garrymartin

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/roger-lewis-aba461241_press-release-approved-by-kingspan-timber-activity-7383754952692719616-E9b4 PRESS RELEASE APPROVED BY KINGSPAN TIMBER SOLUTIONS LTD Home@ix Ltd acquires Potton from Kingspan Timber Solutions Ltd Home@ix, the housing innovator redefining affordable, scalable living, has acquired Potton, the heritage homebuilder, from Kingspan Timber Solutions Ltd This strategic move anchors Potton’s craftsmanship and trusted legacy within the Home@ix platform, combining tradition with innovation to deliver smarter, greener, and more accessible housing. Home@ix integrates modern methods of construction., technology, and finance in one seamless solution. With six years of proven operational data, the company has cracked the code on scalable delivery while keeping customers at the centre. From Stylem@ix entry-level homes, to Superm@ix family builds, and premium Ultim@ix by Potton, the platform makes sustainable homeownership both affordable and customisable. Through its finance arm, Moneym@ix, customers benefit from integrated mortgages, green finance options, and upgrade opportunities, making homes more accessible than ever. “The housing market is broken. Home@ix is here to fix it,” said CEO Designate RH Steve Baker. “With Potton’s heritage as our foundation and Home@ix as the tech engine, we’re setting the new standard for modern living.” For further information, visit [website] or contact rogerhome@ixnow.net

There's a webinar on Youtube from National Grid about the project. It's basically for retrofit. The idea is that when properties need to be upgraded to support EV charging and heat pump usage, they would provide three-phase at the boundary, and then you can cable to the EV charger and heat pump *externally* without having to go into the house and then back out again. They would just disconnect your single-phase cabling to the house, and then reconnect it to one of the phases in the new three-phase boundary location.

Almost certainly a RAMPA screw (not bolt 😉), though I'm not sure what specific type. It's a German brand, but is often used in Swedish (and other countries) staircase manufacturing. https://www.rampa.com/eu/en/RAMPA-STAIRCASE-SCREWS-TYPE-TKH/3490900010100 https://www.junoindustries.eu/en/products/rampa/screws-with-metrical-thread/rampa-staircase-screws-type-tkm.html Maybe give RAMPA a call or send them an email with the photos? If you do, measure the head diameter, and the diameter of the screw, and if there is writing around the top (possibly the screw type), tell them what it says. RAMPA GmbH & Co. KG Call us: +49 4155 8141-0 E-mail: mail@rampa.com

Such an inspiring blog. Look forward to reading your updates every week 🙂

Just to help me understand better, why is that? I thought, in a new-build, there must be enough space for someone in a wheelchair to manoeuvre, and if not, the easiest thing to do is for the door to open outward or slide? It just didn't look like there would be enough room on the plan.

WC door on ground floor needs to open outwards I believe.

That looks like some really tidy work. Great to see people taking pride in the work they are doing.

Oh, OK, didn't know that. That's really interesting. I understand that, as you describe, you essentially have two spurs, rather than a spur feeding two sockets, but I thought you were only allowed one spur from a single accessory; "Only one unfused spur, supplying either a single 1-gang or 2-gang socket-outlet, should be connected to any accessory forming a part of the circuit (Appendix 15 of BS 7671 refers)." https://electricalapprentice.co.uk/connecting-equipment-to-a-socket-outlet-circuit/?utm_source=chatgpt.com#:~:text=Only one unfused spur%2C supplying either a single 1-gang or 2-gang socket-outlet%2C should be connected to any accessory forming a part of the circuit (Appendix 15 of BS 7671 refers). But then Appendix 15 of BS 7671 only states that "an unfused spur should only feed one single or one twin socket-outlet only" - it doesn't explicitly say you can only have one unfused spur from a single accessory, even if that is commonly accepted...

But there is already a spur (C1) off C, so it isn't permissible to also add a FCU spur feeding an additional socket (C2). Without seeing the cable routes, these appear to be the two easiest solutions: 1) disconnect C1 from C, add the FCU as a spur next to C, and then connect both C1 and C2 to the FCU 2) insert the FCU into the ring by disconnecting the cable between C and D, connecting that cable to the FCU along with a new cable between the FCU and C. You can then add as many extra sockets as you like off the FCU B1 and D1 are fine - you can add a single spur off an existing socket on a ring.

Should be fine. Just bear in mind that if it is fibre, it may be a pre-terminated cable of a particular length, so the inside diameter of your PEX needs to be sufficient to take the connector, and the bend radius you employ needs to be appropriate to the connector length too. I installed 20mm flexible conduit from the external box (City Fibre in my case) to my internal comms cupboard and we just fished the cable through when they did the install. No issues.

Not that it will help now, but going into a plastic box, potentially outside, I'd always go with the correct sized Storm gland... https://www.electricpoint.com/swa-storm20s-lsf-armoured-cable-glands-m20-20mm-ip68.html

I find the problem with economics and market value generally has much more to do with plot prices than with how much work you do yourself. Inflated land costs often *lead* to a requirement to do more work yourself to make the sums add up.

+1 very clever

If the issue is that they submitted a S106 that wasn't signed and witnessed by all appropriate parties, that's an easy fix... Is that the issue @Katbuild?

I don't understand what a "witnessed planning obligation" is, to be honest, especially if, as you mention, your planning consultant submitted a Section 106 document with a self-build undertaking in it. My personal experience concerning Unilateral Undertakings is that even if you use a format the LPA has previously signed off on, they will still say it isn't acceptable and will give you some new text that probably doesn't make grammatical sense and that isn't legally enforceable. Nevertheless, you should ask the LPA for an acceptable document template specific to your case. My Unilateral Undertaking included the following for your interest. You'll need some similar words (agreed with the LPA), but in a complete, legal document format; Note that it has to be signed and witnessed by everyone with an interest in the land. If the person(s) applying for permission don't own the land, not only will they need to sign it, but so will any landowners, and any mortgage companies with an interest too. You'll possibly also be asked to provide the Title Deeds for the land so that any interests can be checked. I'd include these as they may be requested, adding further delays.