ProDave

Looks like you have identified the problem. Now lets hope they agree and swap the pipes over. Keep us posted how it goes.

I got mine from stairbox, but I don't recall ply being an option.

If you study a female - female coupling when mated to the respective pipes, there is literally nothing for "passing material" to hit on it's way past.

Do what I did, make it clear to the planners you want it to stay and in my case they agreed the 'van could remain but not for habitation.

Can we have a closer / clearer picture of the jumble of pipes coming out of the floor bottom left of the photo. Following the copper pipes between the 2 manifolds, the left manifold has the hot pipe connecting to the right hand manifold cold. These are the flow and return to / from the manifold. So either one is connected with flow and return swapped (which is wrong) or they are connected in series, which I have never seen before.

The annoying thing is why was the warranty issued. The worst case suspicion is there was some detail done wrong on your half that the warranty provider was not happy with, but it was done correctly on the other half. Warranty providers inspections are often more stringent than building control.

Question. Has the downstairs UFH ever worked properly? i.e. are we trying to solve a fault (it used to work but has stopped working) or is it a new install that has never yet worked on the ground floor? Post some pictures of the ground floor UFH manifold please.

I would be surprised if the kitchen heat loss is really 1.4kW that would be more than half my total house heat loss at -10 outside.

That's it in a nutshell. That's why this needs sorting or a solution on the table before you conclude the missives. What did the home report say about the drainage (let me guess get another survey?)

That will say whatever the vendor told them when registering it prior to putting it for sale. I know of 2 round here with septic tanks draining to a watercourse and SEPA have shown no interest in doing anything about it. My suggestion of rodding it was to see just how far it went and if by chance it did go to the stream, you know you have a route to discharge a proper treatment plant.

It's part of the building warrant process and agreed with SEPA who issue a permit. Generally they only do so if land drainage is not possible which appears to be the case here. You could always get the existing tank pumped out and get at the tail pipe with drain rods and see how far it goes and who knows it might go all the way and you unblock it?

NO it's NOT "working fine" Clearly whatever soakaway it was supposed to have is either blocked, non existant or the water table is too high. It is just leaking it's effluent into the now boggy garden. Seriously, you need to factor at a very minimum getting the soakaway completely renewed which WILL mean digging up the field next door and re laying and so will need a deed of servitude. I would be having serious discussions with the vendor (via your solicitor) to sort out the deed of servitude needed AND reduce the price to cover the work you WILL need to do. You also need a proper percolation test done in the location you will construct the replacement drainage field to determine if indeed it is even feasible. Failure to do that could leave you with a non functioning drainage system without the means to fix it. If that is too much for you, walk away and look for a different house to buy.

Fundamental question: Is this a boiler just for the garden room, or is the garden room close enough to the house to be fed from the boiler in the house? WHY run the boiler at 70C, First thing turn that down to 55 or lower. You will probably have to run the heating longer but it will work out cheaper.

Top post. Why can't talking heads on television explain it clearly like that? Regarding old UK houses, rentals and EPC's. I am certainly glad to no longer be a landlord myself. It astounds me that buyers still seem to mostly ignore an EPC. You would have thought old houses with a poor EPC, clearly in needs of upgrading and lots of money spent, would be valued less than a modern well built house. but pretty "period features" seems to override common sense in most buyers eyes. (the exception being I bet no landlord now will consider a house worse than EPC C unless it is very cheap) There have been discussions here before about EPC's and assumptions, with one particular person having vastly improved his house. When he sold it, he explained all the extra insulation and air tightness and showed photographs of the work to the assessor, who promptly ignored it all and made the standard assumptions. Talk about banging your head against a (insulated) brick wall.

That makes sense. What I was reading from the OP is rainwater was getting in, THAT would have to go up hill.