HerbJ

We have an enthalpy heat exchanger, which was installed as part of the original installation 2/3 years ago - we have PAUL Novus MVHR. We installed the enthalpy HE because we have a relatively large house (340m2), there are only two of us normally living here. and it was recommended that a enthalpy HE would prevent the air getting too dry in this situation. It has worked well for us We do not have humidistats installed but control boost settings in bathrooms and downstairs cloakroom are initiated automatically when the lights are switched on in those rooms - the controller allows adjustment of the boost run time after the lights are turned off in those rooms (currently set at 15 minutes). If we require greater ventilation when cooking or drying clothes in the utility room, we simply use the boost setting on the remote controller, which is located outside the kitchen.utility room. As I respond to you, the house is sat at 23 C and 38% humidity on the low settings. Our system was set up with the BR values set as the 100% setting and the boost setting at 130% of BR values. We also have a reduced/low settings of 70% BR values, which is what the system usually operates at. We have remote controller for our MVHR in the hall and it is very easy to change all these values from this controller. The removal of the standard HE and installation of the new enthalpy HE should only be a 10 minute job, providing your MVHR unit is easily accessible. (our is in a plant room and we could change the HE it in 5 minutes...). There should be no need for any further adjustment of the system. We also have an F7 Filter on the inlet and G4 filter on the return. Again, we do not change any settings when using an F7 filter.

+1 to this. We also have Gaulhofer windows and incorporated the requirement to meet SBD and BR into my purchaase specification and contract. Insist that the supplier confirms their ability to meet the relevant standards and regulations and make it part of the contract

@Weebles I have sent you a PM with some info on our contract name and details and the redirect name.

Yes, that may well be the case. They seem to be trading under a similar name at a new address. When I entered their old website from my old correspondence , it redirected me to the new trading name, which is very similar. both for worktops/quartz/stone and for kitchens.......

I'm surprised too. Their main business was quartz and stone worktops, mostly to the trade . They supplied fitted worktops to many other kitchen shops in Berkshire and Surrey.

Yvonne, my better half, was responsible for all interior design and colour selection. She bought a RAL Colour Wheel very early in the design process and carried it with her everywhere. She bought it on ebay - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Original-Ral-K7-Color-Fan-Deck-Swatches-Classic-213-Colour-Tones-Newest-Version-/192590016704 She used it all the time for every decision involving colour or colour matching. She also had a bag of samples, containing a decent sample of everything we had selected for finishes - tiles, wooden flooring, paint sample sheets, curtains, sofa covering, etc etc. Again, that was dragged around show rooms. She never relied on colours on the computer - she always sent off for actual colour samples for everything she was interested in selecting. She still using the Colour Wheel for fabrics for cushions and window seats. We moved in two years ago...

No, you cannot build in the air space above a piece of land you do not own - that is trespass. Anchor Brewhouse Developments Ltd and Others v Berkley House (Docklands Developments) Ltd , the oversailing boom of a tower crane was held to be a trespass over the land over which it overhung. But not sure about the ownership of the two pieces of land? If the two pieces of adjacent land are in separate ownership, the new build could be stopped because of the trespass of any overhanging element of the new build on the adjacent land with the benefit of the covenant. They would not have to enforce the covenant, to take action for the trespass. This would be the easiest way to deal with the problem.... You can sell/lease the air space above a piece of land you own without giving up title to your land. Developers in New York have built massive residential and commercial developments above the railway lines/property in Manhattan - it makes sense where space is land is at a premium!

Not sure of it breaches the covenant but if this separate plot of land is owned by someone else, it would be trespass. See the famous old case Truckell v Stock [1957] 1 All ER 74, [1957] 1 WLR 161, 168 EG 668 . Lord Denning's judgement in the Court of Appeal in the Court of Appeal is very short and clear. I used this case to have a troublesome neighbour's gas flue removed, when we were having problems with our flat Management Company in Torquay.

We have the downstairs as one zone and this is set to 21 °C.it maintained within 0.5 °C 24 hours/day. We tried 22 °C for a few days but decided 21 °C was comfortable temperature, as when we are both the kitchen,/family room or lounge for a few hours the temperature rises quite quickly anyway. The 1st Floor bedrooms and bathrooms have individually UFH controlled zones.Normally, there are only two of us at home and we have the master bed and ensuite at 22 °C ( keeps my wife happy)and the rest of the settles at 19+ °C, without the UFH being activated. If we have visitors, we can adjust bedrooms to suit their comfort levels. We are currently away in Spain. I have set the downstairs at 18.5 °C and the upstairs is set at 17 °C but hasn't been necessary as the upstairs has settled above that though we don't have the MVHR on except for a daily 30 minute ventilation cycle.

By comparison, our 0.48 ACH figure equatd to 0.652 m³/m²/h.

Yep , beats us too... We got 0.48 ACH. Not bad for 337m2 house with 3 floors

Great result - keep going

I hope the removal and completion goes well tomorrow. Enjoy the new house... Have a great holiday

+1 @Cambs I have used Hatchbags for my last 3 cars.

I used a system using Fermacell for the overlay board for the 1st Floor UFH. I didn't need the amount of insulation you're contemplating and laid my system directly onto the OSB floor. i attach the data sheet for the system I used but I think that other similar systems are available. Flooring_Installation_Guide_11.09f.pdf ECO-10U Pt E.pdf

Do you have the same gap at the other end of the wall plate for that planned look?

We used Knauf Aquapanel, with a Weber Render System which has a complete set of standard details that had to be complied with to get the benefit of the Warranty.

I was on an episode of "Frontiers of Construction" in 2000, which featured a mega-project, Sable Offshore Energy Project in Canada, which I was the General Manager of the Main Contractors Alliance Team. It was North American TV Series which has featured on various channels around the world. Different world, different budget, different challenges but make no mistake doing a self build by yourself is just as hard, just as challenging and a lot more rewarding

My stairs are on the oak & glass end of your spectrum but JEA Stairs do all sorts of stairs - the stairs in their manufacturing facility are beechwood ply = and would be well worth talking to for something special in more economic materials. They have a CNC machine so can manufacture to high standards.

Our stairs were designed and manufactured by a specialist stair manufacturer in Dublin - Jea Stairs, Colin Walsh. colin@jea.ie - see www.jea.ie, The stairs were all assembled in the works, for acceptance, diassembled and shipped to the UK, with the glass balustrades delivered separately. They did a great job and Colin was very helpful. with practical advice and support. I attach a few photos

We paid a fee of £195.

@JSHarris is correct. The relevant legislation was withdrawn in September 2015. We had Conditions requiring compliance with CfSH Code 4 imposed on our Planning Approval granted in March 2015. We successfully applied to have these conditions removed in April 2015. This is the text we used: The RBWM (Royal Borough of Windsor& Maidenhead) Notice of Decision for Application 15/0xxx that granted full permission for the replacement dwelling at xxx was subject to two conditions (Conditions 9 & 10) that required the dwelling to achieve a Code for Sustainable Home rating of Code Level 4, at the Design Stage prior to the start of development and a Final Certificate, no later than 3 months after completion of the development, respectively. As you are probably aware, the Deregulation Act 2015 recently received Royal Assent and will become law in the Autumn (expected September 2015). The Code for Sustainable Homes (owned by the Government) has been scrapped. When the new bill is made law this Autumn the Climate Change Act 2008 will be amended, which will result in local authorities not being allowed to require a Code level for new planning applications. It is understood that local authorities have been strongly urged not to include any requirements for CfSH code levels in the interim period. We have obtained several quotations from suitably accredited consultants to undertake services to assist with discharging Conditions 9 and 10. We have also been in communication with these consultants to clarify requirements, cost and scope. Several of these consultants are now advising us that in their regular contact with other local authorities, they are increasingly being advised that these local authorties would not be imposing the Code on any schemes with immediate effect AND also strongly intimating that if on applications which were recently consented and had such CfSH conditions, an application to remove the CfSH Code condition (s) would probably be favourably received. Have RBWM reviewed their position on imposition of conditions to meet CfSH4 with regard to both future and recent consented Applications? Have RBWM issued any policy or working guidelines on the recent change of legislation impacting their adopted Neighbourhood Plan and/or Supplemnetary Planning Documents? Considering our approval is just for a single house for our own occupation, would RBWM favourably consider a submission to vary or delete Conditions 9 and 10, based on the recent change in legislation? Your early advice on this matter would be appreciated. The response from RBWM was rapid as follows: There are two ways of progressing this, you could still submit the details required to satisfy the condition as I understand that there are still come companies that will be able to hep you with this, alternatively you can apply to remove the condition from the application as there is now no ability to impose the condition. We applied to have the conditions removed and this was approved. It may be very beneficial to you make a similar submission requesting removal of your condition to your Planning Officer.

The battens are nailed through the Smartply or in my Vapour Control membrane/OSB, but all battens are only positioned at the main structural frame lines so even then penetrate the Smartply they are nailed into the main frame supporting it and this effectively seals the nail penetrations. The problem arises when you puncture the Smartply by itself... The battens have been installed with recesses as necessary to ensure the boxes did not protrude through the plasterboard - you have a depth of 50mm (batten +12.5 (plasterboard) = 62.5 mm depth to install the boxes plus the noggin, recessed as necessary. For clarity, the only 1st Fix items we completed before auirtest was the penetrations ( conduit or MVHR Ducting) required for external equipment and these penetrations were pemporarily sealed for the airtest by MBC.

Ideally, you should avoid attaching anything to the Smartply. If you do penetrate the Smartply with pins or screws or accidentally, then you need to seal the penetrations, however small, with tape or sealant. Any such penetrations will make a difference to the integrity of the Smartply for both vapour control and air tightness. All cables (and pipes)should be attached to the battens. All back boxes should be fixed to noggins that are either glued to the Smartply or fixed to the battens - not screwed to the Smartply. . One of the jobs that should be tackled first in 1ST Fix and before the airtest and cellulose filling, should be any conduit penetrations from internal/external that you have planned for external lighting, satellite dishes, alarms, CCTV, etc etc.. It is very difficult to make these penetrations and ensure good seals AFTER the cellulose has been installed. It is useful to have these penetrations installed, sealed and tested as part of the airtest [ I've attached some photos of my 1st Fix to give you an idea. MBC didn't use Smartply on my house but a less robust system using SIGA vapor control layer membranes/tapes over OSB that required more work and superseded /improved with the use of Smartply.

I am with Utility Point since June and very happy. However, I have just received a weekly update from Money Saving Expert (MSE) strongly recommending the latest BG 1Year FIXED Tariff. Check their website online