saveasteading

Use treated timber (Tanalised or equivalent) and C24.... the C16 untreated is generally for lightweight internal work, and the cost difference is small. The element doing most work in your example is the fascia board, as it is supporting multiple rafter and joist ends, and that isn't good. Start with the gallows brackets, then add a timber to the front, bearing on them, then fit the rafters and joists. The fascia is for show and to keep the weather out. This is a very small structure which is supporting your tiles most of the time, but occasionally will have wind uplift. Nobody is going to die if it fails, but it is still best to keep it to the logic above.

I recommend all, especially critics, to consider standing for their local parish or borough. We need you. Then report back on whether it was easy, well rewarded, selfish: or hard work, not or barely rewarded, or public spirited. Or to stop criticising all councillors, politicians and public servants.

I recommend all, especially critics, to consider standing for their local parish or borough. Then report back on whether it was easy, well rewarded, selfish: or hard work, not or barely rewarded, or public spirited. Or to stop criticising all councillors, politicians and public servants.

An interesting discussion on radio 4. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m003011r Very architect heavy, but that was I interesting in itself. I have new quotes... shiny buildings.....green toupee.

Yes. Over what was prob a £2k claim ( I don't know because they handled it all). I'm now with Allianz which came top in 3 different comparisons... yet strangely variable between them. They don't ask the right questions.

I was very surprised when Churchill said they were not offering renewal. Because of a relatively small claim? Shame, as their customer service was exemplary. Ie they answered phones and had real people. So it now seems more likely that it was a takeover thing. These good people are probably gone. As I've mentioned before, an insurance manager proudly boasted that they had the lowest payouts in the world (40% of income I recall). They spent a lot on resisting and refusing claims. So I agree that we need to know this as well as the cheapest quote. That's where "Which" ratings must be worth a look.

@scottishjohn when a petrol station is charging 6 to 8p/litre more than one not far away is this always location and convenience? Because as you say , 3p/l is not much return, but suddenly to become 10p is a huge difference. In Spain there is even greater variance. It is nearly always linked to attended service or self serve (8 to 10c/l) . The 3rd option is total automation with no shop which is hopeless when there is any problem of course. These can be cheaper (no labour) or dearer (remote or 24/7).

generally this is the case, but it depends on the ground. If sitting on hot rock, the borehole will be expensive but decent heat may be harvested. payback is a few years At the other extreme is heavy clay and with other houses seeking the same heat source. Payback is never, and air source is the way. in between are other boreholes with sand or silt that has a flow of water through it, warming the pipes. Pipes in surface trenches are not really harvesting ground heat, but the energy from the sun in summer, stored in the ground, but diminishing, through the winter. These can be simply installed behind a plough that makes it very easy, or in a trench being dug for another reason. Payback again depends on aspect and ground. 10 years perhaps. The slinky companies of 20 years ago have gone, and rightly so. Pipes in lakes or very large ponds can be an option if the volume and depth are sufficient, and especially if water is flowing.

Just thought of this: according to contemporary accounts incl ballads, and evidence in palaces, the nobility did lots of hunting and sports. Then as you say they fought or caught diseases.

I don't recall ever doing it. But your way seems sensible. Push a plug of rockwool to give a stop then a sharp sand mix as facing.

Agreed, and I don't think that planners have the skills or knowledge to know if it is appropriate.... they've had a free seminar with sandwiches, from an mvhr body or energy consultant, and now think they are experts. I had a similar argument re green roofs. And superfoil nearly had one council convinced that it was effective. ( I went for that sandwiches and to be a pain at question time) You could tick a box with a tiny mvhr. I saw a pretty useless one at an exhibition.. a box on the inside of an outside wall. The guy couldn't explain why the same air wouldn't go straight back out again. You might find something a bit better with some ducting. If the bco doesn't want one then that might kill it.

Nobody cares about 6 inches. The conditions are to prevent a greedy increase.

The SE may well say to leave it alone while the winter allows the ground to get wet again and perhaps expand. Filling cracks now could be the worst thing to do.

This is exaggerated surely. Take a castle or even old palace... there isn't much light coming in, and normal people lived in dark boxes. Did a candle really make that much difference? Prior to that people lived in holes in the ground or deep in forests. Presumably poor people were outside scraping at the ground in daylight so were healthier. No mention of skin colour. So the pale northerners will get more benefit sitting round the family candle

That's absolutely what I would do... if it wasn't my profession already. The reason I say that is that even a very good building surveyor (not a quantity surveyor) who is RICS, or the most practical registered Architect will see the cracks and tell you that there are cracks. And that you need an SE to look into it. The AI suggestion above will include both the surveyor or Architect and then the SE. Surveyors and Architects are much better at self publicity, hence AI has found this ready made suggestion.