Bancroft

Thoughts from an amateur learning as I go... We're doing similar to you but on a bigger scale. We've contracted a main contractor to do the groundworks, slab and ICF build for a new house. Were now preparing for phase 2 - everything else. Things that have come up/been discussed with the architect and other thoughts: Check the Building Regs. Something this big may need a designated main contractor/duty holder. This could be you but be aware of what your responsibilities might be as a result. A main contractor will probably cost more but could save money by being more efficient and less stressful. If you sequence a plumber to come in on Tuesday after the electrician finishes on Monday - but the electrician doesn't - then you're left holding the baby. That will probably make you more likely to build gaps into the timeline which, in turn, will increase grief and nausea from the other half because things drag on so long. If you do use a main contractor be ready to have lots of discussions as to why you want the Heat Blaster 3000 heat pump while the MC insists on the Gentle Waft 5000 - because that's what he's always fitted. When I told a Tesla Fan Boy electrician I would not be having anything with the word Tesla on it in my house on principle his face was a picture of 'does not compute...' Boundaries and responsibilities - if you're going to get different people in to do all the different jobs, how are you going to get any of them to take responsibility when something goes wrong? The roof leaks and knackers your new MVHR - who pays for the new MVHR? Probably easier to get an answer if one MC was responsible for the whole lot. I think there are three key elements here - time, cost, risk and only you can understand the importance of each one. We're going down the MC route because of the size of our project but there's part of me that wants to be the one in charge - because this will be our forever home but, as far as any builder is concerned, for them it's just another job to be forgotten about in a few months' time. Whichever way you go throughout the contract, by all means delegate but never abdicate. As soon as you take your eye off the ball, or allow someone else to do things in ways you wouldn't, then you're opening the floodgates to ending up with something you didn't want.

I can't comment on your specific question but, more generally: We're in the build phase of our house so have taken out a warranty with a well-known provider. They did their first inspection recently and we were then informed of the outcome. The areas where we were 'non compliant/more information needed' were vaguely worded so I called them up. It took three "I'll just pass you on to my supervisor" discussions until I got to someone who could answer the questions. Even then they still couldn't actually explain what their own questions actually wanted. So we passed a load of information to them that we thought would cover their queries but then were told we needed a site report. Up until this point, no mention had been made about a site report. Planners didn't ask for it, the warranty company themselves hadn't asked/mentioned it. We don't have one because no-one has asked for it and nothing untoward came up from the geotechnical reports. But now it seems we're going to need yet another report. I explain all this to demonstrate/support your general point that warranty providers - like all other insurance providers - are both ineptly manned by uninformed people and will do everything in their power to avoid actually paying out a claim.

The person who invents an AI camera system to identify when a cat is carrying a 'present', trying to get through the cat flap but then shuts the cat flap will make a fortune.

I think I would have been happy to pay for additional pv to roof connectors so that there was one on each standing seam (as with @Russdl's setup). The asymetry od skipping one seam would have my OCD twitching every time I looked at them!

Sadly ours will be on the front but, I have to say, your setup looks much more dicrete than many. Have you had to take any anti-bird/nesting measures?

How slimline/innocuous are yours? Do you have a photo? One of my key concerns is the panels will be on the car port (which is integrated into the house roof) which means that they will be front and centre to anyone approaching the house. So, I want them to be as innocuous as possible. I could accept something very slim and low profile but clunky panels stuck on with half a Lego set would be a big no-no.

Seen that - thought this was a slightly different topic and didn't want to change the focus of that thread. Roof was actually specified by us. The whole build is going to be barn-like in appearance and, for our area, metal roofing is the more common solution. The only other common option around here would be clay tiles and I'm no fan of those.

Lack of space and being in a national park limit options somewhat but, given the opportunity yes I'd agree would be much easier/cheaper.

We're building a house that will have metal standing seam roof panels. We want solar but I hate the ugly carbuncles that are fitted to some homes. I like the idea of Flextron (bonded to the seamed roof panels in the factory). I acknowledge the fact that they're probably not the most efficient but the fact that they're innocuous and flat against the roof is more important to me. My only concern is if the bonding fails and/or inefficiencies increasing over time to the point of them not being productive. Question: Does anyone have experience of the Flextron system that would help inform my decision on their use? Or, does anyone have an alternative for seamed roof installations that are low profile from a visual perspective?

Do you mean like this? Looks like they grip on the vertical seam section and then provide a mounting point for the solar panel, though not sure how you size roof seam width to solar panel width without ending up with a Meccano set's worth of scaffolding. Has anyone got any experience of using these?

My personal thought is that, instead of new build 'anywhere' projects of 100+ houses in one spot, we should be sprinkling the new builds across multiple sites and limiting development to 5-6 houses at any one location. This has a number of benefits: It stops Nimby-ism which is probably the biggest blocker to new developments It reduces pressure on specific sites - most transport/school/doctor/utility systems can cope with 5-6 new houses without too much additional work - they can't with 100+ Small developments are more likely to create neighbourhoods and communities; modern anywhere projects rarely do. Done properly this could create a positive response to new housing in so many ways.

Razor wire? Would snag their clothing (and flesh) to stop them falling and they're unlikely to try it again (unless they're a Darwin Award contender).

Agree, we had four different Planning Officers from Pre-App to final Decision (and I think all of them were only part time, 2-3 days/week). I'd also add that, from the perspective of someone suffering planning over the last 18 months, I'd say the biggest issue is trust and confidence in the system. No amount of 'full stack' back office tools, 'resource efficiency', or 'feedback tools' are going to change this (I'm quoting management phrases from the MHCLG Digital website here...). Trying to have a discussion with anyone in the planning department was almost impossible - it's almost as if the Council had a 'no communications' policy (they certainly don't publish an Org Chart of names/telephone numbers). I applaud any efforts to improve the system but I think focusing almost exclusively on tech (as this initiative seems to be doing) is probably not the best way forward. Talk to people face to face, don't 'guide them through a set of tasks'.

Not sure if its the same for BC but for planning we just showed them a bill for the existing supply. The Openreach online system is not fit for purpose for private builders. We had a really frustrating time trying to get an additional supply to a site that already has fibre. From my experience, you'll get no sense out of Openreach's India offices until you agree to pay whatever random figure they come up with (that random figure for us was £12k - with no details as to what the work entailed!) Once you have agreed to pay the random figure, you have 30 days to do so or they just invalidate the contract. However, once you've agreed to that then you will be allocated a local Supply Engineer who can visit the site and talk sense. They can then work within the system to actually achieve a solution. A completely stupid, back to front situation but that's Openreach for you.

Have a word with CoolEnergy in Grimsby - they might be able to provide the sort of solution you're looking for.

These look to be the same roof panels that Catnic are using for their solar roof solution (both sites show the same photo so it's either that or one of them is being loose with the truth!). Catnic were, I think, the early adopters of these panels but I'm seeing other suppliers entering the market now. Speaking with reps about this, they can be bonded to the steel panels in the factory or applied afterwards. The roof manufacturer's preference is factory bonded, naturally, and I would have thought that they would be longer lasting in terms of stickiness but if the roof is already thre then options might be limited.

If Ajax is a Ukrainian system, do they give the option of adding a drone that will hunt down anyone trying to break into your home? I'd happily upgrade to that option!

When we were on an old-style septic tank system it was fine but when we replaced it with a package plant it was recommended we stopped using it. Chances are it might have been ok but if the manufacturer advises against it and then there's an issue...

After the inane process our planning department put us through to get our planning, the devil in me says the planning officer should be formally reported to the head of planning for attempting to alter a decision made by the planning committee without the proper authority. That might help to put the Little Hitler back in his box and stop him trying it on with anyone else.

Are you on mains drainage or a private sewage system? Most private sewage systems won't work with salt water softener systems, I believe. Had a Twintec system in the past. Ok, but paying for the salt blocks started to get weary after a few years.

If you've paid for a Pre-App they should have indicated how long it would take. Nevertheless, if it's been over two months than I would certainly be on the phone to them to try and track down what's happening. Planning departments are notoriously slow and unhelpful in most cases, and seem to try their best to be uncontactable. if you're not getting anywhere with them I've found the best thing to do is call up and ask how you register a complaint about the planning department. That seems to energise them. Not the way it should be done but it's worked for me twice where everything else failed.

Interesting, I wonder if the people putting these up have to comply with the same building regs requirements as a home owner would? Or will it be different because it's the Council so normal rules don't apply...

I noticed this wind turbine the other day (outlined against the solar panels) on the edge of a new development. Surprised for two reasons: First, will it actually achieve anything meaningful? It's quite low and surrounded by houses and some high trees to the south west (where prevailing winds come from). How/why has the local planning department agreed to it? It doesn't seem to fit the criteria required for personal wind turbines, even permitted development rights.

When I did some Googling around regarding this I quickly noticed that each local council seems to take a different approach to the process and what requirements they want (probably proportional to the feeling of self-importance the council officer dreams of). I put myself down as the owner and the 'company' doing the work, kept detail to an absolute minimum, and just got an approval email a few days later.

That should be on a t-shirt!