zoothorn

Members
  • Content Count

    1,501
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

zoothorn last won the day on October 13 2018

zoothorn had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

108 Excellent

About zoothorn

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Personal Information

  • About Me
    hamfisted, lazy, incompetent.
  • Location
    The Wild West

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. @AnonymousBosch understood- it is very hard for me I appreciate that comment. I do need a break but thing is I know my builder will want to cover his tracks/ cover this mistake (bc I could kick up a stink & demand xyz, as I should) & only way he covers tracks is to get onto TFrame Co as soon as/ order 2m + 2.3m.. to corner me "too late its ordered, well if you didn't put the ffl on the.." argument. I just know this is what he's done yesterday, before I'd realise the mistake & call him. He's not answering now which is 1st worrying sign. A disaster at very 1st stage.
  2. NOW can you see how this 350mm extra complicates almost every part of the job folks? Who pays the extra block clad course now to get the building up to where it should be? Do I have legal surity to get them to build up to this overall height? or, am I fkd & can now only legally expect an overall height of 2000 + 200 +2300 + roof? (IE the whole build 350mm shy of the original/ existing eaves- a total & utter disaster).
  3. I can't ABosch.. I have to get onto builder, not to argue my case (its utterly pointless with his experience & my not putting FFL on plan he can pick up on knowing I'm cornered, & he has an escape route for a bad mistake).. but to see what the hell is happening re. the T Frame dims: if its already been started at 2000mm + 2300mm I'm utterly screwed.. & its court cases, as I will not accept the whole thing 350mm less tall than it should be. At least here I have diagramatical proof of the look/ height it should be, so, I hope now my builder has NOT gone ahead with the TF call (aware as he is of the 350mm mistake likely will help him not jump in yet). But who knows.. slim chance he might not be aware its all 350mm too low. But I doubt it knowing how thick these two are. But he's only been on site twice for 1/2 hr each time so fk only knows.
  4. I must have missed this then. I need(ed) to have marked FFL on the wall.. its too late now, its been built, 350mm lower than it should. The slab there is 100mm shy of the FFL. I know this bc there's a lip of block 100mm above the slab pretty likely the insulation. Then the BO talked of chipboard floor.. which was alarming in itself/ another problem/ I do NOT ever ever want a chipboard floor in my workshop (I bet this is exactly what mu builder plans to do, why? because its a fraction the time & cost of a proper screed floor.
  5. Ok so I mark on the wall the FFL level. My builder comes & says 'well a bit late to put that on now!!' (this is what he'll say, laughing at me, or in a grump at my audacity at this late stage). I can't now put a line & ask him to get me to it, its pointless IF he has the argument ready that I didn't put FFL on the plan NOT because this argument is valid -its not- but in order to cover for his guy's/ their mistake (he saw, checked, we both went thru & all looked fine- he didn't mention Id forgotten to put FFL on then). The btm of the big arrow of 2000mm is SO blindingly obvious as to be the damn flolor is seemed to me not in any question it could be anything else. I understand it can be back-filled, & I know this can only be done up to dpc level: but the very trouble is here.. 1) from where do I get 3 tons of earth to do it? who does it? 2) the dpc level is 350mm LOWER than it should be, so any back fill can only get 1/2 way up. This will not satisfy BCO, so a retaining wall has to be introduced: who does this blockwork? who pays? So what do you think the btm line of the 2000mm figure represents chaps? "well.. it could be a number of things" maybe? go on please someone tell me what on earth this could be apart from the floor. Anyone. Go on I dare anyone. Please.
  6. @Tennentslager but back-filled.. with what/ from where?? how, just piles against the side of the build in the gap?? that wouldn't be allowed by BCO surely, so, a trench/ retaining wall is needed. A trench I do not want, or a wretched retaining wall either (& at whose cost if so?)
  7. One thing I just find depressing, is this consensus that the builder hasn't done anything other than follow the plans chock full of mistakes I gave them. Its just so untrue & the total opposite. Its dreadfully wrong, & I do not care one iota how ever many club together nodding with each other agreeing. Not -one- person has even SUGGESTED that the builder might have done a mistake.. & only yesterday they were saying how bad he was, trying to convince me I was wrong when I said I trusted him. Once I show clear cut evidence that he IS untrustworthy/ bad.. eveyone jumps on board his ship pointing out 'he's only done what he could'. Why does this antipathy twds me exist?? its just anything I say/ refute, anything I draw/ xyz wrong.. only for the logic that I don't have the experience they have. Not one person DARES to even say even tentatively 'you could be right, it looks like you might have a case'.. not even daring to cross the line in my favour. Its ridiculous.
  8. Ok ABosch.. but how on earth do I attatch it to a contoured stone wall??
  9. That's perfectlu reasonable as to a suggestion, but it doesn't address any of the main problems. The internal H now is irrelevant in terms of a problem. The exposed old area, the trench dug around, the height of the top of the 2x 9" block as it is relative to adjacent ground all -cannot- be remedied by this. Only if another block course + concrete pour to remedy the situation, could some of these be addressed. My builder will no way on earth do this by 1st agreeing that its an error (bc he's decades of experience knowing how to play such an argument, knowing full well already that a mistake has been made so expecting the conversation/ primed rready with ab or c excuse, playing it that no not them but rather IM fully responsible.. just like some on here seem unfathomably to think). Its an asbsolute disgrace.
  10. @PeterW did you mention the trench area (600mm wide around prob 2 tons min) 'its ok it can be backfilled' later.. if so, with what & from where??
  11. Can anyone advise on how I cover this area up? trouble is the wall face rain will just run down to the exposed area, unless a sealed line is fasten to it/ a sheet fixed & weighted down.. its a fkn disgrace.
  12. I just spoke to my nice BCO. Thank goodness he's approachable & friendly (if I had the other chap..). Ok now he doesn't have my plans (no need to), so cannot concur with me about reason for 350mm extra D. Ok understood. What he did say was insulation is yet to be added, & that either chipboard or scree top. So, 100mm of insulation + 25mm of top. It matters not a fart for this conversation what materials used. It only matters that ontop of my 2x 9" blocks.. will be ONLY an inch or two max. So my 350mm extra is a certainty as to its an error. So I need to approach my builder1. Very tricky. He reassured my slightly with regard to my main concern the area of exposed ground below adjacent orig wall footings.. but only slightly. He said ideally it does need covering (I fkn did this last night as best i could/ pretty much all still exposed), but can be 'blocked' up later to sure it up. Even the word 'underpinned' he used which sends shivers down me re. cost. Still it remains that a whole 1ft x 6 yds area of ground bang next to shallow 1830 founds has been unneccessarily excavated due to builder2 error. Fact. I'm furious & this aint the frame of mind to tackle my builder, especially if even I put my concern that a mistake's been made timidly, he'll shut up shop & leave me in the lurch for weeks with this exposed area so vulnerable. So I have a battle. And this is appalling situation to be in at such an early stage.
  13. I'm not sure about mixing up terms. I haven't mention the word application in the thread. My applications were many steps past. We have an agreed set of plans, so, I do know what is correct. I mean you are now suggesting I haven't given any plans. IO have. I posted them up here twice. The ground level of the lower room.. is so clear I cannot poosiibly understand any argument to say its not. I just can't. I t doesn't make any logical sense, & keeping reading it is bewildering. Room 1 height = 2000mm. Its on there in bold, a line up/down designating it. This -IS- clear. Its not ambiguos in any way at all. Room 2 height = 2300mm. Its on there in bold, a line up/down designating it. This -IS- clear. Its not ambiguos in any way at all. Dividing floor between = 200mm. Bold, clear, unambiguous. I mean I even went for whole easy figures, 2000, 4500, (4000 L to build) to make it bullet/ idiot- proof as to clarity & simplicity. But you say the very opposite that's is a mess, a fag packet sketch, nothing's clear so my mistake only?! its utterly totally nonsensical.
  14. Cheers ABosch.. wise words. I have tho been put off making friends here due to the nasty 'welcome' I've encountered from entrenched-minded locals. But saying that my buddie couple I mentioned are a help, so I'm not entirely alone, tho he was the one who thought -& maybe he's right who klnows what's going on this surface, if anything- that the insulation/ scree/ is all to be added TO the top of the 2x9" block level & all will be tickety boo bar a few inches: the immediate response on here to this suggestion was (& I share it fwiw) was '"oh he' hasn't a clue whoever he is".. so I don't know. Immediate support group.. I'm sorry to say, but you guys are it! far far better than not it goes without saying. Thanks alot-zoot.
  15. Thank you Jamie, but Full Plans are A) not what I did/ was expected to do/ or asked by builder1 to do, B) I had a set given to me by builder1 to go by anyway I still have them & I went by them too, to draw up my condensed/ simplified 'Build Notice' he asked for, C) its too late now. On these Full Plans, the existing floor levels within the main house are designated -only- by broken lines, without even labels saying "existing floor level" so the assumption was to me (& never questioned by builder1 or said 'what's that line?' in fact to the contrary I asked him if he understood the broken lines to be clear indication of existing floor levels? "yes") that broken lines indicate existing floor levels. I remain of the opinion, in this build & from the very plans HE gave me to then work from.. this to be simply the case.