saveasteading

So the vendor's insurers are aware, and have commissioned a survey which says that the foundations have failed, but are not paying to repair it, and it us up for sale. Hmmmm. Any more info on this? Would you get any insurance that was worth having? Mortgage, probably declined too.

Firstly, i am both Engineer and contractor. For a clientI I take few risks. For my own, and family, i take more chances. We have taken on severely distressed buildings 5 times, always to live in. In every case there have been nasty surprises, even to me. These would nof have come up in reports other than as general warnings. More accurately these are considered decisions, not risks. So the default here is to say to be careful. The discount may not begin to cover the risks....but i don't know as i don't know enough about this property. If this house was possibly to be mine i would cost the repairs of the known problems, but also allow for the unknowns. Repairing to live in rather than sell is an advantage. Things like the drains can be dealt with as and when. A builder either has to get it right, or disguise the problems, in order to sell it. Stitching is a repair, not a solution. Best have an expert look at what caused these cracks and the floor movement. A good local SE could simply have a walk round inspection and give off the recird advice. This works for easily seen problems and avoids unnecessary detail and report cost. For example i once suggested this, on the basis that the SE would say only whether the house would get a mortgage, and why not. Client paid for 2 hours and avoided an expensive mistake. The discount may not be remotely enough. Be prepared to let it go. On a positive. Maybe the ground is ok and thd floor is just very badly made, and can be repaired. Maybe the walls are cracked for other ressons thsn foundations, and just need repair. On a negative....often houses are beyond repair, demolished and rebuilt as new. Be careful, get independent professional advice.

Gus is right of course. You have to be very determined and stroppy or you get the brush-off, esp ftom the big developers. Not every crack and creak is a major problem. The brush-off can move from politely ignoring, to bullying. The big developers' Architects and Engineers may be very good, but are usually selected on lowest price, and without an overall responsibility. There are well documented cases of very serious design faults being denied....their reputation strangely not being their main concern. It seems though that your issues may not be so serious. Photos?

Hence factors of safety. Some for load, material, and build quality. And a lot of that weight is at the edges. Then, most structures are governed by deflection limits...ie they flex and feel uncomfortable long before they break. I assume that the stairs did not fail in this instance.

We recently got thd best prices from the local builders' merchant. Use the online sellers for the initial guide costs but beware delivery cost. Never ignore wickes and b&q...always worth a quick check.

Welcome. Always something to learn, and there is a lot of knowledge and wisdom in here.

I don't begin to agree on this broad statement. In clay and rock, gsh is not efficient because thd heat is not replaced. In fact, boreholes freeze. In porous ground it can work, but with great capital expense and too many disappoinments. I have been going to gshp industry presentations for decades and noted how the wild promises were gradually altered to suit reality. Without grants the true value became apparent. It is now acknowledged that most boreholes need to be reheated in summer (pump running) So it is really air source or solar, with the ground evening out the seasons. Slinky coils take solar energy from higher ground and can be OK in large sunny spots, but they also chill out in cold weather. I know this from observing failed projects in SE clay and the industry recently acknowledging it. You have inspired me to look at the EST website. They show better savings from gs than as, but at much higher capital cost. But they are very quiet on ground conditions. Air source works well, and reliably, except in very, very cold conditions. Convince me otherwise please.

No. They don't work efficiently in most uk situations. No hot rock.

Please excuse if I have missed something but my thoughts are.. The cross sections are a bit vague. Where is the floor insulation/dpm? Why an extra block to support the beams, is the outer wall existing? Yes there is a cold bridge..this can be sorted but needs more detail. 2m deep footings. Presumably there are trees about 10m away , at all sides. Ask the local concrete company what their cheapest mix is. Leanmix is fine, but I would just ask in case they have a mix with bigger stones, or single sized, etc that might save a lot. I don't follow what the line under the beams denotes. It looks like a slab but it perhaps is ground....it should say on the drawing. 700 and 900 seem very wide trenches. Others tell please...Scottish regs used to require a solum ( stone or something) below a suspended floor. Does that apply?

That was what I meant. Reclosing the gap. Window going in soon so i will report back.

Indeed. I have seen buildings which should have a poor rating, get a good one. Ignorance, lazyness, lack of effort worthy of a tiny fee, or writing the rating the client wanted? Probably all the above occur. The algorithm is flawed in the first place anyway, but of use in comparisons if completed professionally ( i mean honestly and thoroughly) I don't think designing a heat system to suit a SAP is the best idea. The Jeremy table is probably better.

Thanks Miek and to everyone else who didn't respond. No I am not being facetious. One of the great things about this forum is that people don't guess, and don't reply to say they don't know...which I just hate on other forums. I have had great advice that I have acted on, some that i have absorbed and then not acted upon, and the occasional silence. The latter is always on complex or very particular circumstances. Silence confirms that my ideas are as good as anybodys..... probably, and is all my own problem. So the decision is made, and is to not use mechanical fixings up to the arch. Fixing will be by quality expanding foam. We will probably first insert expanding foam tape to the outer edge as a permanent and flexible weather seal. For general intrest, the bulk of the units are Nordan: timber windows with aluminium outer skins. They couldn't handle angles or curves*, and are a bit clunky at multiple units, so these are coming from Stevenswood. Upvc with a coloured outer skin, and so very much cheaper. * a series of straights....3d bit style......not seen yet.

Does it expand after curing though if, as arches do, one stone moves up a fraction in a year or so?

We have some characterful stone arches. Another way of saying wonky...they have moved over the years and are not symmetrical. That is the glory of arches, they move, adopt a new shape, and keep working. So our new windows are asymmetrical too. They are upvc frames, made with 4 different straights at the top to replicate the curve at a fraction of the curved cost. To the sides and bottom we will plug and screw. But I am conscious that the arch may move again. How to fix to the top? If screwed through then any joggling of the stone and the screws will push or pull at the frame and will likely crack the glass. Or thd screws inhibit the movement of the stones. Perhaps just expanding foam as glue, and no screws. How flexible is it? I suspect it crushes but doesn't expand. Or memory foam strip? My inclination is to make slip brackets of 2 angles with a slotted connection, then fill with quality expanding foam and/or memory foam. There should be 20mm top gap at the joints, and wider between (straights under curve).

That smell is in my brain while I read your comments. I had this at a wc connector. It was a sealed joint and extra mastic so I didn't suspect it for ages, but eventually noticed a tiny gap almost out of sight. New plumbers mait all round and thoroughly packed: sorted.

But first try without heat. There are 2 effects on your side. 1. Stack effect is that air flow at a higher level is usually faster and may suck air up and out if you have high and low vents. A chimney will do the same. 2. Then simply the air pressure at opp ends of the building. Any wind will tend to suck air out. So having holes at all faces, high and low will maximise the effect. The higher vents will also be good in removing warmer, moister air that has risen. Windows and doors do the job as long as you remember to close them again against rain.

Air flow works much better than dehumidifiers.

As always, read and absorb all Gus says. Can I add? Why build on hard-core? If the ground is virgin, far better to concrete in the ground. 1.4m is quite high. It looks less when shown as if 3 blocks, but it will be 6. Just sticking a bar into the base will help but what diameter, and will it be L shaped? Base would be better all the way back in the excavation. Does the existing wall have a footing? Don't disturb it. Absolutely, insert drain holes, 25mm pipes, at or near the bottom. Line the excavated face with membrane to stop roots entering and blocking your gravel. And assume the worst...what will you do if the existing wall seems precarious, or the excavation falls away? Be ready for a plan B. Consider the kit walls as Kelvin suggests. You will save on excavation, concrete and risk. Then, with some, they are attractive and can be planted.

Not fair. An SE can optimise the design if confident it will be properly installed, and not have holes cut in it. I have seen electricians cut lumps out of the bottom flange of a steel rafter. Default may be to design a size up when the contractor is as yet unknown. If you want a lean design, tell the SE you are personally supervising and then supervise. An SE working for a main contractor can more safely do this...but then the end user comes along. So on second thoughts you are not wrong . SE generally assumes some overdesign is prudent....

And the structure! Commercial sheds are made with minimal material and the osb roof is critical to stability. It is efficient design reflected in the cost. ...don't cut holes.

Good info, although a third is more a maximum than 'nothing' if the beam is economically designed. To which I add that multiple holes are an issue too. Big holes need to be a long way apart, small ones not so much. Say 1m. As with all holes in beams and joists..keep them at mid height, and towards the ends rather than central. Otherwise the web may fail.

A contractor is nervous about where the next job is coming from, has often to juggle several potential clients....and then is too busy....or has no work. Often there is minimal notice from getting the order to starting. So i suggest politely keeping in touch, as it won't be personal, but he might be at the on/off stage with someone else, and avoiding burning of bridges. And look elsewhere at the same time.

Option B without a doubt. As well as the point re silting up, the wet gravel is very attractive to tree and other roots, which would soon fill all the gaps. It is a pain to do and needs to be quite organised, but worth it.

If it works for you, install a temporary wc for site use when the plumbing and some walls are in. Costs about £60 for a basic one. Then replace at the end.

Not really. You need toilet, wash basin, and somewhere warm and dry to rest. First aid, and fire extinguishers. They don't have to be in an expensive self contained unit. In my opinion a site diary is adequate on most projects, doubling as accident book. The diary, kept daily without fail, is the best value of all your project expenditure.