Members' experiences of Timber frame and slab suppliers

[IanR]

21 minutes ago, TerryE said:

..~..
  @IanR, @NSS and @RandAbuild, I know that you are both active on the forum.  Any comments? Can any other members suggest who else might want to give input?

 

Don't forget this thread:

 

 

[TerryE]

Thanks @IanR.  That's link is an extremely useful cross-link for other readers :-)

[NSS]

On 16/02/2018 at 10:49, TerryE said:

I am really just refreshing this topic to let members other than those who have had an MBC timberframe have an opportunity to recommend / give feedback on their supplier.  The problem we have as the main contributors is having other members give constructive recommendations on other suppliers and whether they would recommend them etc.  @IanR, @NSS and @RandAbuild, I know that you are both active on the forum.  Any comments? Can any other members suggest who else might want to give input?

 

 

We have traditional foundations with a Hanson jetfloor slab. The below ground blockwork is topped with Foamglass Perinsul to mitigate cold bridginging. We used a local builder to carry out the groundwork and emphasised the need for the perimeter to be mm accurate (both dimensionally and level). UFH pipes were laid direct over the Jetfloor and a 70mm fibre reinforced structural slab poured before the TF came to site. 

 

We chose Scandia Hus to supply and erect the timber frame. From our very first contact with them we were allocated a project manager and he remained our main contact throughout. Ours is not one of their 'standards' designs, but a completely bespoke one-off to my design. They took my drawings and turned them into working ones, handling structural calcs, as design SAP, even the submission of the detailed planning application. We felt completely comfortable and involved in the process and greatly appreciated the benefit of the experience that SH and our PM brought to the project, suggesting minor tweaks that would ensure the final design/layout was the best we could achieve for our purpose.

 

Scandia Hus effectively offer a menu of options which can be added to the basic frame, including (if desired) windows, doors, UFH, MVHR, staircases, joinery items, etc. I understand they can even offer a full turnkey package for those who can afford to go that route.

 

We chose a relatively basic package of the frame (including erection) to sarked and breather membraned roof, plus supply of all the insulation (thermal and acoustic), all timber for the internal studwork (structural internal walls were erected by SH), timber for wall and ceiling battening, t&g chipboard flooring for 1st floor and all 224 sheets of plasterboard (all 15mm).

 

Our builder delivered a near perfect perimeter for the timber frame to sit on, such that no shimming of the soleplate was required (according to the SH erection crew that was pretty unusual). On the appointed day said team turned up - both of them. Yes, the SH timber frame erection teams consist of two guys (aided for 2 days by a crane and driver to lift the larger cassettes for the first floor walls). They were on site for just 14 days and the work ethic of the guys we had was exemplary. 

 

So, all fine and dandy - well not quite. One of the wall panels was made the wrong size and one had an incorrectly sized window opening, but replacements were ordered (the factory is in Sussex) and delivered to site within 48 hours so any delay was minimal. We also had a problem with floor joists not being level in one area when we came to lay the flooring boards upstairs. Turned out that they'd craned a very heavy load onto this section and some of the joist hangers had buckled under the weight but this was not visible at the time due to the temporary 'deck' of 22mm OSB that had been loose laid before the heavy load had been deposited. As soon as the issue was identified SH sent a crew to rectify. Finally, we discovered much later when battening the vaulted ceiling in the lounge that the rafters (cut to fit on site) had been set at a slightly different angle than they should have been. This would have led to a tapered line between the ceiling and the top of the (angled) windows. A call to SH and (again within a couple of days) they supplied a set of battens planed to size to add as shims to the ceiling battens so as to bring the ceiling line parallel to the window frames.

 

We're delighted with our now (nearly) finished home and are loving living in it.

 

Are Scandia Hus perfect? No, but as others have said, it's not so much whether problems occur but how they're dealt with.

Do they build the most energy efficient homes available? No, but we have no complaints and with our EPC of 96 it's hardly going to be an expensive home to run.

Would we use Scandia Hus again? Absolutely.

 

Sure there are probably cheaper TF suppliers out there, there may well even be better ones, but you pay your money and you make your choice - and we're very happy with the choices we made (which is all that matters really).

 

Edited February 20, 2018 by Nickfromwales
Assumption removed.

[vivienz]

When I was looking around at how yo get our house built, I looked at Scandia Hus and really liked what they did - I was very close to using them and it was only the lack of confidence in being able to achieve the required accuracy of foundation that stopped me. As far as I went with them, they were a very nice firm to deal with.

[NSS]

2 hours ago, vivienz said:

When I was looking around at how yo get our house built, I looked at Scandia Hus and really liked what they did - I was very close to using them and it was only the lack of confidence in being able to achieve the required accuracy of foundation that stopped me. As far as I went with them, they were a very nice firm to deal with.

Yes, nice people to deal with, but also very professional in all aspects of our dealings with them. The fact that deposits and stage payments went into escrow accounts gave both parties confidence financially, and they've been building timber frame homes here in the UK for over 40 years so they have a long track record. Those were important considerations for us.

[TerryE]

[ Edited in line with other edit above to remove dead quote. ]

 

There is a view recently implied or expressed by some members that the forum is pro-MBC, to the exclusion of other TF alternatives.  Yes, some of the active contributors including myself have been open about having  MBC timber frames in their builds and have blogged and posted about our experiences.   I just wish that members with other TFs would put their experiences and recommendations into print so that these can be mined by new members.  I started this thread to encourage other members to present such a balanced set of alternatives to new members, but I can't create this content.  

Edited February 20, 2018 by Nickfromwales

[ryder72]

Why am I getting the feeling that there is tendency to stand up and rally around MBC where anything said about them is not in the most positive light?

 

I have tried to keep the review as unbiased as I can possibly be and this isnt easy given that ultimately I bear the stress/costs cross. I still look at some of the inexplicable flaws in the finishing and cant get away from it. I still worry that there may be bodges in the building that I havent discovered and these may become an issue in the future.

 

Does that mean that other suppliers are perfect. NO. But I care only the experience I have received and not how much worse it could have been. That serves no purpose.

 

As I see it, the mark of a good company is to build a good product to the agreed spec and quality and the cost of this must be borne by their own internal quality processes. Third party supervision should be minimal. And if this is going to be required then lets just accept that with enough hands on supervision, chances are that the performance gap between most companies will get narrowed down significantly and more importantly the price/value equation shifts.

 

Whether MBC can and will learn anything is their lookout, but the purpose of my review was to highlight to any prospective buyers that not all is well with them. They certainly arent this shining beacon of quality and perfection. Their biggest weaknesses where communication and that didnt improve after an expensive debacle. And all of this points to huge systemic failings that need to be recognised.

[PeterW]

48 minutes ago, ryder72 said:

Why am I getting the feeling that there is tendency to stand up and rally around MBC where anything said about them is not in the most positive light?

 

6 hours ago, TerryE said:

There is a view recently implied or expressed by some members that the forum is pro-MBC, to the exclusion of other TF alternatives.

 

There is a perception here that everyone uses MBC and right back at the beginning it was stated we were trying to supplement this with experience from others.

 

It’s pretty well documented that they are not the cheapest, but with around 30 or so builds ongoing here it is interesting to see a wider view of who is using what. 

 

If you look geographically then the Scottish / Irish builds seem to be predominately TF, with a mix of other methods in England and Wales. 

 

Taking all of this information and trying to summarise this into objective useful and usable data for new builders is something that would be significantly beneficial but it needs the input available first. 

 

 

[dpmiller]

What might help, is a slight change in terminology. I see plenty of "MBC frame" "MBC build" and "MBC slab" but is there really anything unique about the product? Surely it's a TF or passiv slab  *by* MBC.

It's not a Hoover, it's a vacuum cleaner.

[NSS]

6 hours ago, TerryE said:

 

@NSS  Neil, yes, the recent @ryder72 topic did trigger my refreshing this topic, but the smoke screen quip implies that I have something to hide, and that's unfair. 

 

There is a view recently implied or expressed by some members that the forum is pro-MBC, to the exclusion of other TF alternatives.  Yes, some of the active contributors including myself have been open about having  MBC timber frames in their builds and have blogged and posted about our experiences.   I just wish that members with other TFs would put their experiences and recommendations into print so that these can be mined by new members.  I started this thread to encourage other members to present such a balanced set of alternatives to new members, but I can't create this content.  

Terry, there's nothing recent about it, it started on ebuild. For me though, it's not so much the continuous plugging of MBC and passive slabs at every opportunity, it's the scorn poured on anyone who dares to use anything 'inferior'. As I've said before, this forum can be a beacon for better, more energy efficient builds, but that requires that it be a broad church. You and others have obviously had a good experience with MBC, and that's great, but when a member posts such a carefully worded review as @ryder72 has done, he deserved better than to be accused of being to blame (at least in part) for poor project management.

 

If someone came on here and posted a similarly 'warts and all' (and yet remarkably balanced under the circumstances) review about A N Other supplier, would anyone have been so quick to defend the supplier and point the finger of blame at the client? I think not, so it's not healthy that one supplier, no matter how good, is 'protected' in such a way, never mind that a poster is made to feel uncomfortable about posting anything negative about that supplier when they've clearly had a bad experience.

 

Rant over.

[TerryE]

Members who have used a given company can talk in detail about that company.  What I would like to see is more members who have used other companies explain the values and advantages of the alternatives.  

 

Someone has to generate that content.  That's what this thread is about.

[Barney12]

9 minutes ago, TerryE said:

Members who have used a given company can talk in detail about that company.  What I would like to see is more members who have used other companies explain the values and advantages of the alternatives.  

 

Someone has to generate that content.  That's what this thread is about.

 

Sorry, I’ve just got to reply to this:

 

The problem is that’s not what happened. The initial respondents to @ryder72 excellent review sought to question his experience, management and interpretation of events . I accept that might have not been what was intended but it is certainly how it read. It is further unfortunate that all those people are I believe founders or administrators of this forum. 

 

You are are quite right that what should have happened was a posting of their own experiences positive or negative. 

 

 

Edited February 17, 2018 by Barney12
Typo

[PeterW]

3 minutes ago, Barney12 said:

It is further unfortunate that all those people are I believe founders or administrators of this forum. 

 

@Barney12 please be careful with that ... of the three admins, one has MBC, one has Durisol, and one has traditional brick and block. 

 

Of the founding members, of the 14 there are 3 MBC builds out of 6 Timber Frame, the remainder are a real mix of method and provider. 

 

Its  not exactly an MBC Church..!! 

 

My initial questions were pretty simple as I was trying to get a view on what had been contracted for - I’ve seen far too many instances on here and ebuild where we all jump to a conclusion and find it’s not based on the correct basis. I was very interested for example to find in probably @ryder72 third or fourth clarification that it was a brand new roof system that they had no experience of so I support his view entirely that it needed a lot more supervision from the contractor at that point than it had ..! 

 

I was taught one thing early on - learning from your mistakes is good, but learning from others mistakes is better...! This is what this thread is about ..!! Reviews of the good, the bad and what could be better of any of the TF providers. 

[ProDave]

I will add my experience for a complete contrast.

 

I could not find a TF company that offered the insulation level we wanted, and one even refused to talk to us when I suggested I may take a standard TF design and add extra insulation to it  also for various reasons we were using strip foundations and a suspended timber floor downstairs.

 

So we ended up getting the frame detailed by a local arhitectural technician and then built by a local builder who have done many low energy houses. We contracted that same builder to lay the foundations then build and erect the frame, so any issues of the frame not fitting the foundations were theirs and theirs alone.

 

As it happens I dug the trenches. The first thing the builders did was set up the profiles and the guy doing it was surprised to find I had actually dug the trenches in the right place.  They were very particular to get the walls mm perfect, straight, level and square.  But even so, the frame team did not build the frame to the drawings, instead they came and measured the footings as built and built to match that.

 

The frame was built by hand off site in their workshop and brought to site and erected as complete panels as any other TF.  The roof was different, a vaulted roof cut on site supported by big ridge beams.

 

We had an open ended contract with the builders, basically "you carry on until I tell you to stop"  That was because of limited finances.  We actually got further than I thought we would and when I told them to stop they were happy to do so and we parted amicably. (I still see one of them regularly) Since then I have been doing all the work myself.

 

There was one issue (similar to one noted above) that the rafters that made up the cut roof were not quite all straight. By then the roof was tiled so way to late to alter anything so I corrected it by packing the battens that make up the roof service void, and the finished, plastered ceiling is now perfect.

 

I should add we had a very good working relationship with the builder. They were always happy to discuss details, in particular air tightness detail as the frame went up, and offer suggestions. They were also happy to make minor amendments, like the position of a couple of doors was altered very slightly,. and ensuring the stair opening size matched the stair design we were using (slightly different to shown on the plans)

[RandAbuild]

We also used the Hanson Jetfloor slab with Perinsul to prevent cold bridging. The foundations and slab were set out by the local Director of a building firm who had previously used our timber frame. We employed him as a technical project manager until we were out of the ground and his advice at this stage was invaluable. The structural concrete screed was 70mm thick and was laid using a very wet mix so it found its own level. This worked out very well and was fine for laying engineered wood floors and porcelain tiles; we only had a small amount of cracking.

 

UFH pipes were laid direct over a dpc on top of the final layer of insulation (the radon barrier was below the insulation). This was installed by our plumber without any problems.

We went to 11 timber frame firms for prices, including 2 SIP suppliers. We were pleased to get back 9 quotations, varying from around 40k to 105k. MBC were towards the top of this range

 

However, although these were based on drawings and a brief specification, firms quoted on the basis of their ‘standard’ product – some were fully pre-insulated (which was our preference, to ensure better fit of the PIR) while others supplied the insulation which we would have had to arrange on site. Some included (double glazed – we wanted triple) Velux windows, and others included UPVC windows (which we did not want). Analysing these apples & pears was difficult but we managed to narrow it down to 2 firms with broadly the same spec.

 

Eventually we went with Turner Timber Frame, now Turner Timber  http://turnertimber.co.uk/  who are based in Hull . Their highest level spec was nothing fancy but better than building regs:

• 140mm Timber Frame with 10mm OSB sheathing
• Protect TF200 Thermo Insulating Breather Membrane
• 120mm Celotex between studs
• 25mm service cavity
• 15mm Plasterboard & skim (we subsequently added 32mm insulated plasterboard to ceilings)
• Easyjoists by Wolf Systems
• Eggar Protect 22mm first floor boards, glued to Easyjoists

We supplied them with CAD drawings of the architect’s planning drawings. They arranged a team of erectors who were familiar with their system – so TTF would be singularly responsible for erecting the frame and we wouldn’t have to pay VAT. We arranged the crane hire.

 

Would we recommend them? Without question, yes. The frame was pretty over-engineered, especially the roof. It fitted together very well and was up in about 9 days. They supplied us with far more timber (25x50 battens, 222x47 timbers for an extended gable end over a balcony, to be erected after the brickwork) than we needed. This was very useful throughout the build!

 

Their communication prior to delivery was always very good. They understood what self builders needed (unlike some other firms we spoke to), answered questions quickly and were always available on the phone. Answers to technical queries gave us confidence they had all the right experience and expertise. The only issue we had was they delayed the planned delivery by 3 weeks because their fitting teams were committed elsewhere. This was very frustrating at the time but on balance wasn't too bad; at least they kept us informed.

 

We were however let down by the erecting firm. They knew their stuff and began well, but became more sloppy as things went on (first floor studwork out of plumb, metal fixings not fully nailed, some poor spacing of rafters). We ended up with a very solid build, but only after I had spent 2 or 3 days with a hammer and twisty nails finishing it off. Our carpenter also had to adjust some of the first floor studwork around the bathroom and one bedroom.

 

We were also very lucky with the weather. The crane hire day for the roof was a glorious sunny day in September 2016, and our biggest heart-in-the-mouth moment came when a large section of the roof on one wing (weighing in at 850kg and 11m long) was swinging about 15m in the air against a clear blue sky. Fortunately it landed perfectly before being fixed into place.

 

 

[RandAbuild]

[Jeremy Harris]

1 hour ago, Barney12 said:

 

Sorry, I’ve just got to reply to this:

 

The problem is that’s not what happened. The initial respondents to @ryder72 excellent review sought to question his experience, management and interpretation of events . I accept that might have not been what was intended but it is certainly how it read. It is further unfortunate that all those people are I believe founders or administrators of this forum. 

 

You are are quite right that what should have happened was a posting of their own experiences positive or negative. 

 

 

 

There are a lot of accidents that led to the formation of this forum.  The initial way 16 people managed to find each other after Ebuild shut down (bear in mind that we didn't have each other's email addresses - there was a sort of "chain email" that resulted in us getting together, by chance), was one such highly improbable accident, the fact that we all managed to, rather chaotically at times, create this forum is very largely accidental - who could have guessed that out of 16 random people several had very good IT skills, and knew how to set up a forum like this?  The fact that 16 people actually agreed on a way forward was both accidental and, in my view, slightly miraculous.  Clearly some of the 16 knew of each other, so the fact that 3 of them happened to have used the same frame supplier was perhaps less of a coincidence, but it was just a part of the near-random sequence of events that led to the group forming.

 

From the very beginning, of the many, many discussions and lengthy debates we had when trying to decide how to set this forum up, one of the longest was about commercial stuff.  Should we operate the forum as a company?  Should we fund it by advertisements? Should a forum company be a not-for-profit? Should we operate this forum as a members association?  Was it actually possible to run a forum as a members association (most are run by companies, it seems)?  What were the legal implications of these, and other, possible operating models?

 

There was a consensus view that we should run this forum as a not-for-profit association of members, with no advertising or commercial promotion, and I will freely admit that I was, and I remain, a strong advocate for this approach.   I am vehemently opposed to the idea that we should be commercial in any way, or be seen to favour any one commercial entity over any other.  I've stressed many, many times that I do not have any connection, financial or otherwise, with any building company, and never have had, despite what some may believe.  I've only ever been a customer, never an agent, sales rep, or whatever.  Any company that has asked me if they can let prospective customers contact me has had the same answer; "Yes, provided that I can tell them both the good, and not so good, aspects of our experience" .

 

I've adhered rigidly to that rule, both here and when chatting to people I've met outside of this forum, and I have no intention of changing my view on the wisdom of taking this position

 

As Terry has very rightly implied, this forum is only useful if it contains content that helps people, and if those people, in turn, add content that adds more value to the self-build community.  Things change and evolve over time, both with products and services that are available, and with the evolution of some of the businesses that supply those products and services.  Unless we try to encourage discussion on a broad range of products and services, taking great care to be absolutely factual and accurate when doing so, then we risk the forum developing "tunnel vision".

[Barney12]

Thanks for the replies guys and the PM from one administrator. All read and taken on board but I stand by my comments. Please refer back to the third sentence of my post.

 

As a great friend of mine once said “opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one”  

(yes that’s an attempt at injecting some humour) 

 

This is a great open, uncommercial forum, long may it continue. 

 

[Gone West]

Review of our foundations and TF PM experience.

Our project managing experience entering our first self build can be best described as minimal. We had totally renovated a Victorian cottage before starting the self build. The builders we used for that project were a father and son team who were members of the Guild of Master Craftsmen and required no supervision. Their work was exemplary and I acted as a labourer so I was naïve to the ‘real world’ of building.

For our new build we used the Isoquick insulated slab system. I found this to be an excellent system but as with all systems it is how it’s installed that makes the difference. We used the, at the time, only UK installer. As it was the first Isoquick system installed in the UK Isoquick sent over a technician from Germany to oversee the insulation installation. That went well and the rest of the installation was done by UK workers who fitted the steel reinforcing and laid the concrete. This is where problems started and we saw poor working practices. Fortunately we were videoing the whole process and we used that as evidence of what we saw. We showed the video to the MD of the company and eventually this resulted in the whole slab being cut up with a diamond road cutter and a new system laid. This is detailed more in my blog. The MD of the company accepted their errors and the work was redone at no cost to us.

The timber frame was supplied by a local company that has since ceased trading. The design of the frame is novel in being a portal timber I-beam frame which reduces thermal bridging. The design and structural work of the frame was carried out without problems with a lot of input from us including the slab design. The slab was reasonably flat and the sole plate fitted without problems. There were two knowledgeable TF workers who worked well setting out the frame. Unfortunately the leader of the two fell off a roof and broke his heels, not on our site though. After that things started to go downhill. I noticed poor practices in the racking of the frame which I reported to the MD of the company who sent someone out to ensure the badly fitted racking was removed and new fitted. I noticed the size of the stairwell was incorrect which meant the metal web joists had to be altered. The tall feature window opening in the hall was positioned wrongly which meant removing the racking and fitting new I-beam noggins. The job was taking them longer than they had anticipated so at the end we agreed that I would finish off in return for a reduction in the final bill. All the problems that I mentioned to them were sorted out without issue. I did discover faults after the job was finished such as a large dip in the whole length of the single storey roof and a bow in the side of one of the walls. I think that just being there and watching what was going on cut down on any corner cutting.

I think we have been lucky compared to @lizzie and monitoring practices on site is critical. This is unfortunate, but seem to be the norm in the building world these days.

[Moira Niedzwiecka]

Due to a change in our personal circumstances our build has been a bit chaotic.

We have renovated several period properties over the years, but, this in no way prepared us for a complete new build.

However, we were delighted & excited that an opportunity arose.

We were intending to be true self builders & take on a lot of the work ourselves.

We had to go down the route of a very sustainable build to outweigh the planning restriction that we were in an unsustainable location.

We worked with an architect who was experienced in this area & chose a build method that would allow us to take on a lot of the work ourselves.

Henry retired, closed his business & sold the stock, I was going to give up work for a year or so & it was going to be a big lifetime adventure.

Unfortunately, just as we finished the ground works & foundations Henry became ill & we had to halt our build until we knew the outcome.

It became clear that we would not be able to proceed as planned, but we were past the point of no return.

We decided that the most expedient way to proceed would be to have the structure of the house built in a factory & erected on site.

Speed was also important as Henry's prognosis was life shortening and he very much wanted to see the house go up.

We contacted several timber frame companies.

We decided to go with PYC construction from Wales.

Sam & Ben visited us almost straight away as coincidently they were also doing a build not far from us in Leicestershire.

They spent a lot of time assessing how they could adapt the system to our already existing foundations, trench fill with beam & block.

We will still have the originally proposed 20mm of celotex with a 6cm flo screed.

This has worked well & luckily our foundations were accurate to within the 5mm tolerance necessary all round & just needed some adaptations.

We have a closed panel, I joist timber frame  with 300mm of cellulose insulation & metal webjoist with caberbeck intermediate floor.

It took 4 days to erect the main structure & several more visits for the internal stud walls & additional battening for service channels.

The lads from PYC worked so hard with long days on site. As they were a long way from home they stayed in the local pub during the construction.

They were always on site by 7.30am & worked until at least 6pm everyday. I have only good things to say about them.

PYC also installed the velux windows & the vertical battens on the roof & the timber overhangs to front & rear ready to be slated.

It is all perfect? No it is not.

The soleplate was installed in the wrong place & had to be altered as it would have caused a problem with our stonework.

This happened while I was at work & I noticed the next day. PYC corrected it . However, had I not noticed it could have been a disaster.

The window openings were not correct for the glazing we had specified & had to be adapted.

Some of the panels are out as has been pointed out to us by the chap doing our cedar cladding where he has had to pack out some of the battens.

It is 20mm out of level over a 9m run on the front elevation as noticed by our stonemasons. This is the panels, not the foundations.

Some of the panels do not meet exactly at the apex & daylight was showing.

This has been rectified, made watertight & airtight & an additional false ceiling of OSB has been installed with an additional 300mm of cellulose as a belt & braces job.

Again PYC corrected this but, again I noticed this & worked with PYC to find a solution.

The left hand side roof panel on the dormer is not sitting properly along its whole length on the wall panel.

This will have to be sorted out with battening before we can plasterboard.

There are some other small.gaps where the closed panels do not meet, I have stuffed these with rockwool & made the airtight with tape.

These were at the angled junctions where the dormer walls meet the slope of the main roof & the first floor. Difficult to get exact.

Before boarding out I am going to install some additional internal structural bracing straps where the panels meet so I am absolutely sure there will not be any movement. I am probably just being over cautious but it is a simple & inexpensive job to do at this stage to be absolutely sure.

I cannot praise Sam the architectural technician at PYC highly enough. He was always responsive to any issues and PYC addressed any problems quickly & free of charge.

On the whole we are happy with PYC & would recommend them with the caveat that, as with any contractor, checking as the construction goes along is vital.

 

[Nickfromwales]

For the benefit of future readers who may find some of the more recent posts slightly confusing, regards to references made to alternate review content, please find the following for cross-reference. 

 

Note to all :

Could we politely request that no further content relative to the linked review be posted here. Please toggle back to that thread for any such content / exchanges accordingly. 

Mods. 

[Jamie998]

Where has the original thread containing @ryder72s review of MBC gone to? Unless I am blind, I can't seem to find it.  Ta.

[dpmiller]

I just see this:

 

" Sorry, we can't show this content because you do not have permission to see it. "

[IanR]

42 minutes ago, Jamie998 said:

Where has the original thread containing @ryder72s review of MBC gone to? Unless I am blind, I can't seem to find it.  Ta.

 

Censored?

 

I can't locate it either.

[Stones]

 

The topic is currently hidden on the basis that it potentially breaches 6.5 and 6.7 of the BuildHub Terms and Conditions.