Indy

Agreed. I will admit that on balance - it still remains one of the best places on the planet despite the doom and gloom that we get blasted from every media outlet. However, I have noticed a real degradation on a number of fronts since 2008. Public services, wage growth, levels of taxation, investment in infrastructure - these are all worse in a material way.

I'm not really qualified to comment on this - but isn't there a statistic that the birth rate is dropping and therefore there's a glut of school places (which is why schools are closing down)?

Not exactly what this thread is discussing but another point that came up when I had a long conversation my architect while going through an extended 4 year planning process - people tend to hate the homogenous and identikit houses and there's a lot of looking down upon so called housing estates. These estates, the uniformity and symmetry is exactly what is prized when you look at architecture from the past. Whether its the Georgian rows in Bath, Islington, the rows of Victorian housing or the 1930s semi-detached houses. So it's a little confusing when new developments are looked down upon for doing the same - the developers do it because it sells. Plot sizes is a separate topic though!

Hard disagree. NIMBYism over the years has killed off the growth and any opportunity to provide private solutions to a problem that governments don't want to tackle. This is why there are only a few large developers who control the bulk of new builds - they're the only ones with the funding, patience and armies of consultants that can battle through the NIMBYist culture to get anything done. Most rational people trying to make a better home for themselves and their families can't endure years of delays and regulations and move on with their lives. Calling new buildings modernist monstrosities and concrete landscapes goes back to the point I made earlier in the thread - this desire to keep us in the 1950s. It's high time we get over it and move with the times.

It's something I actively investigated and discussed with my builder, before chickening out. A few key points of difference though - ours is not a passive house, only built to BR standards. We had specified UFH on both GF and FF as the missus wanted it. I wanted active air con - and I actively looked into ditching the UFH on the FF and replacing it with a multi-split air con system that would cover all the rooms on the FF (not hallways and landing etc as that would be heated from the rising heat from the GF). It was definitely doable as the A2A units can do both heating and cooling though we were asked one key question by the builder which made us change our mind - would you buy a house with no source of heating on the FF? Most buyers wouldn't consider air con units to be source of heating so it does limit the resale potential quite a lot, and even though we aren't considering selling our place - it's something you have to consider as situations change very rapidly.

Agree with all of that. My issues with the planning process also extend to the fact that almost every part of it is designed to put you off. If you're doing a new build - it has to be in line with the local architecture which is usually dated stock from the 30s, 50s, 80s etc. Massively more energy efficient, have insulation, triple glazing, get loads of surveys done incl noise, arboricultural, ecological, light, bat etc. Pay through the nose to have your electricity and gas to a temporary spot and then pay again to have it moved back again. Have to provide a spreadsheet which lists what taps/fittings you're using in each room and their flow rates. The mind boggles! It's almost as if people sit in a room and think of ways they can exert their control over each part of the build process and stick on a load of regulations - which drives prices up and self builders out. I fail to see the real connection between politicians claiming we need to build more houses, but then the regulations being designed in a way that stops people from doing that exact same thing.

Governments provide jack shit as we’ve seen over the last 20 years so it’s not really something to bank upon going into the future.

I also don’t buy in to this need to ‘protect’ our countryside. The country is largely empty once you get of London/SE and I’ve read stats which indicate that 97% of the country is not built upon. What exactly are we protecting and more importantly, at what cost? Younger generations can’t afford to buy or move anywhere as all the existing stock is overpriced, precisely because new stock is so hard to come by or build in the first place.

Catch22 situation - developers or private companies won’t provide services unless there’s enough population in a place to warrant the investment. The demand won’t be there if developers aren’t allowed to build houses for people to move in. You get stuck in a doom loop where everyone expects this to be magically funded from a non existent pot.

I’d argue the thing that needs the most immediate reform is the Town and Country planning act, that holds development back to a rosy picture of what Britain looked like in the 50s. Any development or attempt to modernise is viewed with hostility by both the planners and local residents who have far too much power. Of course, a reform to that needs strong political will and therefore political change to start with. So far, none of the parties have any concrete ideas on how to deal with this outside of empty slogans like Build build build etc…

Hasn’t it always been like this though? Struggling to find a place that achieves the perfect balance - while still being affordable. There are places that offer a perfect balance of suburbia while still being close enough to town, walkable from schools, train stations, GPs, hospitals and supermarkets within easy reach (say local bus services that run regularly), have playgrounds and facilities for kids and teens, interesting architecture and well maintained streets. The only problem is that everyone wants to live in those places and therefore prices are significantly higher as a result.

Just saw your note re pricing - if you're after something which is under 4 figures, then the strong suggestion would be to go for wireless only, and with integrated keypad/panel/sounder etc. Fewer devices = Lower cost. It does mean changing batteries every year, but it's not that much - usually under £5 for each sensor as long as you can do it yourself. Wired systems will be more expensive due to the higher labour cost plus the marginal cost of wiring etc to be run.

It hasn't been installed yet - I've only just had the first fix cabling done at the start of this week and 2nd fix won't happen until August, once internal plastering/decorating is largely done. I've also gone for a separate control panel (where all the cables terminate) and keypad (by the utility door) - so they're not integrated with each other, though I have to admit I wasn't aware that there were issues with the integrated version. Went with the installer recommendation and the main discussion I had with him was around the number and placement of all the sensors/door contacts/PIRs. We've gone for a system that allows us to either do a 'full set' with all PIRs activated, or a night mode 'perimeter set' which keeps the door and window sensors active but de-activates the internal PIRs, allowing you to roam around inside the house.

One of the very few places online that will list Ajax prices and let you buy direct - Ajax Smart Alarms – The CCTV Store For the others, lots of different websites will let you view prices online so I won't paste links - easy enough to google. Best thing to do is sit down with your floorplan and mark out where you want the sensors, PIRs, external and internal sounders, keypad/control panel etc to go. Then sense check with ChatGPT/Claude and ask it to create shopping lists for your chosen products. Works fairly well and will at least give you a baseline for the parts cost when looking at or comparing quotes from installers who will want to charge labour and their profit margin on top.

Went through the same thing with my own build and here's what I gathered after countless hours of research and AI aid as well. Ajax - is the Apple like new entrant into the market, and has the most stylish keypads, sensors etc. But they don't sell direct and are the priciest - got some quotes and it was easily 2-3x other competitors so I dropped this idea. Texecom - this is the industry standard for a graded system (I think you need Grade 2 for home security). Kit is pretty well known and standardised through the app and keypads are a little dated - works but nothing to look at is the consensus. Apparently there is no charge to use their app if you have the WiFi/Ethernet module. Orisec - relatively new entrant in the market and seems to have been setup by ex Texecom people. App is slightly newer and seems to get more updates. £45 charge to use the app on a yearly basis. Pricing is virtually the same as Texecom - based on the installer so you take your pick based on what you like. Pyronix - seems to be lowest rated of the lot (at least if you look online). This is the one we have in our current house (a wireless one). It works but the app is quite shit and frequently logs me out so I miss the notifications(!) when an alarm is triggered. Also currently £45 for annual access to the app. The other choice you have to make is a wired or wireless system. Wired does add a chunk of cost upfront (wiring and labour cost to do the wiring), but you don't have to change batteries every year which means high Capex low Opex. The advantage with most of the systems is that you can start with a baseline wired system for your key doors/windows and then expand gradually by adding wireless sensors in the future (like if you're adding front gates, rear outbuilding etc). FWIW - I've chosen to go with a wired Orisec system with option to add wireless sensors in the future. It was a toss up between the Orisec and Texecom and I'd be happy with either - went with the installer recommendation.