saveasteading

You lift the inspection chamber then one person inspects it while another flushes a toilet, with paper in it. Water hoes past and you know it is foul. Repeat with water down a rainwater pipe, but no paper. Water goes past and it is a rainwater drain. 2 positives and it is a combined system and you connect to it. But adding a barrel to the new dp is a "good thing to do", costs £30 and you save on water and sewage bills. 100 litres for the garden costs you about 15p and 20p for the sewage they assume results. 90 uses and you are winning. Do you even have to connect to the drain? I don't know.

We know you don't mean this. Best idea for an easy life perhaps, until the next time. And allowing what the water companies are doing... ditching sewage into a river in storm conditions. Somebody else's problem, esp water life downstream. You probably have til the winter to find an easy way to divert at least some rain to barrels or onto the land. A barrel is £30, and the clever rain diverter is sometimes included. Then sleep easy that you have done 'a good thing. Tell the family ASAP and they will be proud of you.

It should be easy enough to check. Do you have manhole covers? I do wonder if the drainage authorities really care. If it is combined or separate, you can help by using a barrel. Firstly you can use it and it saves water plus reduces the drainage load, secondly it slows the flow to the drain, and reduces flash flooding. You can leave the tap on to drip away over the next day and be empty for the next downpour. Every m2 counts.

Old carpet made of wool on jute backing yes. A scabby modern carpet of plastic pile and foam rubber backing, buried in the ground forever, no. Bob flowerdew would surely agree.

About your tank. My 1m3 brick thing was chucking out nasties in the rain and the soakaway was blocked. I had the tank sucked clean, and repaired a bit of the pipework. Also sucked down the pipe towards the rubble doakaway. Most importantly I diverted 2 rwp away from the drains. They now just go to barrels and overflow to the ground. It is only 1/3 of the roof rain, but it has made all the difference. In winter, the barrel taps can be set slightly open to drain gently, ready for the next downpour. The soakaway also recovered over a few months of, I assume, bacterial help.

Among some of them there is an arrogance which can only have been taught or encouraged. I think it comes also from mostly dealing with small builders and home owners, who seldom challenge them. They don't know how little they know. There are good ones of course. An example that sticks in my mind was a small area of paving in a much bigger project. Due to an obstruction I redesigned on the spot, and explained it to the bco (boy at day release stage). He told me it wasn't acceptable. Why not? Couldn't say. I explained the engineering and he didn't like that. I said I would send him an Engineer' letter justifying it. He said pahhh, Engineers will write anything you pay them for. I wrote him the letter and heard no more. Never met him again fortunately. With a few more years self confidence I would have written an official complaint. Another standard is they say ' take another 100mm out of the trench'. I ask why, and they don't know. I'm always polite. Lastly an argument over 4 storeys of timber stairs. The very senior bco wanted them ripped out and made of concrete. Eventually (weeks), he accepted what the regs say, but was livid. We changed inspectors to one that is interested and collaborative....like teamwork..... It can be OK. I do sympathise a bit that they get aggro and perhaps abuse, and are expected make decisions beyond their knowledge. Now about your tank......

The EU has a rule along these lines, but implementation varies. It is to prevent sewage going into watercourses, especially where it links to drinking water. Likewise to stop it entering the aquifer. Sensible really. The problem is that historic sewage tanks are not covered...we have a m3 brick thing from 100 years ago, and it is surprising it works at all. The grey outflow heads off to a soakaway. New treatment tanks require a testing chamber on the outlet side. I don't know if the EA (scotland SEPA) are entitled to test.

The tank is always full. A gallon flush goes in one end and a gallon of treated comes almost immediately out of the other end. The tanks are designed for a typical mix of wee, poo and waste water.* A significant change to the mix will slow the process. So the stuff in the third chamber might be pretty unpleasant still, but will still be expelled. Rainwater running in pushes sewage out, far too early, so it is dirty. A lot of roof rain could fill the tank, and hence flush it through completely. So the soakaway is completely full of festering sewage and the tank is full of cleanish water. No rainwater should ever go into the sewage system. * for a non domestic situation, the mix may be different. There is a formula and it generally requires a bigger tank.

Noticing your original question there are some quality differences between brands. Knauf and BG are the normal brands. I don't know Arrowa so no comment. There used to be an unbranded product at CCF which was a lot cheaper. Then there is a much stiffer system (name escapes me) due to being made with ripples in the metal. And Lindab have one that clips into self and head tracks, saving time and easier for one person, but costs accordingly. My rule of thumb was to use timber for normal ceiling heights, and steel stud from 2.4m to 6m, based on cost.

It does let water through. The fabric with tiny holes punched in it let vapour through but not liquid. The fabric shown prevents weeds from growing up through it, but seedlings germinating above it can get their roots down through the weave.

Yes, based on a trial pit, no testing and a very cautious assessment. ( he claimed to have used a 'handy' length of steel rod, which nobody else witnessed) I was fuming but there was no time to argue. In fact the ground was incredibly dense sand, so the improvement was dramatic. I don't really understand the eps system of raft, but it seems to be somewhere in-between the two I have described. ie it is done on good ground with a reinforced ring beam, so the load doesn't have to spread far into the slab. Is the eps denser than the norm? Convenience and speed at, presumably, a cost premium. My point as originally stated is that you and I are using the term raft differently, perhaps 3 ways, and the OP should be aware of the possible confusion....which we are increasing.

My point exactly. That is not structural, only taking floor loading (you in an armchair). Floating is a good term. So that is not normally called a raft, not among Engineers anyway. Our project was cautiously designed with a structural raft, about 200mm thick and with 2 layers of heavy reinforcement. For urgency we proceeded while discussing and agreeing the matter with the SE. We then did the other half with 100mm and fibre mesh. Hence I know the cost difference was 15k for 170m2 of each. (BTW I am a Chartered Engineer but not on the Scottish register so had to use another SE.)

Yes they are. I would add this. The need for desludging is generally overstated. If the plant is working well there isn't much sludge, just stuff that shouldn't be flushed, and that floats or sinks out of harms way. If the pump fails, a 3 chamber keeps working but not so well. The pump is just like a fish tank one. Cheap and easy to replace. The soakaways for treated outfall as mentioned are many times smaller than the regulations require. The regulations are wrong in my opinion, but beware of an earnest bco if you don't have enough land.

Careful. Raft is being used in different contexts. To me a concrete slab on insulation, not structural, is a slab. That plus conventional strip footings is easiest and cheapest unless you have poor ground. A raft is a structure where the slab is thicker, heavily reinforced, and integrated with the perimeter concrete beam. Used only on difficult sites or with some systems where the overall cost difference is complex. Hence the £15k or more difference. Plus you need a builder who understands and cares. Mixing construction types is seldom wise. It can cause quality and performance issues.

Welcome. 1. Traditional trench footings. 2. Not at all unless you want a raft for some reason. 3. Lots more. I'd guess about £20,000. Oak is an expensive option, especially for a big house. Why do you fancy it? The point of sips is that it structural. I don't see the logic of oak plus sips.

Looks good. Now we need to check that the wall you are omitting was not supporting floor joists or another wall upstairs.

Yes. You might have to dig out a bit more where big roots come through the trench. Roots can grow and shrink and rot. But this is a few shovel fulls if at all.

Useful. I wouldn't have known that and thought it was steel. Either way, this will be very fragile. It is worth digging a well oversized hole by spade to half way, then starting to be really careful with the rest. It should be surrounded in gravel, but you can't count on it. I found that our new meter had been inserted into a rusty steel pipe which had failed on our side , £1,000 water bill showed us this. Not paid....another story of incompetence and corruption. I.e. don't assume good workmanship. When you are going to work on the new pipe you will need to turn off the water. Perhaps buy the meter key now, just in case.

Do you mind saying what you now hope to do? I mean what will you propose to the builder for his reaction? Keeping us informed we can perhaps point out any secondary effects of your intended changes....eg foundations, walls, floor support. Re using forums: it is OK but beware some have poor standards or poor control of troublemakers (through ignorance or malice). You are safe here but we can only deal with what you tell us as we don't have all the background.

OK that looks good. I'd say it was clayey with stone. But it looks really strong, with those teeth marks in the bottom. The vertical sides are a good sign too.

Actually a super team of multiple diciplines, but nearly always with a practical attitude...and understanding that cost matters. But we often end up saying to get a professional because site specifics mattter. You do that with ideas and knowledge.

Photo would be good. Also, if safe in the hole, do some simple tests. Push your thumb into the side of the hole. What effect is there? Take a broom or rake and push the handle down into the base. How far does it go? Take a lump from the bottom. How easily does it fall apart in your hands, and what do you see? Photos of anything of note.

What is the ground? Don't need to be technical , just as you see it.

The cost of the survey, design, the work and the disruption. (£3k???). Double that for what else you discover while doing it. (Will the windows need attention?) Double it again for the risk you are taking and the hassle.£12k. Sounds almost enough to be sure. If you need tdmporary accomodation then allow for that. That just covers the cost and is getting the house back in shape, nog making money for you. Take that off any offer and await refusal, then someone else will have the process, and trouble getting a mortgage. Or a builder will buy it, conceal it, pretend to live in it, and sell on. Next purchaser may have a recurrence.

That is like a cupboard squeezed in a leftover space. You could stack washer and drier at the far end, and the remaining area is then just space for handling washing. We have just built a utility room combined with plant room and are stacking. We decided not to buy appliances that would combine with a special stacking device, because it limits choice now, and in the future. So we are just building a worktop over the washing machine and the drier will sit on that. option 2, haul in the architect (small a for the moment) and demand a solution. option 3. don't build that wall and the sinks etc can go in that space. You have then gained a corner where the door was, and can put in more units with washing machine and drier. option 4, bring the wall into the kitchen to create 1.5m, and lose some of the generous circulation area. You still might put the appliances at the end so the doors can open without blocking the area. The foundations and floors may need revamping if the wall is structural. I notice that the architect hasn't even shown a washing machine. Needs embarrassing at the very least. The word architect cannot be used unless they are registered. Are they?