andyscotland

For my garage conversion / extension I'll be laying a GRP flat roof covering (on new OSB). One of the products I'm looking at (from a supplier previously recommended to me) has a 20 year manufacturer's guarantee, and a third-party fire test certificate - but it doesn't have a BBA (or other third-party) certification. My approved warrant documents don't specify it has to be BBA, and I don't have a structural warranty so no requirements there. The supplier has advised that the only thing Building Control will want to see is the fire rating document, and I shouldn't have any problems (practical or paperwork) using their system. Does that sound right - am I safe enough to go with that product? Or would I be better using a BBA system (which appear to be more limited in choice, and more expensive)? Thanks, Andrew

Oh really? That's not good. To be fair it's a long time since I've used the provider-supplied router/modem for anything bar the final network access where necessary, I've always installed my own WiFi and cabled router(s). Had so many bad experiences in the past with the variety of rebadged cheap boxes that come by default.

Indeed. My post was mince from start to finish, with the possible exception of the bit that it just makes the timber good enough to avoid it being a thermal bridge through the surrounding wool.

That's basically an entire sequence of units I have no concept of apart from the hours! And perhaps the ft2 if I picture it as a ruler by a ruler ?

@JSHarris ahhhh thanks - I had no idea the US R values were different! Though of course it makes total sense that they are...?‍♂️

R is 1/u and vice versa. So R20 is a u value of 0.05 (against 0.13 for standard timber). I don't think he was saying that's all you need, you still have e.g. wool between studs at 0.039 but the studs form much less of a thermal bridge. So you can get a good overall wall u-value without having a secondary continuous layer of insulation in front of / behind the studs. Edit: this post is nonsense but I'm leaving it as an example of what happens if you come on here before your morning coffee.

I'd second the advice to look at Virgin, if you're in an area that has it. Their network is consistently miles better in terms of stability and performance. Also because the whole network was installed more recently than most housing, and is less sensitive to cable lengths, it tends to be installed in public areas e.g. under the pavement where BT often takes shortcuts through back gardens. The problem then is that if - as happened to my mother in law - there's a fault on the line it relies on the engineer being able to get onto people's property to fix it. If they're no longer BT customers themselves they have no incentive to arrange access. Cue 3 months of Openreach arranging visits for the engineer each time to confirm that the fault was somewhere between her and 3 poles away but the other gardens were all secured and nobody home. Eventually the engineer marked up they were unable to service her but it still took another 2 months to the call centre before they'd agree to cancel the 12 month contract. Or, the reverse where a neighbour down the hill wanted a new connection to the pole in our garden. I work from home, engineer popped round and took a look but needed to cut back some of the neighbour's tree above our fence. Said they'd schedule a tree surgeon to come, then 2 months of an appointment being set, nobody turning up, then an engineer turning up to finish the install and going back to base to arrange a tree surgeon. Eventually we got a snippy note from the neighbour that we were blocking her connection so I had to pop round and show her on my calendar that I had so far blocked out 7 days for openreach and their contractors, and had essentially been in all day every day the rest of the time. A week later the tree surgeon turned up unannounced and did their thing. But no engineer. I bumped into her a couple weeks later and she said she'd cancelled the contract the day she spoke to me! With virgin they usually just have to get from the pavement outside your house up to your property. Obviously if you're in the countryside you probably don't have options, but if you do - take them!

Interesting, did you use a contractor for the drains? I know some are allowed to certify same as e.g. an electrician. Maybe I just need to relax

Generally speaking, a 200A 3-phase supply is effectively 3 x 200A supplies - in other words caters for 600A of connected load. If you have a possible peak load of about 200A, then you would install either a 63A (which is very slightly under) or 100A 3-phase supply. Your installation circuits would then be split over the three phases, aiming to get the loads fairly evenly spread. So for example: The PV array would be connected as a three-phase "appliance" - so 1/3rd of the panels connected to L1, etc. If you've a main house that'll be used fairly consistently and has some big loads (heating / cooling etc) then you might give it a 3-phase supply of its own and split the various circuits across the phases. This adds a bit of complexity / cost compared to a standard single-phase domestic install which is why you usually only see it in commercial. If you had e.g. 3 holiday cottages that were fairly similar you would probably just connect one to each phase. This is essentially how the utilities connect up standard domestic properties. Note that on a properly-designed three-phase supply a lot of the current in the neutral is cancelled out - the electrical waves are all offset to each other, so one phase is high while another is low. Therefore the neutral still only needs to be the same size as the phase conductors, even though it's connected to all the loads. At 130m you'll be primarily sizing cables for volt drop, from a quick look at the tables I think you'd be looking about 35 sqmm c.s.a. SWA for a 63A supply, or 50 sqmm c.s.a for 100A depending on install method etc. Though as above if the utility run it in they won't use SWA. Might be more complex if you're going to be installing anything industrial / specialist (large motors etc).

@AliG yes I was surprised about the drain test but they were not at all interested in coming out. Perhaps they'll want to do another at the end, the ones I did were perfect passes - barely any leakage at all - so hopefully they'll still pass now they're under concrete / buildings / backfill... When I've actually been able to speak to anyone, they've been good - but don't know my project and have been fairly non-committal. It's just I've heard horror stories from others, so it seems like it may depend who you get.

Ah - fingers crossed then! ?

@Bitpipe thanks - I guess with private BC (not an option in Scotland) it's clearer it's a service you're paying for. My project is a lot smaller than yours so wasn't expecting that level of attention but thought I might have seen them at least once or twice.

That's reassuring. Did they come for the completion certificate? Take it that went smoothly?

Thanks - I don't get the sense Edinburgh is that sort of council, reckon it's extremely unlikely I'll get to speak to the HoD. They've been helpful a couple of times when you chat to the duty officer, more of a mixed bag by email. @Triassic @ProDave mine has never been on site, not even to look at the drains. The original paperwork they sent said they wanted to see the drains, structure complete and insulation in. Wasn't expecting them every week, but thought they'd do at least one of those. That's very true, guess I'm just nervous there'll be some small detail that's not on the plans or that the surveyor who does the final inspection doesn't like. A neighbour had plans approved but then the BCO on a site visit felt one of the details was not compliant and shouldn't have been signed off and he made them change it. Fortunately was early enough in the build it wasn't too much of a drama. If that happened at completion it'd be hellish... That's what I'd heard, but also part of my nerves. I don't even have a named officer on the warrant, it was issued still showing "Argyll & Bute Council" as the named officer. To contact them I have to email the neighbourhood team, who eventually reply signed off "Building Surveyor North West". Appears to be different people each time. There were a couple of small things came up with the drain alterations once we excavated and it was a nightmare getting any sort of opinion. When I've tried to phone or on one occasion visited the counter they just tell me to email. I think the problem is the fees are set Scotland-wide based on what it should cost to run the process, but unlike e.g. parking the income isn't ringfenced so with all the pressures on council funding the BC department is an easy place to make cuts without losing revenue. I used to work with Edinburgh BC years ago on theatre/event licensing and from what I can tell the team is massively smaller than it was then despite the increased building activity in Edinburgh. The people I mostly worked with have retired and not been replaced. It is annoying, it's not like I've had a discount on the warrant fee to reflect minimal inspections etc.

I'm self building a garage conversion/small extension. It includes new drains to new inspection chamber, new ensuite, door openings in existing walls, new rooflights, etc. I did the plans & spec myself (with a lot of research and a structural engineer who provided a Certificate of Design for the structural elements). I have a building warrant but the council have said (in writing) that they have assessed the project as low risk and won't be allocating me a BC officer or inspecting until I'm ready for completion certificate. I'm to take photos as I go to demonstrate compliance with the approved plans / regs. I'm pretty confident that my plans are compliant, and that I'm building what I drew. My application was pretty comprehensive, included detail drawings of most things as well as the basic plan/section/elevations. I'm taking photos of basically everything along the way, and have a selection of 5 minute videos of nothing at all changing on a drain test which will make riveting viewing... All the same I have an occasional nagging worry that there'll be some small detail that doesn't quite show on the plans, or isn't quite clear in the photos, and they'll make me open things up at the end to inspect it. It's further complicated because I'm not sure anyone at Edinburgh council has actually ever looked at the plans : they contracted the assessment out to Argyle & Bute. The officer there said he reckoned they were to a high standard, but I've heard Edinburgh are known for being quite picky. I'd feel more comfortable if it was inspected in stages in the usual way. Part of me wants to try to persuade them at least to do one visit once the structure is all up. There's loads of (bigger) builds near us so they must be in the area fairly often. But I don't want to make a big drama and seem like I'm not sure of what I'm doing and then get someone out who's actively looking for something to be wrong. What would you do?

You could also look at sheep's wool insulation - I've used thermafleece before but there are other brands. It's totally non-itchy and really nice to work with. Much less messy than cutting PIR too. Not only is it breathable but unlike a lot of synthetic insulation, it doesn't lose insulating value when damp. In fact as the temperature falls it absorbs moisture from the air and releases heat, then as the temperature rises again the wool releases the moisture which has a cooling effect. So it helps to balance out moisture and temperature changes over the seasons, and sucks any condensation away from the timbers (up to a point, obviously). As I understand it, the heat-release properties aren't accounted for in the u-value so it actually performs a bit better than the figures suggest (where a lot of man-made actually perform a bit worse than the lab-conditions tests). It's also fire-retardant and very eco-friendly - low embodied energy to produce and a lot of it is made in the UK.

Ah, that hadn't occurred to me. Seems a bit harsh to include it in GIA if it's actually external, even if the roof does overhang it! Not saying that's wrong, I know very little about those rules, just commenting. Sounds like a reasonable plan.

If you wanted to keep the balcony as-is, one possibility might be to build the external walls as though that was just a big window opening if you can picture that? So you'd have a lintel over the top of it in line with the downstairs walls carrying the roof load, with the roof overhanging the balcony a bit. It would potentially be most economical/feasible with a corner post to support it. Then the inset wall dividing the room and balcony would just be a stud wall, still insulated and weatherproofed, but lighter than a full structural external wall. You might still need a little bit of steel below the balcony wall especially if there's a lot of glazing, or you might get away with it on the joists/any steel that might anyway be needed for the balcony cantilever. But it should be quite a bit thinner than if it had to carry all the roof loads as well. Making it cheaper and easier to hide in the ceiling downstairs. I think could well be worth a short consultation with an engineer at an early stage to get a sense of the possibilities so you have the option to shape your design round them.

Yep. The mortgage we had trouble with was just to move an existing mortgage to a bigger more expensive house without any extra borrowing (added some savings, inheritance etc). So no change to the payments we'd been making successfully for years, and a lower loan to value so lower risk for them. Still had to jump through hoops and nearly couldn't get it. Definitely wouldn't have been eligible with a new lender and if we'd not been able to speak to a sensible underwriter at the lender who was able to see the big picture we would have had to stay in the old flat till I had enough accounts.

Have checked and I'm fairly sure that is indeed unlawful. This page mentions specifically mortgages when pregnant - but if not yet pregnant it'd still fall under gender/age discrimination. It's illegal not to provide services to a woman just because she's theoretically the right age and gender to have kids. Now of course people do unlawful things all the time, so maybe some lenders do consider it on the quiet. Maybe even just if there's a judgement call, it might swing the mind of an underwriter one way or the other. And yes if that happens you'll probably never know that was why. My point is just that you advised "unless you can prove your wife is not going to have kids". If the mortgage company accept that proof they will be admitting to illegal practice. Therefore, either they do it across the board and there's no evidence you can provide as an individual to change their mind, or they don't. They will not want a trace audit to turn up a doctor's note showing infertility in one of the files with a positive decision...

True, but if it is unlawful (and I agree with @JSHarris it probably is) they'd be on a sticky wicket if they accepted evidence you weren't going to get pregnant then made a loan. Either they secretly consider it and hope nobody ever detects a pattern/blows a whistle/checks their file - in which case there's nothing you can do - or they don't.

You'd be best asking a broker. I suspect if it's only one year that might be enough to show your wife's not bankrolling you, but not enough for you to borrow against. But I don't know for sure.

As far as I know, it's generally drawings they're interested in. I know at the time I had left some profit in the business for a rainy day and the adviser said it would have been better to have paid it as a dividend and put it in a savings account of my own to show it was "mine". A friend of mine went for a self-employed mortgage not that long ago and they were mostly interested in the income and dividends he'd declared/paid tax on.

Agree with advice from others, but also - I'm self employed and when we went for a (normal) mortgage in the early days of my business they classed me as a dependent and reduced my wife's income to account for her "supporting" me. Even more mad as she'd only been in her job for 3 months and was earning less than me, but 3 payslips was fine where 2 years of accounts wasn't! In the end managed to speak to an underwriter and agreed that if the business stopped making money I would be taking over the childcare. So although they knocked off for my food and lodging, they added back on the nursery fees we were paying at the time so we were able to borrow what we needed. I suspect therefore even if you just borrow against her salary you'll need to prove at least some income of your own to show you're not a drain on the family finances. That said we were never asked about pregnancy plans - not sure if because we already had 2 or because they don't/can't take that into account.

Ah committees... Love 'em. Did the existing slab beneath have rebar, or is that unknown? Has there been a building there previously (so ground would be well compacted/settled)? If the concrete floor is exposed/tiled/lino then I suspect you'd see any cracking if it did develop, long before there was a problem. Seems (to my unqualified mind) like the building is pretty unlikely to suddenly collapse on Scouts without warning. If it was me I'd leave it as is, perhaps document a process for periodically inspecting floor/walls for cracks as you might for a historic building, so you can show duty of care. And then deal with it if there's actually a problem.