jack

Or vice versa.

When we did this, we went in with the approach of it being a done deal, and didn't ask for their feedback. We just said that we were about to apply for planning and that we thought they might like to see what was going on before it was submitted. We also explained that we were building to live in it permanently with our family. We then focused on the build process and explained that it would be a kit build, so the main structure would go up fast. We also confirmed that we'd be on site every day and would be very mindful of the impact the build could have in terms of noise and dust etc. I don't know whether it helped, but in the end had no objections, one letter in support, and an offer of a letter in support if we wanted it. In contrast, two other nearby builds (our neighbor and another family a few doors away) faced organised objections from several of those who didn't object to ours.

There's no way that anyone in the house except me can control temperature at the moment. I do get reminded if things start getting a bit chilly. We've had little solar gain here over the last few days, so the house is definitely a bit cooler than it was. If this doesn't change in the near future, I expect my wife will mention this and I'll have to consider turning the heating on for at least a couple of hours a day to take a bit of chill out of the floor.

As a result of my personal experience with the company that took over the Immersun brand, I would not buy an Immersun or the other unit they manufacture. I found their attitude to customers of the company they bought out pretty poor (I know they would argue otherwise, and maybe they're great with their own customers, but this is my opinion based on my interaction with them).

I think you'll find that it's the clients that preceded you that have given them this impression, not you!

Ouch! The guy who ran the crew who did mine wouldn't have had the mental capacity to pull this off. We didn't get a schedule, and I think I'd have baulked at it if we had. In the end, it took us weeks to get them to take it down. We quickly realised that the reason they were happy for us to keep it for nothing when I asked for a price reduction is that they just used our site as storage. No point disassembling it and dragging it back to their yard if they can just drop by and pick up as needed for the next job. I think they took over a month to take it all after we asked.

He should be hurling these. Unless this is his way of planting spuds, of course.

I can't remember where I read it, but I believe the limitation is on panels, not inverter. You can't install more and limit with the inverter. Putting up a bit more than you're allowed isn't likely to cause any problems to you or the grid. On sunny days, your voltage may be slightly higher, but not enough to cause any issues for your stuff. I don't know how likely it is that the network provider would even find out. However, I'd be looking closely at the fines for getting it wrong before going any further. You'll also find that installers will be all over this and are unlikely to install something that isn't allowable.

Keep a look out around your area for scaffolding companies doing commercial work. While certainly no guarantee, there's probably a better chance that companies working for larger jobs will have the required paperwork in order. Another potential idea: have a look through the insurance section of the scaffolders' forum (and maybe other subforums) and see if there's anyone local to you who seems to be making the sorts of comments you'd want to hear.

That's the sort of thing I've been looking at. Obviously not ideal for long or bulky items, but okay for most day-to-day stuff.

This is similar to the willingness of many in the trades to modify scaffolding when its current layout doesn't suit them for some reason. Despite asking people not to touch it, we had boards moved/removed, heights adjusted, horizontal poles moved further from walls, etc.

The difficulty with buying (especially "regular" scaffolding that's just poles and clamps) is how to get it assembled, if you aren't experienced, and how to make sure it's covered by insurance. I can't see an easy way around that risk, as no scaffolding firm is going to want to install someone else's scaffolding cheaply, and there's no way on earth I'd install it myself. I suppose if you're the only one using it, you might feel okay with the risk, but I'd be terrified of having trades clambering around on it if I'd done it myself.

Perhaps he/she is VAT registered, and whoever was telling the story confused ordinary business VAT reclaim with the self-build reclaim? Other than that, it's as @PeterW says. If you look at the form for the reclaim, it needs to be filed by the self-builder. I can't see how the project manager could get around that, unless, as Peter says, there's some sort of agreement that the PM's final fee includes the refund being paid to him/her. Seems an odd way to do it though.

Welcome back, glad you found us again!

I've looked into these too. They aren't perfect, but they're okay for small parcel deliveries.

Genuine question: why do ASHP manufacturers require the use of glycol if Sentinel-type inhibitor is good enough? Are you sure that a couple of bottles of inhibitor is sufficient to prevent against freezing to a low enough temperature? I should say that we had a circulation pump failure on our ASHP after just over two years. It failed after having been off for several weeks, and possibly up to three months, over summer last year (our PV diverter basically kept the tank hot for most of summer). At the time, we weren't running glycol, because we were trying to get around to finalising the installation. I had it from a couple of sources that this shouldn't have made any difference, but it cost me hundreds to replace the pump and board (it's strongly recommended that they be replaced together). The only thing I did that was out of the ordinary was not to use glycol, so I'm reticent to recommend running without.

Thread locked as original question was posted by a spammer. We'll leave it here, as there are some useful replies.

Ignore the thread @recoveringacademic, it was started by a spammer - see my post above yours.

There are some useful replies, so we'll leave it up, but this thread was started to allow posting of a spam response (which was deleted before it was posted due to an eagle-eyed mod).

Welcome to BuildHub. I'm not sure what you mean by "overwhelming". Do you mean too bright? We have a 5.5m long, 2.2m high sliding door on the south side of our kitchen, several large windows to the east, and a small window to the north, but it's rare I feel we have too much light coming in (shade from a tree to the south east, and external blinds on the eastern windows help). Can you be more specific about what you're doing and what you hope to achieve? Photos or plans are often helpful.

I don't think you'd need a mould. Cut flashing, glue in place (bit of OSB underneath to support), then glass fibre and resin inside to finish. You'd still need an external flap and a way of finishing the inside neatly, but this would give you a low thermal bridge way of making a chute through the cavity.

Some scaffolders will charge for installation, adjustments, and a fixed period (3-4 months from memory), but not charge anything for extensions of even several weeks. Around here (South East England), it's more common to have an initial period, and then a weekly charge after that. I think ours might have been 5% per week. In the end we went over by so many months that I asked to renegotiate the deal and he said to just stop paying and not worry about it! I think we had it for about 7-8 months in the end, but that was a bit unusual because of the trouble and delays we had getting the brick slips done, and then we held on for a bit to get the PV up.

I need to look up what form of contract, if any, we signed. My wife largely dealt with this particular trade, so I'm not sure.

Yes, the claim is legally against the roofer for sure, although the insurer could get their legal team involved of course. I'm sure that at least some of the above won't be covered, as it's just a general public liability policy. I can't imagine there's any provision for a partial refund of the installation payment, at the least. I did ask what the policy covered (not unreasonable, since I'd been asked to deal with them rather than the insured), but they ignored me. Interesting possibility. I think at the moment the best option is just play it with a straight bat, and not think too hard about these known unknowns. I need to take a break from this for a few days to get some work and some balconies done, but will update once I'm ready to take the next step. Thanks all.

Warning and apology: long post ahead! I'm partly doing this as a way of organising my thoughts. Yes, quite a lot less at the moment. Depends on what else I claim for! This is what I'm thinking. One problem, though, is that some of what I now plan to pursue (partial refund of installation cost) is almost certainly not covered by this insurance. I'd rather not fight on two fronts, so my current thinking is to stop dealing with the insurer and go back to the roofer directly. I suspect they've been told by their insurer not to communicate with me, but that only applies to the extent that I'm willing to keep going down this route with the insurer directly. Possibly. A solicitor acquaintance said that insurance law is a bit tricky, and didn't feel they could give advice they'd rely upon. I'd assumed that a local firm of solicitors would be the same unless they happened to have someone who dealt with insurance law. Always a possibility of course. Exactly my problem with all this (disclosure: I have a law degree, so am mindful of privity issues), and an issue I think I discussed earlier in this thread or the other thread when it first happened. I've assumed that the insurer is acting as an agent of the insured for this portion of the negotiation, although they haven't formally stated that they are taking this legal role. The rest of your post is helpful, thanks. I hadn't seen that link to third party insurance claims - very useful. No, the sole interaction I've had with the insurance company is as set out above. In summary: I receive a single paragraph email from the insurer saying that they hear I allege their client has caused damage, asking for evidence to support my claim. I send back a detailed explanation of what happened, including timeline and photos. Didn't think to include client's emails admitting fault/liability, as it didn't occur to me that fault/liability was at issue. Three months and several emails from me later, I get back an email that says, approximately: You haven't provided proof or an expert report. Our client says they don't know what caused the leaks and they could have been caused by many things outside their actions. I write back with quotes from the roofer's emails to me, confirming that the leaks are due to items they supplied and fitted. I tell them that I've withdrawn my previous offer and am now expanding it to include other damages directly arising from their client's actions. I list the items against which I now intend to claim and ask them to confirm which items from the list their client's policy covers. They reply with the following (this is the entire email): "In an effort to resolve the claim without need for further protracted correspondence. I am willing to make an offer of £2730 in full and final settlement. We are not responsible for the first £250 of this claim and our Insured will be asked to pay you this separately. If the offer is accepted, please provide your account holder name, sort code and account number?" That sum is the lowest quote we had for replacing the insulation, boarding, skimming and painting, which I set out in my original email. It allows nothing for any of the other items I listed, and (as with the first email I sent them), they more or less ignored my questions. Re: claiming, I'm interested in potentially pursuing the following costs: Removal and disposal of insulation This took me over two days on a stepladder, cutting open the airtightness membrane in each 400 x 400 section (battens + counter-battens) and pulling sodden cellulose insulation into rubbish bags. The cheapest labourer around here is around £100 a day, so I thought to claim £200 for my time here (not counting costs of bags, or trips to the tip). Cleaning Cellulose insulation makes a hell of a mess. Even with dust sheets and our best efforts, it got everywhere. Very conservatively, we spent 2 hours cleaning after all the insulation was taken out, and then another 2 hours after the membrane was repaired and the insulation re-pumped. Cleaners are at least £20 an hour around here, so 4 hours gives £80. Loss of amenity We weren't able to use the bedroom or the bathroom while this was happening. The leaks happened in early January, and we were advised to let the easi-joists dry out properly, ideally over summer (the wood may already have been wet for months before the leaks became apparent). In the end we had well over a year without these rooms, but I was planning to call it six months. I don't know how to value the loss of amenity. I could base it on renting a room in a shared house like mine in my area, but you get a share of the rest of the house for that money. The alternative is to go by floor area. The affected bathroom and bedroom are just over 30m2 in total, versus 289m2 for the whole house. Call it 10%. 10% of the monthly rent around here is roughly half the amount it would cost to rent a room in a shared house. Rough numbers would be about £2000 for the six months. Reasonable? Additional heating Having no insulation, and less airtightness, while the roof was drying out increased the cost of heating. We have no heating upstairs, so during the three coldest months, we left a column heater on low in the bedroom, just to make sure that the timbers and internal walls didn't get too cold (thereby avoiding condensation). Call it 24 hours a day at (very conservatively) 0.5kW average = 12 kWh @ £0.14/kWh, for 90 days = £151.20. The bathroom was left open to the rest of the house, as the uninsulated area wasn't big enough to chill the rest of the house. I therefore don't propose to add anything for this, although undoubtedly the house heating system would have been working a bit harder to make up the difference. Expert assessment This is a tricky one. I suspect that some water is likely to have made its way into the cellulose where the roof meets the wall. I have no idea how much though. Any water will almost certainly have dried out over the first summer after the leaks, and it's pretty unlikely to cause any long term damage. However, I don't know this for sure. As such, I think there's something to be claimed here for either getting in an expert to do a proper review with inspection holes etc, with restitution if needed. This could be expensive: if there's any damage, we're talking major structural matters, including replacing insulation and studwork in an external (=supporting) wall with all that entails. I assume we're talking several thousand quid for this job given how fiddly it's likely to be. An alternative would be to raise this as a possibility, and then offer as an alternative a risk premium. I would agree not to pursue any future claim in relation to structural damage caused by the leaks, for which they would pay some fraction of the estimated cost of inspection and rectification. Say it would cost £10,000 to inspect and rectify - I would accept, say, £1000 to absolve them of the future risk. My time I've spent countless hours on this to date - probably at least a couple of days, including time trying to locate the leaks and interacting with the roofer and the insurer. I'm not sure how reasonable it is to claim for this, but I was thinking that any tradesperson I had in to do the investigating would be at least £200 a day around here. Call it half a day = £100. All the other stuff could be an hourly rate - nominally twice minimum wage? Call it (very conservatively) 8 hrs @£15 an hour = £120. Total: £220 Partial refund of installation costs These aren't the first leaks we had in these areas. Not long after the membrane was installed, we had some serious rain that resulted in several leaks (including exactly where these two leaks happened after we moved in). The roofers inspected and concluded that the problem was likely to be water tracking back through the structure of the house, since the coping over the parapet hadn't yet been installed. I thought that extremely unlikely based on the wall structure, but it was my opinion against theirs, so I didn't feel I could push too hard. They put the coping on, and then we had more leaks in the same places when it rained. They inspected again and concluded that it was likely to be water tracking back along the underside of the outlets going through the parapet wall. They installed a drip edge underneath the scupper. Again I wasn't convinced that the volume of water could possibly be tracking all the way back across the twin stud wall (no insulation as yet). They also spent some time adding additional patches around the outlets on the inside of the parapet wall, because I was convinced this was where the leaks were happening. Once they'd finished, I inspected the work and raised a number of issues to do with various edges not being sealed properly. I also again raised the fact that I didn't think the membrane was properly adhered to the flat bits of the scupper inside the parapet wall. They came and re-did the joins I identified, but disagreed with me on the scuppers. In the end, they had a rep out from the membrane supplier (Resitrix), who inspected the work and confirmed in writing that they believed the roofing had been installed to a high standard. We moved in a couple of months later, and the leaks happened within two weeks. My personal theory is that the unadhered bits around the scuppers allowed a small amount of water to work its way into the joins. Every time we had a cold snap, the water would freeze and open up the gap(s) a little more. Over several freeze/thaw cycles, the water eventually opened up a path into other unadhered portions, and now had a clear track into the roof. You have to give a supplier the opportunity to correct their own errors. Based on the history of these leaks, I believe they had ample opportunities. I therefore think it's reasonable to now demand a partial refund on what we paid them for the installation. Would 10% of their labour cost seem reasonable? Definitely open to suggestions as to what might be a reasonable request here. More generally, I'm not trying to punish anyone, but I'm increasingly frustrated and annoyed by the reactions of both the roofing company and the insurer. They've put us through an awful lot of stress and sleepless nights, and made us spend a lot of time dealing with the aftermath of these leaks that we'd rather have spent finishing off the rest of the house. I offered the roofing company a cheap, simple, solution, but they complicated the situation massively by getting their insurer involved, and either they or their insurer has since lied about the roofer's culpability. I'm currently thinking that I add up all the costs I would claim if it went to court, and offer to take some proportion (70-80%, say) of this if they pay up now. However, I don't want to take the mickey, so please tell me if I'm going too far with any of my costs above. I'm also mindful that the larger the compensation I demand, the more likely they and/or their insurer are likely to want to fight it, so I very much want to stick to claiming only for what a court is likely to award. Thanks as always.