Temp

One of the items thrown up by that search is this one that mentions bearings. Worth giving them a call. http://shop.aeg.co.uk/product/4055191383/Washing+Machine+Plastic+Pulley+Kit

Don't know about the AEG but some tubs are welded together making it hard to replace the bearings. There are some vids on youtube..

I'm a bit late to this thread but I suggest reading "How to get Planning Permission" by Roy Speer and others. Try for latest edition. Typically it takes two weeks for them to check the drawing package is complete and send them off to be scanned into pdf form for the web site. Can take longer. Anything major missing and they will usually contact you. Officially they have 8 weeks to approve or reject your application but only very simple applications manage that. In my area they write to you stating that unless you object they will assume you are waiving your right to an 8 week determination. I suggest a carefully worded reply stating that you won't hold them to the 8 week deadline but you reserve the right to appeal for non-determination should that become necessary. If it does drag on keep an eye on the timescales as you have a limited timescale in which to appeal for non-determination. After that you loose the right. Once live on the web site the planning officer will write to all the neighbours giving them the required statutory period time period to comment. These comments will also be scanned and put on the web site with a delay. He will also visit the site and write a report recommending approval or rejection to the Planning Committee. The Committee meets either every 4 or 8 weeks so you can see that an 8 week target is difficult for that reason alone. It's possible to get site of the planning officers report before the meeting and ask to speak at the meeting but you will need to be pro-active in keeping track of progress without making a nuisance of yourself. Sometimes the agenda for the meeting is published a week or two in advance on the council web site. Sometimes not until a day or two before. Some applications are determined not at committee but by the planning officer using his delegated powers. The Planning officer might start out intending to approve or reject using his delegated powers but if there are any objections or if the planning officer thinks it's controversial he will refer it to the committee. After the committee makes a decision the planning officer has to write a letter detailing the reason for refusal or any conditions if approved. Do not celebrate too much until you get that letter. Sometimes the committee reject an application for reasons that aren't entirely consistent with planning law and the planning officer has to think up more valid planning reasons for rejection. Do NOT start any work on site until you have sorted out all the CIL exemption paperwork or you may loose the exception costing you £thousands.

Insulation will increase the temperature of the UFH pipe and screed and reduce the temperature in the island units. I suppose there might be a small risk that the screed and tiles will crack due to differing rate of expansion? We omitted the UFH under our island and had no issues with the screed and tiles there. With bare feet we can definitely tell where the UFH was omitted at an internal doorway so I'm not so sure the heat spreading effect always occurs.

Outside the SPA zone or outside a 400m zone around the SPA?

No curtains on the window either :-)

I would see what the council say. I doubt they will send you a formal grant of approval, most likely they will confirm that Planning Permission isn't required for the change and hopefully that will satisfy the HMRC. To get a formal grant you might have to submit an application for a non-material amendment with drawings and a £28 (?) fee. That can take some time to be processed. I'm not sure how the HMRC would respond to you removing the additional items. I think you would have to admit that it appears the additional shower/wc was not formally approved prior to completion and explain that you have deleted these from your claim. Back in 2015 HMRC were turning the screw on DIY builders.. I realise the three cases here are different to yours but you get the idea... http://www.landmarkpt.com/blog/2015/11/16/hmrc-under-pressure-over-new-penalty-regime-for-diy-builders

When the receipts are inconsistent with the drawings. eg you claim for 2 garage door when there is only one on the elevation drawings.

I think at least try for some sort of wording that allows or better still mandates installation on the building before completion.

I checked the reclaim form and it says.. "Has Planning Permission been granted for your new build? To obtain a VAT refund you must provide evidence that the works are lawful and send us a copy of the planning permission" So you might get away with a letter from the council stating "Planning Permission is not required for the additional shower/wc" and you reminding them that it was done prior to completion. However HMRC were really pedantic they could say that although PP isn't required _now_ it was when the house was completed. You would hope they would see sense.

Get that metal detector/magnet going to see if that narrows it down to either a or b... a) Middle bowed out - no screws in the middle? b) Joints bowed in - no studs or screws near the cracks? If you have one of those USB cameras it would be interesting to look down into the wall from above. Most cement boards have some sort of marking on them at least on one side.

That effectively means you don't have PDR until the house is complete.

Work on the inside of your house is covered by Permitted Development Rights (PDR) but I think you only get PDR when a house is complete. If I'm correct then technically your house wasn't built "exactly as approved". The planners will take a pragmatic approach - they won't take enforcement action because it would be a waste of time and money. They know you could have added the shower/toiler after completion under PDR. The HMRC are being picky and unfair but they could well be legally correct. You should have completed the house "as approved" and then added the shower/WC. As they see it the house was either built "not as approved" (eg unlawful) or you added the shower/toiler after completion (which isn't claimable). I'm not sure of the way out of this one. You could try asking the planners to confirm that the house was "built as approved" but they might be reluctant to do that. If they aren't very co-operative you might have to try for a retrospective certificate of lawful development. You would get a certificate but I'm not sure if they would agree to it being retrospective. It depends when you get PDR. Depending on the outcome you would then resubmit the VAT reclaim or modify it to remove the shower/WC and resubmit it. Beware the time limit! It might take too long to get a certificate. Others should consider not claiming for anything that's not on the approved plans.

Those on the border will be allowed to have a mixed installation.

I suspect they didn't screw the Hardi to the middle/all the studs. Got a metal detector/stud finder (eg to look for the screws)?

That's pretty strange. Our bathroom was clad in travertine over Hardi backer board with no issues. I'm wondering if your joints weren't done on studs? Is it the centre of a sheet bowing out or the edge bowing in? Edit: Looking at that last picture it looks like the centre of sheets bowing outwards. Were they screwed to all the studs or just along joints?

Is the problem that the concrete beam is curved?

Came across this by accident. How to dig a trench on difficult ground using compressed air. I've no idea if you can hire one in the UK.

Try and take some photos before he puts the pipe in! (Edit: Looks like you have done that.) We were advised to write a letter to a neighbour and send it recorded delivery, keeping a copy etc. This is because once someone has been formally made aware that their actions could cause damage, if they go ahead anyway, they become liable for additional damages for negligence. Otherwise they are just liable for damages for repairs and/or nuisance. I would point out in the letter that.. * Land owners upstream have riparian rights to discharge water into the burn. * You are writing to make him aware that the existing 1m diameter pipe at property X has proved inadequate and caused local flooding on at least X occasions in recent years. * You believe that his proposed use of a 1m diameter pipe will also be inadequate and may cause flooding and flood damage to your property for which a court is likely to find he is liable. * Now that he has been made aware (that a 1m diameter pipe is likely to be inadequate and cause flood damage to your property) if he proceeds to install or retain a 1m diameter pipe and it does causes flood damage it is likely he will be additionally liable for damages for negligence.

When we submitted our drawings prior to starting work the BCO asked us how we were going to comply with Part E (sound transmission). He said he was mainly concerned about our first floor which is beam and block, insulation and UFH in screed. Started talking about needing sound tests because apparently there wasn't an existing "robust design detail" for a B&B floor with UFH on top. To my surprise he was right. He had me calling every beam & Block company I could find to see if one of them had any kind of test certificate that might help me avoid a sound test. Not only are they an unwanted cost but there is always a risk you might fail. Anyway when we started building a different BCO came out to site and we never heard any more about it.

Great view, shame about the railway line?

Good point.

Not sure about that but you can get inline double pole switches like this.. https://boatlamps.co.uk/products/in-line-water-resistant-double-pole-switch Just check the cable diameter will be ok.