AdaminCymru

@Conor @Mr Punter. Thank you both for your comments

Please could I have a sense check. Is this acceptable method of constructing steps within a retaining wall? The wall was existing, and steps new and part of the patio project. Clay soil behind the retaining wall, dug out on a slope. Mortar / concrete laid straight onto clay soil and steps formed off this. Brick face and porcelain slab on the top. Thank you

Hmm, yes it can get pretty windy / heavy rain is not unusual. So far no leaks and we’ve had some very heavy rain in the past few months

It is between 15-16 degrees and crest planum duo tiles which can go down to 15 degrees.

Thanks so much for your reply. BC officer is apparently happy with the builders explanation, but I’m not, and certainly not since taking a closer look today.

I’ve Recent had an extension and new roof structure. The final balance has not yet been paid and building control cert not yet issued. The builder says the lead work and sealant here is acceptable. BC initially raised it but the builder had apparently reassured him that lead sealant had been used inside the chase and the exterior silicone is just ‘decorative’. He says the lead does not need to be dressed over the tiles as the plaster soakers lap up underneath and up the vertical wall. I’ve removed some of the silicone and theres clearing nothing behind, the lead can be removed with ease. Is this acceptable? It looks terrible to me

Thanks for your response. Yes plenty of written communication about drainage but none stating he would deviate from a basic / acceptable standard. We have a dedicated storm water sewer network and separate foul, which he knows about. It would have just meant more work for him to do the work properly. There may not be a straight answer to this question but perhaps a more succinct way of putting it would be: If a portion of work is completed within the estimated fee, and that work is below an acceptable standard objectively, and the contract states all work will meet such standards, can the tradesman demand more money to bring this work up to an acceptable standard?

Hi all, 200k contract nearing completion, based on an estimate. To date, numerous extras have been added at highly inflated prices so I want to be careful and well informed on how I raise this All outside rainwater drainage has been connected directly to the foul drains despite the contract stating all work will comply with the build over agreement, building control and planning. The builder is due his final £10k payment soon. I’m aware that if the water board are ever called out in the future, I could be fined heavily for his decision to cut corners - there is an up to date cctv survey on file and I know there are two existing rain water gulleys which he has left unused. If I pull him up on this, can he revise his estimate at this stage and demand more £ to complete the drainage adequately? Or, can he not do this, as the work has also been completed but non compliant? We have had many discussions about drainage throughout and he’s always said rain water would be connected to the 2 existing rain water gulleys. He then went ahead and ignored this. thank you

Thank you for the response. Not in a conservation area and the house is detached

Correction, a 300mm ladder overhangs the gable, plus 100mm tile over hanging the end of the ladder. Dormer is therefore set in 350mm from the outside of the external skin on the gable wall

I’m having a dormer loft extension at the moment and the existing roof structure includes a 400mm overhang with laddered rafters plus another 100mm tile overhang beyond this to the verge. The approved planning drawings indicate that the dormer cheek will sit 750mm from the verge, so taking into account the laddered rafter plus 100mm tile overhang, the dormer cheek was set to be 250mm in from the outside of the outer gable skin. The trimmers for the cheek have been formed, but my builder says that the 100mm tile overhang must be reduced to about 30-40mm once the roof is re-tiled, as we are having a continuous dry verge. Would this be an issue with planning? The cheek is still where it is meant to be, but the distance to the verge is reduced. I’ve asked if the 100mm overhang could be maintained and he says it can’t - any thoughts on whether this can be maintained once the roof is retiled? Thank you

Thank you Annker. Yes I appreciate perhaps I didn’t work my comments correctly. BCO is visiting on Monday and I’ve emailed the engineer. It really does not sound right to me so let’s see what they say. thank you again

I would appreciate some insight on this. We are building a single story rear extension with a block and beam floor. There is a ground beam spanning the rear of the extension which has been meshed and encased in concrete. There is no foundation under this ground beam, it rests on a trench on one end, and a pad on the other. The external blockwork is not running straight along the beam, and as a result, on one end we only have 100mm of concrete encased beam left for the 150mm cavity and thermalite internal skin. The blockwork has been built square however the beam must not have been laid the same. I spoke with the builder after noticing it and he says it’s fine and the internal skin and 150mm cavity will be built off the block and beam that rests on this 100mm. Does this sound correct? unfortunately my building control drawings do not detail this.

Thank you. I am concerned that with the render option, as this is a retaining wall (lawn), we would have problems down the line with water damage to the render