saveasteading

Including cheap and nasty shower outlets. That becomes a very big job to replace. So i won't use a bottled drain cleaner unless i know the fittings are proper quality. That may mean undignified and repeated struggles with a plumbers' snake but so be it.

No I think it might be expectations though. Take in your 3 year old car to a trustworthy garage. They expect it to pass but do the tests they have to. Take in a 20 year old thing, and they expect it to fail, and i think will look harder at nooks and crevices. BCO similarly has expectations. Hands on , self builder is not knowingly cutting corners, but may have knowledge gaps. A small contractor that they know, who has and refers to the drawings. It's going to be ok. One BCO told me that the most issues were on main contractor (the big names), big developments. The chain is so long that the work is done by a secodary gang of a 4th tier subby. They don't know what they are doing or why, and don't care. He asked one such why the reinforcement was not in place when concrete was due in an hour. "On its way". He went back in an hour to see the concrete laid but no reinforcement. There follows lots of paperwork and unpleasantness. The contractor prob moaned about being picked upon.

Thoughts with the benefit of ignorance. I've tried to use ICF but couldn't make it work commercially. I suspect ICF is under-researched. The manufacturers could commission load testing and provide accepted detailing. This would probably reduce the amount of reinforcement. But they don't want or can't afford the cost. But as it is, every SE is taking their own decisions on it. An ICF skin has a small core of reinforced concrete. If hollow concrete bocks are used in this way, the blocks contribute significantly where eps cannot. Perhaps Jenki' s design is the right solution and the others underdesigned. Is there also a tendency for ICF buildings to have bigger clear spaces? In traditional houses the rooms are small, providing stiffness to the construction: and hundreds of years of practical experence as compared to ICF.

A proper epc takes hours to prepare, and knowledge of the construction, boiler efficiencies etc. The output is then a summary of multiple factors, with fairly arbitrary loadings attached to them. (These are changing at last eg gas is good, all buildings use cooling). My business invested in the program and a lot of training so we understood where the flaws were. But then still had to pay an independent company to do it again for every new building. For £30 or £90 you are getting a piece of paper based on negligible input and standard house construction. Depends what you need and want. We did a conversion from a small barn to be a store with small office. 40mm composite cladding . No floor insulation. Our Client got his own assessment for renting it out. Very cheap and a B rating, whereas it was clearly only a D at best. It worked for him. Whether the assessment was incompetent or cheating (what rating do you need) I have no idea. A family member was offered a free energy rating by the electric supplier. Totally pointlessly but to tick a box. He spent 5 minutes in the house. When told of added insulation and draught proofing he said that was of no consequence and not of interest...Victorian terrace therefore based on standard construction. If selling, do what you want. If buying, dont trust the epc/sap.

Good point. And to close....with your new knowledge of the process, what would you do differently another time?

As Temp suggests. BCO is probably correct that this is unsafe until the gap is safely closed off. He is probably liable if an accident happens when no Juliet has been fitted. You can politely and professionally advise your proposals. This could be a bit of osb screwed inside the window/door until the proper balcony appears. Or get some metal trellis that would look better. That would allow temporary habitation/ conditional sign-off. They will not accept assurances that the door will be kept locked. So it is a nice letter and £30 of work.

Settle for that. Everyone happy. But this is what your newt consultant should have done for you.

I always decribed drain survey recordings as dirty videos, despite nobody ever laughing.

That toothpaste method doesn't allow for movement in shrinkage, so it willl crack a lot. I'm assuming that it is allowed to shrink and crack, and then outer and inner skins conceal it.

Either of these is my preference. The rated performances are rarely achieved in practice (these are lab test figures) so go for the best rated that works for the width available.

If you draw a line from bottom left to top right, then that will be where the peak is, and water goes the 2 ways. But you could omit the left hand drain and slope it all to the bottom one. If you raise the left side a tad it will all run to the drain. i.e. as your original but raised at the left. Where is the water to go next? It is supposed to go to soakway, not into the drains, to reduce flood risk. You could use a french drain (gravel) istead of the aco, or take it to a soakaway or pond.

I have an innate preference for 3 chamber systems. They continue to work whether aerated or agitated or not. The wiers between sections prevent solids getting right through. Occasionally they might be overworked, but a decent drainage field will complete the process. In this old house we have, and are entitled to keep, a single brick chamber that discharges to soakaway. It is far from fully treated, but by inspection a 2nd and 3rd chamber would do the job.

Not drainage as precisely discussed here, but i think it comes under "Civil Engineering". Fluid mechanics and soil mechanics are covered. (Not Structural Engineering as they have split off from the profession into their narrower field.) There is an overlap into biochemistry, but that is buying a 'thing' these days. Designing domestic drainage fields isn't a glamorous or well paying speciality, hence so often it isn't designed but bodged.

The Highland document linked here shows 5 pics of examples, of which 4 are timber clad and one is white render. The document is brief and perhaps superficial. The guides by Moray and by Aberdeen give more specific examples of what is considered good design, and sometimes why. I think the principles are transferable. They also say that "exemplary modern" may be acceptable. I wonder if the ubiquitous white render is driven by cost. It will be the cheapest way to build in a way that is likely to be acceptable. But it seems that timber cladding is well received, but that most developers prefer the render....for cost.

I now only buy expensive screws. The time saved and job quality improvement is immense. The ones that come with their own head that clicks into them are favourite. I really should throw out the boxes of old fashioned screws that I will never use....or give them away to someone who wants cheapness before convenience.

The patio needs a fall or it gets puddles and the water may not run to your drain. The drain should fall too, although it will work without but need cleaning out more often. Is there a reason that the falls are causing issues?

The cheapest screws aren't worth having as they will be made from inferior metal which may not 1. Have the hardness to grip the screwdriver head 2. Cut into the material 3. Resist corrosion 4. Have the strength for the job. What function do you want the screws for?

If it is the same as ours then it is nothing to do with the sea, but is glacial. When the glaciers formed rivers of meltwater they crushed rocks and carried boulders and sand with them. They dropped it as they went. These are called eskers and can be up to 50m thick. Our ground is mostly single sized, rounded sand, with some beds of gravel, and extremely dense. Like soft rock to break through, but then crumbles to sand.

Vat reclaim has to be for works as on the PP. Perhaps that requires you holding off until the permission you need is confirmed.

If you are sitting in your car ( eyes 4ftabove ground, and a bonnet distance back from the roadside) , how far can you see? The required distance both ways is based on speed limit and hence braking distance. Includes trees hedges, walls, road signs and anything else that might stop you seeing an oncoming vehicle in time. So verges are usually helpful in this. If you still need guidance let me know.

I think they do, by definition. The thing on such a practical and hands on forum as this is that we are by default questioning and cost conscious. It is not necessarily in the typical Se or Architect skillset to be god teachers or to understand costs. Hence many Engineers who do, are engaged by contractors....and the rest do these on-off designs. Yes that is what I do. It happens to be within my experience. Most consultants will propose details that they are comfortable with, or have assurances on. My suggestion isn't Engineering, but builder's detailing based on experience and knowing the cost of things. Your typical SE or Architect wouldn't know what things like this cost, and can't know everything. I suppose I am being defensive on this subject (to an unknown SE who may well be very good or not so good) because I have seen so much appalling work carried out by people who don't know how little they know, and seem to think that SE/Arch/BCO are trying to catch them out. I have had projects where the client decided to not use us, and do it themselves. Met by chance later (or to do the next project for them) they moan about fire barriers, foundation depths and all sorts that they have been made to do. Wind posts and pad-stones might be another example.....just how much is expected as free advice before even engaging a designer. On our project I challenged the SE, and we saved £15k. The daily contact resisted but the top boss agreed our proposal was acceptable, but they hadn't realised it was a commercial option. Fair enough. But I did many hours of general research, more site tests and technical research, and got tacit backup from a certain member on BH. Allow 30 hours a plane trip and 3 days board.....I worked for it. I allowed 10% for unknowns on our project, because conversions have surprises. And I am reasonably expert. On a new build of a project I understand backwards it would only be 3%. I can well understand that many on here have not allowed for contingencies, and it hurts when the unexpected is required and the costs rise. That is the big risk of self-build.

That sounds extremely competitive for 400m2. I would expect the skip and disposal cost to be that alone. Looks to me like you have a lot more than 400m2m though, esp including the walls....but still, an encouraging start. Is the VAT reclaimable?

I'm not a biologist or got a medical degree but I trust my doctor. Your SE did at least 3 years uni. If Chartered he did several more years and exams. What is the problem really and we can try to help?

Always a good sign. A beam calculation is everyday stuff and doesn't need a computer programme. Good to be interested of course. I expect he could sit you down for a lesson if you paid for his time. The bco does not check calcs, or have the training. Trust the SE.

No it doesn't. I refer you to my earlier response. BCOs are not Clerks of Works.