Stewpot

https://asbestos-testing.org.uk/#Buy Now Other options available elsewhere

Beware of Council Tax liability with that. Councils don't like empty properties, and some apply big increases in CT on them - you won't be able to claim single-occupancy relief, either. Also check what your insurance says about leaving the property unoccupied.

It will affect your CGT liability. But stand by for any changes in the budget next week. IIRC, at the moment, if you let out the property, the CGT will apply to the proportion of the gain that happened when it wasn't your main residence. The 'gain' as I understand it, is measured as the difference between what you paid for the land, and what you eventually sell it for, minus all the capital expenses of the build, etc. You then work out, pro rata, how much of that gain is applicable to the time that you let it, so if you own the property for, say ten years, but it is let out for one year, then one tenth of the gain attracts CGT. You can then subtract the Annual Exemp Amount, if it still exists by then, and multiply it by the relevant tax rate. You'll have to look up what the current tax rates are - property rates are different from other stuff, and this may change in the budget. Having said all that, I'm not an accountant, and I would highly recommend 20 minutes of their expensive time to make sure you have all the details.

The animal hair would be teased apart before adding to the mix. I don't think asbestos fibres are anything like that long - more like microns (thousandths of a millimeter), which is why they float about unseen in the air.

I'd say for sure this is animal hair in the plaster undercoat. Probably a sand and lime mix, which would have been quite coarse. Horse hair was often added into old plaster and render mixes to stop it cracking. Sometimes other animal hair was used - cow, goat, dog or even llama, apparently. An inch long would be the ideal length.

Maybe a tenor guitar. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenor_guitar Not as popular as they once were, but you still see them, and I've even seen an electric one.

They sent me an electronic copy, and it's the same as the one on the planning portal. The Decision Notice has sections under different headings. I've seen several of these notices from this particular authority, and they have always listed the Schedule of Conditions between the Reason for the Decision section, and the For the Information of the Applicant section. There simply is no Schedule of Conditions in any form, either in the Decision Notice itself, or appended to it, and nor does it refer to a separate document annexed elsewhere. However, the covering letter with the Decision Notice says "Please read the schedule of conditions...", but this may just be a standard paragraph. Elsewhere, the Notice says "Subject to compliance with the schedule of conditions...", but again, this may be a standard paragraph, and I think both could be read to imply "... if there is one". I can't really believe it's happened; I should have bought a lottery ticket last week. I think you're right - I should just crack on.

I don't think this went to committee. Would I have been informed if it had? I suppose it could have been the advice of a senior colleague, or maybe the case officer just changed his mind. But even so, for the whole schedule to be omitted...? I know the Officer's Report as no legal status, but I would guess that it can be used as evidence of their intention, should this go to law. The question really becomes two more:- How likely are they to discover the error (what would bring it to their attention?), and are they then likely to go to law to try and correct it? If I build according to plans, they really only have the window design to beef about, and I don't really think it amounts to that much of a beef - they are not that unusual. Other houses in the village have similar windows, including an immediate neighbour. I think the omissions, both at the PPP stage and at this stage, is evidence of an over worked, under staffed and under valued department that simply can't keep up with the workload. I wonder how many other mistakes are slipping through. Perhaps they won't have the capacity to give this application a second glance, now, unless someone raises a particular issue.

It isn't hypothetical. In fact what appears to have happened is that the entire Schedule of Conditions has been missed off the Decision Notice. And this is not without antecedence - the Planning Permission in Principal (this is in Scotland), which was in place when I bought the plot, has a significant paragraph missing. This means that when they said my application for full plans wasn't complying with Condition 7, I was able to argue that it was, because the condition didn't actually require me to do what they thought it did. This approach was successful, although somewhat grudgingly. I now have full approval. In the Officer's Report (to be found on the planning portal, but not otherwise sent to me), there are six conditions listed, but that entire section is absent from the Decision Notice. Most of them are fairly trivial - the usual stuff about submitting colours, finishes, details of the water connection, and such like, but one refers to the design of the windows, which has been a bone of contention throughout the application process. The condition would have asked me to resubmit drawings with redesigned windows. Thanks for you links - I also found this: https://www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/planning/318-planning-features/22731-the-finality-of-decisions This suggests that it would require a court ruling before the council can add the missing conditions. Wasn't there some case recently where a planning department was trying out some new software, and, thinking they were filling in dummy Decision Notices to test it, the Notices actually got issued, and were irrevocable?

How set in stone is the Decision Notice for a planning application? Specifically, can the council add to, or amend the Notice, if, for example, they have granted approval, but inadvertently missed off a Condition or two? Is there the legal scope for them to do this?

But doesn't get past the plastic lining on the inside of a modern house...effectively living inside a plastic tent with a building around it. Well, yes. But no. If you've designed the building with lime in mind, you wouldn't then go and ruin one of it's advantages (vapour permeability) by installing a VCL. Really, you highlight the point that building with lime is not just like building with OPC, but quainter. Building with lime can offer advantages, but to make the most of them, it also requires a different approach to the philosophy of the building. Some people confuse vapour permeability with air tightness - they are not the same thing, but the common (mis)use of the word 'breathability' often makes people think they are.

Ain't that the truth. However, I find that if you ask people who actually know and understand the stuff, this doesn't happen (so much).

Just to preface this, I am by no means an expert. By no means. The more I find out about using lime in building work, the more, I realise, I don't know. But I have used it a little over the years, have read lots about it, and plan in using it in my own build (if the planning department ever get around to my application). Mixing and using lime mortar is a little different from a more usual Ordinary Portland Cement mix. For a start, you need to be more exacting about the quantities you use. Whereas with OPC you can make a perfectly good mix by measuring it out by rough shovelfulls, you will need to be more accurate than that with a lime mix. Many people would use a pan mixer for lime, as it can clog and ball-up in a barrel mixer, and generally require more attention. And be careful with the water. If you're mixing from lime putty (non-hydraulic lime), you may not need to add any extra water at all. To an extent, a stiff mix becomes more pliable, the more you work it, so give it plenty of time in the mixer. Using it can be a nicer experience than an OPC mortar - a good mix is workable and pliable stuff, has a much longer open time, and can be re-knocked up to bring it back to life. The long curing time of lime means that you have to give it some after care. Keep it damp and protected from direct sunlight to help prevent it drying out for at least a couple of weeks, and this will help carbonation to continue throughout the depth of the mortar. It may take months, or even years for the full curing process. You wouldn't want to use OPC and lime mortars in the same element, but if they are discrete units - ie. they don't form part of the same structural element - you may be able to do that. But why, if you are going to the trouble of using lime mortar, would you be using OPC in an adjacent element? A major advantage of lime over OPC is that it is 'flexible' - ie. if the building settles or moves a little, the lime will be able to accommodate this. It has a very long curing time, and to a certain extent cracks can be self-repairing. The other main advantage of lime is that it is vapour permeable, so it enables wet masonry to dry out, and can help with problems like rising damp. Some will tell you that it's permeability improves the internal atmosphere and living environment, too. A hydraulic lime mix is more like OPC than a non-hydraulic mix, as it has a faster initial set. To some extent there is a trade off between the advantages of lime and this quick set time, but you will still have to give it the same after care in order for it to reach its full strength. As lime mortar is not generally used these days, and its differences from OPC are no longer well understood, there is an assumption on the part of many builders that it is basically just the same stuff. I would want to be using a builder who is experienced with it (as opposed to someone who says "Oh, yeah, I've used it before"). Some builders also make the mistake of thinking that hydraulic lime is the same as hydrated lime, and as the latter is easily available in builders merchants for use as an admix in OPC mortar, these builders sometimes think they are experienced with a lime.

As someone once said, the difference between a professional snooker player and an amateur is that the professional chalks the tip of his cue before he misses.

If the problem is caused by the sealant, the product description itself says that it will be difficult to remove once it's dry. In that case, I think you should refer this back to the people who applied the sealant. If they did so without your instruction, or if you didn't discuss it, and any possible problems it may cause, then I think it must be for them to put things right. If the patio is dangerous to use, it is clearly not good enough. As a last resort, you could try using something like this www.amazon.co.uk/YUET-Strimmer-Trimmer-Rotating-Replacement/dp/B07ZHHS8P3/ not so much to remove the sealant, but to roughen the surface and make it less slippery. But I fear it may also damage the appearance of it.