zoothorn

@JFDIY no cant find 'preferences' anywhere. please tell me how to put you on ignore?

No alas I can't- I gave the figure final/ final after faffing about deciding, on friday > off he went to town to hand it in to be made. I need to think how I can solid-up this timber packing chaps if I can (regardless of whether I've made the right window W decision- its happening). Packing will be 230mm of some kind of timber structure.

Maybe so Peter I appreciate your thoughts on it, but a decision's been made whether correct on this or not @ opening 920mm (at least it'll look more in keeping with my main cottage lower 2 windows/ same style). Window is being made. So I need to consider what best I can do to this packing timber artea which will spring up in 30mins tmrw AM probably.

Too late Declan, its been agreed @ 920mm. I just need to do what I can to address this timber 'packing' area that'll now happen here on the LHS. If I went with a window as per this opening (I never agreed to being this large width- it was just rush/ done as its intention was only to be a blank, me to utilise it 5 yrs away not not, plaster over the blank now: the BCO suddenly wants it done now only 4 days ago) it'll be totally incongrous to the adjacent smallish cottage windows. The design is to blend in, contoured render etc.

A bloody spanner in the works re. the wretched height issue. I did some detective work & found the Timber Frame Co. I phoned & expected them to confirm that the collar positions were in the lower positions (by 1 foot) due to structural reasons/ maybe a computer deemed they could not be pushed 1ft higher. Not so. I spoke to the very chap who came out on site, once the groundwork was done, who said he measured everything relative to the groundwork point. Yes I recall PeterW saying this was the normal way, but I didn't expect my builder to have told me lies as to the reason at this point in time.. we were 1 ft down lower than we should have been. So now my -innitial- concern has manifested true. That the groundwork -was a mistake- by builder no2.. & its been covered up by main builder now landing me with costs as a direct result of this fkn inneptitude. This leaves me fkn mad. And it means counter to all the replies telling me how poor my 'fag packet' plan was/ how the builder is doing all as he should/ throw your plan away its sh*t/ let him do it he knows best, shut up/ how the collar is CORRECT DUMMY.. I was actually correct, actually my plan was fine to go with should the fkn groundwork be in the right position, & I have been hoodwinked by my lying builder this extra foot was needed 'to get it all in', the collars 'not being able to go any higher' as per my plan. Total fkn lies & bllx. amazing that so many on here blindly followed along just assuming I was wrong- just absolutely amazing.

Frozen! I've never seen it.. prob only chap who hasn't.Ive moved on then.. but still on same window/ got this opening to remedy.

@Declan52 could I get your opinion on what I might do with this window, re. minimising the opening W? I got in a pickle before saying opening 2150mm. Its not that wide, its 1150mm. The last pic above is the window. Its position & width determined by/ to coincide with vertical TFrame studs behind. I was told 'you dont have to have this wide, you can have it narrower'.. but little did I know this meant timber packing either side, or just one side as I'd prefer (symmetry reasons).. I just naturally thought 'block/ brick' pretty simple. But I can't do this apparantly & it has to be timber. So we're going to minimise W to 920mm, packing the LHS. I expect the fastest way possible, wood then, but this will mean a hollow area (sound escaping).. so I want to explore ways to solidify it up prior to mesh/ plaster over. Or anyone any ideas? thanks, zoot.

Yes it will be rendered- ok so it will be covered that's ok.. but not thrilled about this structurally, esp if a bit of wood was all that was needed.

Ok I take your points on board Declan thanks. No I only mentioned the slate as a mark, to show where the bow presses down to @ maximum in the middle (the lower side of the slate = same as the bow max: you can get a thumb in there each side from here, to where the lintel rests on the L and R ledges).

Ok but I will call the BCO. The mortar is just not setting here too (it is in a dark shadow below the 1st floor scaff boards) & lintel is twisted out fwd. Cosmetically once the window frame's in it will be seen won't it? I mean there's nothing to go ontop of it, is there usually? @PeterW the 1st pic, if you look at the bricks.. there's a sag in the middle/ I've put a level on & the gaps L and R are 3/8" to 3/4". There's a piece of ~5" slate in the mortar, on the RHS of opening (just above the lower white placcy thing) its at a bit of an angle up. If you can ID this then the lower side of it.. is on a plane of the bow's maximum = so it is pronounced/ I'm not being ott fussy here.

Temp camera fix/ no idea how. 1. window lintel bow (the 1150mm W window which will be 'packed out LHS only with timber to 920mm.. whether I can solid-up this open timber area I still don't know, I got my figure wrong at 2150mm before which c*cked that question up) 2. Door next to it, entry to lower room

@Bitpipe yes I understand this, but I've never been in a situation like this before. I can cut out one thing: digger skim off drive @ £400 (ridiculous, a small area & 3 hrs work), by getting n'bour to do it £150. If I lay sleepers beforehand a good step in twds the block wall I can use the earth to backfill the gap. BCO has allowed sleepers to go a bit closer. I' m happy to pay £200 to 2x block & concrete exposed inside lower room area, as I was already going a step down so may have needed 1x block anyway. This will elieviate my stress re. this exposed area. I have a strong case surely that the insulation (if not floor ontop too) shouldn't be added @ £445: I had an estimate on July 24 for 'groundworks' that listed the steps as mentioned including 100mm insulation last. The same figure put on the final estimate (only as 'groundworks' as were other things/ same price on the final estimate, the details of which left off final quote, having already been put on this same estimate 24/7). The additional window: £more thanhe told me (£380 as opposed to £260) but I'll lump this to avoid confrontation. So its the drain @ £445 I'm not happy about, nor floor/ insulation situation. So could I do these myself I wonder? plastic 100mm pipe connecting to downpipe, digging, hardcore ontop. And if he were to agree to lay the 50mm insulation included (tho he'll refuse any £rebate from the 100mm he included in quote.. I make that approx £275 he saves by going 50mm).. could I lay the floor?

Anyone know what 'brick plinth' means..? on my quote: External Blockwork & Brick Plinth (2k).

I cannot find these damn lintels exactly, but have found "https://www.less2build.com/catnic-lintel-ctf5-timber-frame--1200mm-50mm-cavity?language=en&currency=GBP&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIyrOc5dTz5QIVybHtCh2b1gc0EAQYAiABEgICPfD_BwE which says.. " All timber frame models from any manufacturer must be secured with restraint clips (supplied) and a batten (not supplied) to prevent lateral deflection (twist) during the building stage to achieve the loading figures shown. " So I have this to put to my BCO. Ok if he tells builder to redo: is this feasable/ if so, how big a job would this be?

If I knew it was an IG (company?) lintel, I could put this to the BCO -if I put it to the builder, the end of good terms/ he'll pop- but it doesn't look the same. Its a farm gate galvanised-look light grey lintel, but definitely this "Timber Frame type" shape.

Now this is just the info I need.. & concurrs with my feelings on it. But there is no way on earth I can put it to him to redo this- he will shut up shop, the work will stop, & I have no bargaining room on my floor (his original itemised groundwork quote, which he repated the same £figure for on the final quote but only in terms of 'groundwork' leaving off the itemised details.. it was clear the details already listed before, & no need to repeat.. that was the clear as day implication), & he'll go back on this that & the other, like the contoured render we agreed on.. he'll just not do/ it'll be flat/ just as I don't want. The only thing I can do is phone my BCO about it. This I'll do once I can scrape a photo together. All the power lies with these builders however you play it. They can just stop & not continue until you relent. You have to get it continued; they don't, they just go onto the other job. They can wait for payment for this job.. but you can't wait to get the build finished, especially @ the start of winter.

Fair comment. But my point wasn't a grumble re. the cost (£200 for doing the inside cover-exposed-area job.. was less than I thought). Its the tricky situation of most of these being a consequence of the +14" depth situation which wasn't on my plan, a plan given to him/ he very happy with, but he effectively tore up either bc A) it wasn't feasable from the Timber Frame Co's structural pov [ IE primarily: the collars maybe needed to go 14" lower, maybe: its not definitely confirmed this is true > so EVERYTHING had to follow on: room positions shifted down/ dividing floor placement realtive to outside ground lower/ floor relative to outside ground lower EVERY-SINGLE-THING.. was this absolutely neccessary to shift collars down? I'll never ever know].. or B) it was just "cheaper to just lower the collars than on his plan/ & don't tell him.. when he cottons on it'll be too late to do anything/ he'll have no choice but play ball". I'm 50/ 50 on which is true. Either way its caused a myriad of added work to do a drain, two retaining walls, levelling off drive to diminish the ground offset: & the question, in my book, of who is "responsible" considering (in my book) I never wanted it, or knew it ALL was going to be, this wretched 14" additionally low.

Ok, that's helpful MJN.. but is it bowed in the middle because of a weight of 5sqM of block above it? How can an 'extra HD' lintel be only mm's thick-?

I've just got back & find a new quote in my mailbox.. from builder. The sod has quoted me for both 'supply 50mm insulation & 22mm floor.. £445'. Plus another £445 for the drain he absolutely has being saying he'd put in for me (clearly implying bc the whole thing's 14" lower, the BCO wanted a drain as a consequense, then he'd do this for me). No mention of any hardcore or anything covering it either. Plus another £200 for the retaining wall needed to cover the exposed inside area (another consequence of the whole thing being 14" lower than was on the plan, & I was totally unnaware was to happen/ or knew why was happening for 2 weeks of the build). Plus another £400 for skimming off the drive area by 100mm (in order for -me- to have a bit easier time constructing another fkn retaining wall of sleepers, all around it probably costing me £250.. yet another consequence of it being 14" lower). He gave me clear indication this would just be a digger hire for the day, nothing more/ shrugging it off as inconsequential 'tidying up'. Utter sod.

@PeterW a 'Timber Frame' lintel.. aha ok. as its solely doing duties to the outer block layer Id never have known this is what it was called. This back angle up/ out, then up 90* again to the 'bed' is morelike to shape I saw. So, these type -had- to be used then, & a concrete type was never an option? But surely it should simply be thicker then.

Anyway I can't find the type that's been used, Peter's eg above is indeed closest. And as I said I'm happy to be proved wrong on the cost.. it seems maybe a concrete lintel -is- less.. but I can't be certain/ can't find my exact type. So why on earth would one of these have been used instead?? Ive never known anything so barking mad if the concrete type cheaper.

They're sort of like this, but do not have the additional back area which lookslike a strengthening bar area.

Good morning Peter- yes its something like this, exactly.. but a grey galv finish (& a 45* slope to the rear not r-angle). Yes I saw it fitted & watched the weight in the middle sag. Its no more than 3mm thick. I'll try do a photo later today. No-one on site it seems today. [Mods- is there an 'ignore' function on the site?] thanks zoot.

Russel- there is no way on god's earth this thin bit of steel is more expensive than a concrete lintel. No way. I'm happy to be proved wrong, but no way. A 1/4" thick one.. perhaps. Well there was no propping then, & as a result I have a bow & a twist in both (due to the sheer weight, is confirmed by this reply then). I'll have to get onto the BCO 1st thing: I'm just not happy with the structural soundness of both these whole areas of block above now.. & if I'm not, surely the BCO won't be. If it was a case of BCO telling builder to 'redo with concrete lintel'.. is a metal job + bricks feasable to remove & replace? it looks the same height & depth. My bet is builder thought BCO wouldn't appear until job finished (this is what he told me, which alarmed me a little) & as he's doing whole build at breakneck speed I bet he's got plasterers already possibly booked in for end of the week. Also I notice the mortar has not gone off here too: its still pliable & a bit wet 3 days after it was done.

Anyone's opinions on the 2.5mm galv steel lintel thing + bricks? Also if I'm given an invoice a week ago+ (friday before last), for timber frame & groundwork.. when should I pay/ what is the 'correct' timeframe? Its a bit odd as the floor insulation not done yet (last on the groundwork itemised list) plus the haggle over the agreed 50mm celotex (instead of 100mm whatever it was/ polystyrene/ poly-something? on the quote) plus 22mm board floor hasn't been finalised. What I might say is Im happy to pay once the insulation & floor materials are here, should he gets the hump if I say "not paying until groundwork done.. & its not all done yet" as really I should do (but if I were to, he'll just batten the hatches & not agree the floor in place of half the 100mm poly-whatever insulation.. then we're at odds.. then he refuses this, that, generally plays up: I cannot have the stress of this).