jack

We too had someone from the OS turn up and survey our property.

Do you think that these are the offcuts from the layer behind?

Nice casting from what looks like good brass, sharp machining... must be your plumbing skills!

Sorry, is it like this everywhere or just in a couple of sections?

We took an almost identical approach, and our result (replacing a tiny bungalow with a large house) was very similar to yours, except that ours didn't end up in committee. We were quite surprised by that given how modern the house is compared to those around it. Of course, had one of the local trouble-making councillors got hold of it, the story could well have been different. I hope we'd have won in the end but I'm not sure whether we'd have had the appetite for another two years in a tiny damp bungalow while we appealed.

Actually, I would. For all my flaws, I try very hard not to be a grammar Wayne Kerr. And (starting a sentence with "and"!) when I am, any corrections are done in ninja mode so no-one should be the wiser!

I think your Heras fencing argument is a good one. Instead of threatening that option, perhaps consider calling (not emailing) and explaining that: (a) until the building work is completed you have a legal duty to keep the site secure, and the current fence achieves that outcome. Rather than threatening Heras fencing, just make the comparison (ie, I'd be allowed to have Heras fencing, and it's more than 1m high, so why is this more attractive fencing not compliant for the moment?) (b) say that you want to work with them to make sure you get the sizing of the hedge right up front, and ask them what size and density they would consider acceptable. I think it's difficult for them to insist you meet some arbitrary standard that they won't set out in concrete terms up front. Whatever you do, I'd be inclined to keep it verbal rather than putting it in writing. When you write something down, people tend to read and re-read it (especially if they don't like what they read). Small things become large, distorted things. It's a lot easier to sound reasonable by phone.

I've done Crossfit on and off over the last few years, but recently decided to take a break for a few months to focus on strength training. I was never any good, but my wife's massively gotten into it since taking it up late in 2015 (to the point where she's just qualified for this : http://www.europeanmastersthrowdown.com/) Anyway, interesting stuff. Will let the thread get back on topic.

Do you do Crossfit?

We have a full width low wall with a shelf above for all of our WCs. Space wasn't an issue and we liked that look, so it worked for us. As ryder says, his build-up is different from ours anyway.

Down the rabbit hole we go. Safety squints on, people!

We had a similar experience with SSE about 18 mths ago - no charge for applying (as far as I can recall), and approval for 8.5kW without question. It did take them a long time to process the application though. Their estimate was something like a month but it took more like 10 weeks from memory. For reference, we have one 3-ish kW array a couple of doors up from us, on a split E-W system due to their roof layout. I'm not aware of any others in the immediate vicinity, which undoubtedly was a factor in the approval.

Thanks Jeremy. I agree with all that, and will take action via small claims if necessary. At the moment, my main concern is how best to approach the insurer and/or the roofer, and in what order. I don't know how much of this initial response from the insurer is actually the insurer's doing. When asked, he could well have said "I don't know why it leaked", and this is an accurate statement of his position (he and the guy who did most of the installation work were both honestly surprised at the way the outlets failed, and couldn't put their finger on exactly what went wrong). The insurer could well have taken this statement and is now running it to avoid paying up. Given that it's now been repaired, it will be very difficult for any expert to prove or disprove what caused the leak. Again, I suspect this is a tactic by the insurer. Anyone else have thoughts about the next best step?

I don't know, I've never had to make an insurance claim involving a third party before. I've just followed their lead. I read similar about Aviva when I was doing some research recently before renewing my car insurance. You can be sure that between that information and what's happened here, I'll never insure anything I own through Aviva.

Update on this: In the end the roofing company decided to put it through their insurance. After three months of being dicked around by Aviva (I'm happy to name and shame them given their appalling attitude to date), they've finally come back with the following in response to a detailed timeline, photos and explanations, including pointing out that their client had admitted liability: "It appears that to date you have not provided any evidence into the cause of the leaks. You have only provided pictures of the damage and your assumptions of the cause of the leaks. You have not provided an independent expert report to confirm the cause of the leaks. Our Insured states they don’t know what caused the leaks from the aluminium outlets but don’t feel it was an installation error. They state it could have been caused by many sources. The onus is upon you as the claimant to prove your claim. I look forward to receiving expert evidence from you. I would also remind you that you are at liberty to seek legal advice in the pursuit of your claim. You are able to seek legal advice from a solicitor or from your insurer and any other legal professional. Alternatively, you are able to seek legal advice free from your local Citizen Advice bureau." Just to be clear, the roof installer has repeatedly put in writing that the cause of the leak is the scuppers they provided and installed. Examples: 18 October 2017: "If unfortunately, another leak occurred; <we> would inspect and deal with accordingly. I am confident that the new scuppers installed will be totally fine. It was the aluminium scuppers which seems to have caused this unfortunate problem. We have since installed pvc scuppers and as I understand there has been no further problems." (ie, source of problem admitted) 13 October 2016: "Please find attached our agreement [for internal repair works]; as we would like to settle without using our insurance company." (ie, liability admitted) 11 July 2016: "Regarding the damage work; can you please get some quotes and depending on the cost we can make a decision as to whether you need to claim through our insurance company." (ie, liability admitted). 10 March 2016: "We’re all still baffled as to why the liner is leaking." (ie, admission that the leak is related to their installation of the liner/scuppers) My plan is to forward these quotes to Aviva and point out that their client has already provided evidence of fault. I'd say that the evidence I've provided so far, in conjunction with their client's admission, must at least put the ball back in their court for rebuttal. I also don't understand this statement: "Our Insured states they don’t know what caused the leaks from the aluminium outlets but don’t feel it was an installation error. They state it could have been caused by many sources." If I read this correctly, it appears they're admitting that the leaks came from the outlets supplied and installed by their client, but are trying to avoid liability by saying it wasn't an "installation error". Surely if you supply something and it fails despite you installing it correctly, you're responsible for the damage caused? Bear in mind that the total costs they're up for are something like £2000-2500. I'm really surprised that Aviva is behaving like this, but maybe I'm expecting too much from an insurance company. Anyone have any thoughts about the best way to tackle this?

I had a similar conversation with our solar installer the other day (I'd called them with an enquiry about something else and talk eventually turned to the new Powerwall). The problem is that I think we used something like £650 in electricity last year, excluding FITs. That's with zero optimisation, not using the cheapest electricity provider, and only one person in the house (me!!!) making any effort at all to reduce energy consumption. Given that showering is the biggest consumer of energy in our house, and that we already get "free" hot water via an immersion diverter for at least 6 months of the year, I can't see how we could save more than £100-200 per year with a system like this. The solar installer had to admit that it's hard to make the numbers stack up once you get into low energy houses. I think he was genuinely surprised at how little energy we use, even though he knew about our house's construction.

I actually measure the surface temp at one point of our slab (under our kitchen island) using a one-wire sensor held against the slab and covered with a weighted-down offcut of PIR. From memory, the highest temp we've seen is 24C. That was fairly early on, before I did anything at all about temperature control (not that I've actually done much more since!) It's amazing what a subjective difference even one degree of slab temperature makes to the perceived temperature of the house. 24C left the house feeling uncomfortably warm. 23 is too warm, 22 is borderline, 20-21 is pretty comfortable, 19 starts feeling a little cool but okay, below that seems too cold.

This is cheap and has good reviews: http://m.costco.co.uk/view/p/versaroll-pro-pvc-flooring-228-x-610-cm-174714

The one behind it, and possibly the one directly opposite (not quite in frame), are exactly the same.

Aren't you still there from last time?

Says more about them than your house.

If I remember correctly, our town council spends something like 10% of its annual budget on flowers, while pollution levels in the town centre have been at the extreme danger level for years without anything having been done about it.

From discussions with Irish builders and suppliers, it's exactly that. The pendulum has now swung completely the other way, not just with higher standards, but with quite onerous requirements for certifying that the standards are met (something the UK could do with a bit of!)

New avatar proposal for @daiking

Have read of the "concrete" section of the Hoover Dam Wikipedia article.