Stewpot

If it's a paying gig, I'll be right round.

I'm currently in Berkshire, and in the process of buying a plot in Scotland. I wasn't looking specifically in Scotland, but because it wasn't possible to visit a plot there and back in a day, I found a handful of likely plots on Rightmove and Zoopla. I did do extensive internet research on them all, and had eliminated many others. I checked with the estate agents to confirm they were still available, and then booked the smallest, cheapest self-catering place I could find that was convenient for them all, and spent a few days looking around. I photographed everything lots, spoke to locals, and tried to gain as much information about each plot and the area as possible. I made a return visit when my offer on one of the plots was accepted. Contrary to popular belief, in Scotland, you have not, at that stage, entered in to a contract, so I could have another long hard look at the plot before I made the commitment. I also visited a local solicitor (you have to use a Scottish solicitor for transactions in Scotland) to make sure I understood what I was getting myself into. And that's as far as I've got - quite what it is that solicitors find to do in the intervening time (two and a half months, so far), I've no idea, but hopefully, any day now, the plot will finally be mine. Good luck with your search. To put things in perspective, I looked at a plot locally to me - just one; I didn't trouble looking at any others - the local asking price of building land per square meter is 24 times what I am paying in Scotland. I'm getting a bigger plot for a fraction of the price, but I was quite bullish with my offer.

I'd agree that that doesn't look like Artex. It's one of two things - water soluble textured coating, or non-water soluble textured coating. Test an area by keeping it moist for 20 minutes (wall paper paste is surprisingly good at doing this, on larger areas, but for a test area, just keep dabbing it with a wet paintbrush). If it goes soft, and you can now easily scrape it off, you have the former; if it remains firm, it is the latter. Early stuff that is non-water soluble from 40 or more years ago, may have asbestos fibres in it. This poses no risk to health, as long as you do not damage the surface. What to do about it? Well if it's water soluble, you could wet the whole ceiling and get scraping, but you are likely to need to skim the ceiling afterwards. If the stuff is non-water soluble, your only real course of action is to skim it. Sometimes, if the finish is very rough, and the ceiling uneven, it can be easier to plasterboard the ceiling, possibly with taped joints, or a thin skim over.

I've been reading (or trying to) the caravan acts for a couple of days[1]; this webpage sums up the definition of a caravan as well as anything I've read, with a look at case law, as well: http://selfbuildtimberframe.com/news-the-legal-definition-of-a-caravan-mobile-home-draft-1/ [1] Find them here:- Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz2/8-9/62 Caravan Sites Act 1968: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/52

Imagine a world where 'being annoying' is prosecutable... I think it's likely that self-driving fleets will be operated by taxi firms. Having your own self-driving car will be largely unnecessary - you'll just have an app on your smart phone to summon a car when you need it; tap in a GPS co-ordinate, and off you go. I also predict that they will be equipped with internal cameras and microphones "to enhance your travelling experience", which will just happen to have facial recognition, will record what you say and listen out for certain key words. There will, of course, be multiple screens to supply you with advertorial infotainment, which you cannot turn off, and your journeys will be monitored and logged, including, for example, which house you stop out side; how long you are in there for, and how often.

I'm beginning to think I misunderstood the phone conversation I had with Scottish Water a few weeks ago. They simply said it'll cost so much to make the connection[1], but they don't dig the trench, and pointed me to approved contractors who do. Are you suggesting that, come the day, they might refuse to make the connection? I suppose I was really after a guestimate of how much a contractor might charge to dig up 25 meters of lane. And clarification of the planning condition. [1] I wrote it down - it's under this pile of paper somewhere.

As my old boss used to say - "All in the fullness of time". I'm not anticipating a problem (why would there be?) - five other houses in the area, all on mains water; it'll just need extending the extra bit.

Solicitor has informed me that the searches show a public water main about 25 meters away. Anybody any idea how much it's going to cost to bring water onto the site? A ball park figure, obviously - just something to give me an idea. Secondly - a condition of the PP says: Is this a standard thing? Is the paperwork involved in getting the water connection done going to include something suitable, or have I actually got to commission a 'suitable qualified person' to say "That's mains water, that is"? And can I get the water connection made before development is deemed to have begun (ie. before reserved matters are approved)?

I agree that it would look bad if you cut into the pattern. But do you need to tile the wall tight up into the corners, or can you just tile areas? Or maybe you could tile the wall with plain tiles and have these set into it.

If, by that, you mean cutting round the bark to kill the tree, then yes. But it didn't work out as I expected. I went round the base of a problem willow with a wood cutting blade on an angle grinder. I thought that would be the end of the tree, and it wouldn't be able to live after that. But the following spring it lived as vigorously as ever. So I cut round it again, this time going an inch or more deep. The following year it lived again. And the next year. In year four, it showed signs of being less vigorous. In year five (last year) it managed a few leaves on a few branches, and then in the autumn winds it fell over. It became firewood for a couple of friends, but I wouldn't say it was dry - maybe drier, and in the region that I'd cut, it was quite rotten.

The main thing that makes me think the wall is original, and not rebuilt, is that topmost string course (is that what a crown moulding is?). That just looks original and untouched, and I would hazard a guess once acted as the supporting bracket for wooden gutters. I imagine that top window is a more recent addition, cutting through that course. Perhaps compare it to other houses in the street, and see if they are like this, too.

That's well spotted. But I don't think there has been any rebuilding going on there - I think the bricks on the front of the house are expensive facing bricks, but the rest of the house is made with cheaper stock. The cheap stuff also have thicker mortar beds (so fewer bricks, and quicker building), and hence the mismatch. These were houses built for poor people made to look smarter than they really were.

I think that Ordinary Portland Cement was in invention of the late 19th century, and it would have taken time for its use to become widespread. Certainly around here houses are built with lime mortar into the 1920s and beyond. Looking at the pointing on the front, below the window, I'd say that was lime, but I could be wrong. The trouble is, it's now a specialist topic - many many houses have been repointed with OPC mortar over lime, and, particularly on a solid wall, this reduces the ability of damp within the the wall to dry out - damp walls and frost damage can ensue, but you may be ok if only small areas are affected. You should really befriend a builder who knows about lime. Meantime, I think you are right - monitor the situation.

I'm trying to understand the building. It's not unusual to have different, cheaper, bricks on the side of a house, compared to the front, but I've never seen a corner tied in quite like that. It's obviously a two brick, solid wall, so we can only hope that the inner bricks have better bonding at the corner, and the outer ones went for a decorative coin. But it is strangely unsettling to see it, particularly with that wide mortar joint. I would guess that it's been repointed with OPC mortar over original lime mortar, which is now seen as a Bad Idea. I was once told that an ordinary settlement crack will tend to follow the lines of mortar (and which lime mortar is much better at coping with), but if a crack goes vertically through a brick it may indicate something more serious. One of those photos appears to show two such cracked bricks. Are there any cracks, or repairs inside? It's hard to imagine how a building could have moved to produce that sort of fault line in the bricks, where the upper part of the wall appears to have slipped sideways over the lower part. But something must have happened - it certainly won't have been built like that. Maybe it's ground heave, but it's unusual. Have there been any earth tremors in the area? If it's new, or getting worse, then I'd be worried, but if it's been like that for a long time, I guess it's not such a concern.

The CGT manual for land is here: https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/capital-gains-manual/cg70200c Your plan is outside my experience, but I would be surprised that if you build new properties on the land of your PPR, that they, too, would be exempt from CGT. I could be wrong, but I can't think why they would be exempt - you are only allowed one PPR exemption. Perhaps if the new build is an annex.

The CGT issue is going to depend upon how long the house has been your primary residence. The taxable gain will be proportional to the time it isn't you main residence. So, as an example, lets say you've lived there for 8 years, you mothball the property for 2 years, and then it takes 9 months to sell the place. When you sell it, you will have owned the place for ten years and nine months. For CGT purposes, they disregard the final nine months, so you only need to consider a total of 10 years, of which 8 years are exempt from CGT as it was your primary residence. GCT is applied pro-rata, so 80% of any gain will be exempt from CGT. From this you can deduct the Annual Exempt Amount - which, IIRC is currently at about £12k. So, if the net gain on the sale of the property is less than £60k, you wouldn't pay any CGT. If, however, you made a net gain of £100k, then 20% of that would be taxable. But you can still deduct the AEA, so you would only pay tax on about £8k. The current rate of CGT on residential property is, I believe, 28%, so the total tax payable on a gain of £100k would be around £2.25k However, if you've only lived there for 2 years, then half of the gain will be taxable (still less the AEA). The longer you have lived in the property, and the less time it is mothballed for, the better the equation looks. Why is the house being mothballed? Is that because it is so in the way of construction work that it is being deemed uninhabitable, and thus no council tax will be payable? And, by the way, £750 for three hours work - it's eye-watering, isn't it, but that's professional fees for you. And they don't even suggest you sit down first, when they tell you that.

If it's the foil lined stuff, it'll probably only be the edges that are affected - you should be able to trim it off, but then you'll end up with slightly undersized panels. Though that may not be a problem to you.

This is the Technical Handbook, covering all the rules: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/830643/190910_Tech_Guide_for_publishing.pdf

It's what they call 'closed-cell' , which means that all the little bubbles are isolated from each other. That means it doesn't absorb water to any significant degree. I think there's a standard immersion test, where they hold a sample of the stuff under water for a period of time, and it has to absorb only a small fraction of its volume - something like 2% after a month's continuous immersion. There may, however be an issue with UV light, as that does cause it to go a little crumbly.

WAIT! Before you consider sealing the lime floor, you have to consider why lime has been used. If the floor is insulated from moisture, and the lime was used simply because it was what was to hand, then sealing it may be OK. But if lime is used in a new build, there is usually a reason - normally lime is used because it's vapour permeable, and for it to function correctly, you have to maintain this property. No end of problems have been caused by sealing lime masonry as if it were OPC based, which means that it can no longer behave as it should. If somebody else installed the floor, then I'd suggest the OP takes advice before using any sort of sealant on lime.

That's the sort of situation (irregular, unpredictable holes) I'd use chemical anchors for: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUJPjJsdl0c https://www.toolstation.com/screws-fixings/chemical-fixings/c102 To be sure, I don't know if it is compatible with lime, but I think it's pretty inert when set. It certainly provides a very strong fixing in concrete and masonry.

I don't think you need to spend money on the 'proper' tool. I can pop my beading out with an old carving knife. It just needs something with a thin edge to it. I wonder if something else is afoot; if the beading is not popping out, there has to be a reason. A gap should start to open up as soon as you push the blade between beading and frame; you might need to work the blade back and forth a bit, but it is designed to be removable. This image shows an example of a frame with beading in place - there is a lip that has to be prised out from its retaining grove. In real life, with the glass in place, it can be a little bit trickier, but it really shouldn't put up too much of a fight. Why not post a photo of your scraper in position, so that we can see what you're doing.

They are not universal, no. Each type of frame extrusion will have it's own beading, so if you know who made the frames, you may be able to get replacements from there. But it shouldn't be necessary; the beads should pop out fairly easily. Remember that some beads are fitted from the outside, some from the inside. Start in the middle of the longest bead, leaving the top one till last - there are several demonstrations on Youtube, eg: www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyQh2B1PcRU www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qsomwD6wh8 Sometimes, the greatest difficulty is that some glass units are also held in place with double sided tape, and it can be a bugger getting that to release. You should find there are packers between the glass unit and the frame rebate - on a fixed window, you only need these at the bottom, to raise and centralise the unit in the frame opening. But on side-hung openers, you need to heal and toe the packers, to stop the frame sagging on its hinges. To do this - at the bottom corner, on the hinge side, one packer at the bottom, one at 90 degrees up the side, and then the same arrangement on the opposite top corner. The net result is similar to a brace on a gate.

If you're not proud, a bucket with a lid, a biodegradable bin liner and some cat litter. Then just bury it somewhere discreet.

As you are in Scotland, you will be familiar that there is a general right to roam - traspassing doesn't come in to it.