saveasteading

It is only needed if there is no other protection to the stair. So if the stair is timber, but is protected by plasterboard then the stair cannot burn. Theoretically a fire could start in the cupboard and burn the stair, or in the hallway and burn the stair......but the door would not help much. Or start in the cupboard and spread to the hall......not a proper argument. I have had this argument with building inspectors re a 34 storey stair, and they eventually conceded that a timber stair was allowed if protected. It is a common misunderstanding, perhaps in the 'how to be a building inspector' book. As above, if you do fir a door, 30minuite doors are mostly hollow with stuffing, so you might need a 1 hour door. which I can barely lift. First action: look at the construction to decide if the stairs can go on fire. 2. protect with plasterboard. 3. fire door if necessary. this is about fire evacuation and spread, not about interpretation of words in Document B.

I once asked a helical wind-turbine salesman how much power it produced, in practical terms. He answered that it could power the led display that said 'this display is powered by the wind'.

Best remember that advice for the future. Apart from her knowledge was there any other recompense? Money perhaps?

The law in England (don't know about Scotland) protects the landowner. The materials do not belong to the client until paid for, but the supplier has no right to remove them, even if unfixed. I recounted this to a European supplier and they were amazed: apparently for most of Europe the materials remain the supplier's until paid for, and they are entitled to enter the premises to remove any unfixed, or even fixed if it can be done without damage. ProDave. I always wondered if, when Britain supplies drones or tanks , they can (or do) put a dongle in there that could disable it if there is a change of allegiances. Perhaps an electrician can add such a signature to the job....a radio controlled off switch embedded in the wall perhaps.

Protect VP400 PLUS LR is a highly vapour permeable roof underlay. It offers the lowest vapour resistance of any Type LR roofing underlay in its class, and yet it remains airtight. It is suitable for use in all pitched roofs without the need to seal the laps, ensuring fortuitous ventilation. Do you feel lucky, Ventilation?

Thanks. We were going to say Tyvec supra because it wouldn't get a second's thought from the bco. However, after further research, and as we are using metal cladding, we are going for Klober Permasec metal. It says all the right things whereas Tyvek doesn't quite. I say 'going for' but I mean showing it on the drawings. Have a few months to research further as it is very expensive. Want a good job, but paying more is not the only way towards that.

A good plan. Gives the client an excuse for backing down, and a chance to meet and discuss what happens next, that you have taken advice, the certainty of your success at court and the costs the client will incur. It is very good that you have photos. Now is a good time to type up the job process....dates working on each room, when the client was there and saw the work, and any comments . Also re choosing the tiles....were there samples? I say this because you will forget details soon, and a written report now can simply be handed over to the judge and will likely be accepted as accurate. email your notes to a mate, or even yourself, as that kind of date stamps it. Do not exaggerate or elaborate as this will probably be obvious. I knew a famously bad payer once and an unpaid contractor friend asked how best to get paid. I advised a knock on the door and a polite reminder that the payment was overdue, while his 'driver' stood at the gate looking big. Cash immediately...there seems to be a pattern of this. I also saw the same person getting a builders merchant delivery....and I knew the MD so phoned him.....'don't worry , we (all the merchants) all know him and he has to pay everyone in advance and doesn't get discounts.'

You bet. I have general concerns that there could be any number of errors and omissions, as they are clearly not trying/ cutting corners/ can't read drawings. Apart from being wrong, the cutting is very rough indeed, and doesn't suggest skilled use of the blowtorch. Were the holes drilled or burned?

Presumably someone who just doesn't want to pay. 'Why should she and what are you going to do about it?' I have heard of this being quite common with carpet fitters. One subcontractor told me they had built a porch, customer refused to pay, contractor said pay or else...'no' ..so he went in the night and knocked it down. I think the only solution is to get legal.. that is the only way to counter what is stealing, and bullying. You can often get the first legal letter from a solicitor free or quite cheap as it is easy, and a loss leader.

up to you but be aware that the smoke may not disappear tidily, resulting in mucky roof and perhaps an erratic draught at the fire. you can always add a bit on top once the initial works have gone unnoticed.

Tinny details questions coming from the BCO today before issuing a warrant. So this discussion has been timely, as the subject was already on the screen, incl ducting supplier and details. thanks. We have suddenly chosen exact makes of wood stoves before turning a sod on site.....I didn't think this was how it worked but hey, ho. Now to choose an alarm manufacturer, and the make of breather membrane. Just selecting well known names for now. Tyvek is twice the price of others but the name will be recognised. I would normally say 'or equivalent' but am pretending certainty.

is a long way above the eaves....which I had assumed....but if coming out of the gable near the ridge it isn't so much of an issue. The bends will be a bit flexible so the scaffold tube to clamp to isn't such a bad idea.

Going through a wall reduces the risk of leaks through the roof, as closing off is tricky. In theory the flue should be straight if possible, but 2 x 45deg is ok. The main issue with going through the wall will be taking the flue high enough to comply with the rules about being above the ridge. at that height the flue is very vulnerable to wind, so needs guy lines and struts to brace it.

Good that you listened to the remaining items, and got the vibe of other applications. I bet the 'losing' neighbours walked out after yours. For interest, did they have the pro and con sitting apart or all mixed? This varies by council and number of attendees.

Well done. Your faith in the planners restored? Think how this is for the planning officers. They have this all the time and have to withstand abuse and noise from all sides, and usually someone is unhappy. You get the choice of 2 or more councillors every 4 years, each selected by a committee of hard-line activists for agreeing to what they want. Then we get to choose one. We don't get to say they are all useless, unless there is a chance of an independent. Then they don't get much training, and can refuse to take it. I have been at a meeting where the planner repeatedly had to point out that they were only agreeing detail and that outline permission was already awarded, yet one councillor kept saying the should be no building. Officer and Chairman prevailed, eventually. And at one of mine, the Officer kept pointing out that the town needed this proposal for the Plan, and there was no other option. When the vote came, they somehow managed to 'not count' when the vote was going the 'wrong' way. pointed out a few more key facts. Approved on third attempt by one. So you did well. Do you think that your attendance and statements were crucial?

Agreed, that looks very wrong. to cut out so much of the beam rather than just the top flange where they clash, and to have such a small cleat connection at the bottom, Also the connection being at the bottom puts more twist into the big beam than is necessary. The steels do not look 'under-designed' so it might be ok but needs checking immediately, before they build it out of sight.

Thanks Gus. The fact that this document was revised in 2010 to state that the BS guidance was withdrawn, and Eurocodes now prevail is, to me, the fundamental part. If it was not to be used it would not have been published, but withdrawn. When Eurocodes were introduced my main interest was in steel. The Eurocodes were much more up to speed on local wind effects, use of tapered frames, flange bracing and many other issues. I had many a building inspector / checking engineer/ client's Engineer saying that they would rather we used BS as it was easier for them, something they had been working with for years, and provided the comfort, to them, of using a lot more steel. BUT in all this we still had to use British wind and snow codes, and most countries did the same. ie the Eurocodes prevail but many countries added their own rules. I won't quote the differences I learned about, but there were many, based on local circumstances or simply feet dragging. My main concern re SBSG was that it had been quietly withdrawn, and the government had forgotten to take it off their website. As it happens, our provided design isn't too bad on the timber construction, but we have big arguments re the foundations and slab, where they add £15k or more to our cost. It is under discussion, but I don't think the Engineer has ever been questioned before.

The usual problem is the bonding (lack of) to the substrate. A system that requires the mechanical fixing of a netting to the wall can overcome this. I have certainly used this on block and on cement board and found no problems.

I am late in seeing this. Gus is absolutely right. Normal plastisol suffers from cut edge peel, so need an application of a special varnish to the ends. They make plastisol in double thickness (still in micron territory) that is supposed to resist this, and this grade is essential within a few miles of the coast. There are many other coatings available, with some very poor and intended for short-term protection (the agriculture market) and some good, but much thinner than plastisol. Any coating works until it is damaged or worn off, as does the galvanising underneath it. Plastisol is also more forgiving to minor abrasions during construction. Guarantees on the life of cladding are an indication only, as there are always weasel word exclusions so that nobody is liable. the biggest issue is usually when the sheets are cut on site. They must be cut using shears or a nibbler as this closes the galvanising over the edge. Absolutely they must not use grinders as this not only rips the edge apart but heats the sheet. Seagulls are an issue too, and no coating stands up to their excrement, or their pecking at rubber fillers. On the positive side: if your area experiences heavy rain on occasions, this cleans off salts etc. Have a look at metal roofs (and walls) around you. It makes trips to industrial estates more interesting.

Not really. They are very precise in following the rules, but sometimes this is down to interpretation. A planning consultant would not charge much for a quick overview, or quite a lot for certainty. You can do your own research by 1. looking at the planning history online for 'your' property, on the LA website. Has there been a rejected application for example? Or has it already been extended and used its allocation? 2. ditto for neighbouring and very similar properties which have been extended.....all the arguments for and against will be made. 3. reading the council's development plan for the area. 4. ask for a meeting with the planners. They will charge about £200. Probably you are right but it is worth checking.

My mistake: this is for birch or some-such pretty beam. I had not noticed that there is a tick-box for other timbers, and spruce is very much cheaper. I'm sure the joiner will know but for my interest, does the scarfe joint have to be central above the support post/wall ?

Please keep us informed, and good luck.

Because you have the best practical advice to hand at all times, and nothing goes wrong.

On my private builds? There will always be unknowns in a refurb, so nothing to make me hurt. On commercial projects: 1. Doing a trial hole which showed topsoil, a little fill, then solid clay and then designing 300m2 of building with conventional footings. While digging the footings the bucket went through into peat. The clay was a compacted capping. Had to very quickly redesign with piles and beams at our own expense. Lost 2 weeks and a few £k and could have been so much worse. 2. Is it a mistake if you spot it first and correct it? Woke up one morning long ago, knowing my setting out of the day before was wrong. Asked the boss for the landrover and chainboy, before coffee and prepping for the day. Went to the spot and adjusted the trunk road alignment to point at where the bridge would be. Back to the site office, Boss said 'everything ok? and never asked me what it was about ....sound man. Not that I would have minded saying, but he didn't want to know. Moral...dreams can be very constructive. 3. Another issue setting out a big culvert, using a theodolite, over an obstruction. I used a spirit level as a line, but used the wrong side of it. Told the GF that the foundations were in wrong. How did it happen? Fair enough! Any easy way to rebuild it?...yes I gave him a method, No more said by him or the big boss, or anyone as I think no-one was told. That has lived with me as how problems are handled....everyone makes mistakes, better to know about it and sort it, and no point scoring or shouting.

That was probably happening at the time anyway, and the money would not have reached you. You supervised everything else and it was good? Well done.