percolation test has been done or consider getting one done. Perhaps ask the seller if he has access to a digger as that would reduce cost. They will ask if you have one when you ask for a quote.

I would ask the planners what you need to do for them to agree you have started. The law just refers to "development" but in many cases they want. 1 ) All planning conditions that say "before work starts" or similar to get formally discharged. Otherwise your start isn't legal. 2 ) BCO to have given approval to start (not necessarily plans spproval). 3) Foundations dug, inspected by the BCO and poured. If you want to do something else that might be considered development to avoid the 3 year limit expiring it is possible to apply for a Certificate of lawfulness on the grounds that work has started. For example I've seen a wind farm do this with just an entrance and the first 50m or so of road. Such a Certificate is really the only 100% guarantee you've started.

No it's just a general principle. All walls, floors ceilings etc should have an insulation 8layer in the sandwich somewhere. One side of that insulation is the warm side and the other side is the cold side. As a general rule the warm side shouldn't be ventilated but the cold side can be (in some cases must be). In most Beam and Block floors the insulation is on top of the Beams and Blocks so the void under them would be on the cold side of the insulation and ventilated. If the insulation is on the floor of the void the space above it is on the warm side and shouldn't be ventilated. However this would be an odd set up. Hence both @ProDave and me would like to know exaxtly what the Beam and Block floor make up is.

That sounds odd. With a beam and block floor the insulation normally goes on top of the beams with a 2-4" screed on top of that insulation. Is it possible the 1m void under the floor was originally fully filled with some sort of insulation fibre that has got wet and slumped down into a layer that looks like a quilt? I hope not.

+1 These can sometimes be ridiculously expensive or simply impossible. Check you have the right to lay services over land between you and best connection point. If in any doubt about any service ask on the forum for advice on alternatives.

The government decided the rules on barn conversions should be relaxed some years ago but not all councils and planning officers are so keen. Is it a Class Q approval or regular Outline Planning Permission or ? If the barn has planning permission for a conversion make sure its sound enough to be converted. Would it need underpinning? Some councils appear to consider underpinning as evidence it needs too much work to be "converted". Others take a more relaxed view. So if down the road Building Control demand it needs underpinning that might invalidate your planning permission. Yes its quite possible for Building Control to insist you do something that the Planning Department won't allow. I think this is quite rare but quite problematic when it occurs.

Not sure where you mean but there shouldn't be ventilation of the warm side of the insulation. The cold side can be ventilated but not the warm side.

Just a heads up... I went to a few carpet shops and about half told me that ALL their carpet and underlay was suitable for UFH. What they mean is that the carpet won't be damaged by your UFH not that it will let any heat through. The manufacturers data normally has the TOG info in it but many shops seem to throw the data away. You need to be sure anything they tell you applies to the carpet you are buying. Match up the part numbers or order codes with the same number in the manufacturers data. I asked one sales rep about the TOG value and she went to investigate, came back with TOG=10 on a post-it note claiming its fine for UFH. Some carpet is made in two versions, one with a hessian back and one rubber. The hessian backed has lower/better TOG. Beware that the small print on the order form may allow the shop to supply either version. If you want/need one or the other make sure that's noted on the order. Some low TOG underlay is a bit thin. I recommend trying a sample of the exact underlay and carpet combination under bare feet to confirm it's the feel you want and not too hard. It's worth finding a sales rep that knows about UFH.

Chain saws blunt quickly if they are cutting soil. I think a reciprocating saw with more easily replacable blades is the way to go if cutting at ground level.

Switch from sliding to regular hinged opening.