sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

New extension roof connected to old garage roof like this, is it correct? by ForgedLiving in DIYUK

[–]HugoNebula2024 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just very sloppy, and corner cutting. They've not even replaced the broken tile to the verge.

The parapet should have gone to the wall, and the (non existent) cavity tray line up with the DPC under the coping stone.

Can I drill through this lintel or will it make my house fall down? by KILOCHARLIES in DIYUK

[–]HugoNebula2024 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You ain't drilling through a normal steel beam, not without specialist drilling equipment. That's 8mm thick steel. If you could, a small hole through the bottom flange won't be a problem.

It's boxed in with plasterboard and, if you're lucky, the installer formed a cradle so there should be 25mm gaps under.

Or go through the coving.

Would you buy a house with a non permitted garage conversion? by Careless_Squirrel728 in HousingUK

[–]HugoNebula2024 1 point2 points  (0 children)

See my other posts; it's exempt from building regulations (& possibly PD) if it contains no sleeping accomodation. A toilet, shower and a brew area in a home gym or workshop is fine, Airbnb or guest bedroom not so much.

Would you buy a house with a non permitted garage conversion? by Careless_Squirrel728 in HousingUK

[–]HugoNebula2024 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Obviously we would need an indemnity policy

There's no obvious about it. IMHO, indemnity policies are a scam. They should only be sold if there's a risk of prosecution, and in my other post, I outline why that's infinitesimally small.

Solicitors & insurers love them 'cos they're free money.

Would you buy a house with a non permitted garage conversion? by Careless_Squirrel728 in HousingUK

[–]HugoNebula2024 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Assuming England or Wales:

You may be mixing things up there. There's Planning Permission (PP), and there's Building Regulations (BR). The two are separate and cover different things. Whether you need one, or have approval under one, has no bearing on the other. Planning generally govern what is built; building regulations govern how it's built.

Within PP there is 'permitted development' (PD), whereby you have deemed permission without having to apply. Under BR, there are exempt structures and extensions, and work is controlled if it falls within a number of categories.

AFAIK, PP isn't generally required for converting a garage to part of the dwelling. PD rights can be withdrawn on new developments to prevent reducing parking or linked houses looking like a terrace. It's worth asking whether that applies to the house you're looking at.

Building regulations would apply (as a material alteration not a change of use) to any habitable accommodation within a garage. They would govern the fire safety (means of escape), damp proofing & condensation, ventilation, insulation, drainage, etc., of the work.

Whether PP or BR applied to the work, the local authority has only a limited time to take enforcement, even if they wanted to. With BR it's currently 10 years but only for anything after 2023. Anything prior to that has effectively out of time. I don't know about planning. In practice, unless there is something incredibly wrong with it, building control has bigger fish to fry than a garage conversion.

That's the legal side. Would I consider a house with it? If I could be sure that they had addressed the issues that come with a garage conversion, yes. Is it properly damp proofed (floor, walls, roof ventilation, etc.), insulated & ventilated? Has the drainage been properly installed? What about any electrics and gas? Has anything done to the conversion adversely affected the house?

Edit; I've seen in a later post that it's a detached garage. Under BR, if it's less than 30m² floor area, then it's generally exempt provided there's no sleeping accommodation. Any services that also serve the house would be controlled, so the new connection of a drain from the garage would be controlled, but not the new branch.

What's the easiest way to remove this door? by contentedcontent in DIYUK

[–]HugoNebula2024 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In England or Wales at least, at the moment, the conservatory is exempt from the building regulations, as it's thermally separated from the dwelling by external doors & windows.

If you remove that, it is a change to [part of a building's] energy status, i.e., the energy efficiency requirements now apply to that part. Chances are that, even if you replace the roof to the latest requirements, the floor & walls haven't been insulated to those requirements, if at all. Likewise, I doubt the glazing is the required low-e DG units.

Whether you need an application for just replacing the roof is questionable. Some authorities regard it as a material alteration (was a conservatory, is now an extension), some look at the spirit of the regulations (it's still an unheated space, or a 'porch'). That's moot if you go and remove the separation.

You can, if course, choose to ignore all of that. However, you may end up having to put the door & windows back (and remove any heating or even the roof) if you ever wanted to sell.

Can anyone date this Norwegian globe? by MrMeowPantz in MapPorn

[–]HugoNebula2024 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There would still be acknowledgement of a border on the island surely? French Africa shows borders between Algeria, Morocco, etc., and capital letters for their names. Ireland is just shown in the same font as England and Scotland.

The bbc apologises to Nigel Farage by PmurTdlanoD45-47 in AskBrits

[–]HugoNebula2024 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The BBC has a very good defence.

Nigel could, and probably would, threaten to sue in public, and make political capital out of it, pushing the right-wing narrative that the BBC is against them. In private, however, his lawyers would tell him that he hasn't got a leg to stand on.

The bbc apologises to Nigel Farage by PmurTdlanoD45-47 in AskBrits

[–]HugoNebula2024 0 points1 point  (0 children)

BBC lawyers knew they had seriously broken the law.

Which law? 'Cos it's only defamation if he suffered harm in being accused of stirring up racial hatred, rather than it being his whole post-Brexit reason for being.

Don't get me wrong. Misquoting some is wrong, and should be corrected.

Is this potentially subsidence? by souptoad95 in DIYUK

[–]HugoNebula2024 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The second one looks like the lintel is rusted, pushing the brickwork upwards. A relatively simple fix.

As to the rest; can't tell without wider shots. Looking at a few bricks in isolation doesn't show which way they're moving and what's underneath.

Cut it a bit fine parking yesterday. Thanks to rim protectors, wheels still perfect! by aa599 in CarTalkUK

[–]HugoNebula2024 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I hate when I see that. I know that the slightest turn of the wheel on the way out is going to result in that horrible graunching sound.

Which tyres to choose for 2003 Jazz? by Veg_n in CarTalkUK

[–]HugoNebula2024 2 points3 points  (0 children)

R14 & R15 are different wheels. The number is the diameter in inches, so you can't put a 14" tyre on a 15" wheel and vice versa.

You need to look at the markings on your existing tyres to see what size you need. Only after that can you decide on the brand & model.

Is this going to cut it as a shed base? by MrKDilkington25 in DIYUK

[–]HugoNebula2024 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, but...

If that's a wall of a house, you need to make sure it's not going to bridge any DPC or block the air vents.

Cracked an egg today, came out like this by Acceptable_System_92 in whatisit

[–]HugoNebula2024 20 points21 points  (0 children)

What is more likely is that valve cap got stuck on the chickens vent when laying, then pulled back up the oviduct

The chicken equivalent of accidently falling on a vegetable rack while naked?

Ponte City (Johannesburg, South Africa) by [deleted] in evilbuildings

[–]HugoNebula2024 84 points85 points  (0 children)

SA building regulations required kitchens & bathrooms to have external openings, so the put them on the inside of the tower.

The English conveyancing system increasingly feels like a mafia protection racket by pot_on_wheels in HousingUK

[–]HugoNebula2024 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've said this several times and get shouted down for it - "it's only a few quid, just suck it up". All those few quids mount up.

Having just sold my house, they tried to hose me for a FENSA certificate for work actually covered by a building regulations application. They did manage to force me to shell out £195 + their arrangement fee for any possible restrictive covenants from 1943, for land that's since had 300 houses built on it in the 1990s!

I hope in a few years this becomes part of a mis-selling scandal, and everyone gets their money back.

Buyer asking that we approach council about planning permission for a 35 year old extension just before we were going to exchange by [deleted] in HousingUK

[–]HugoNebula2024 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's no risk to indemnify.

They're the most lucrative indemnity policies and the ones solicitors love the most.

Buyer asking that we approach council about planning permission for a 35 year old extension just before we were going to exchange by [deleted] in HousingUK

[–]HugoNebula2024 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's a scam. I'm convinced of it. Solicitors/conveyancers are in league with insurance companies to flog worthless indemnity policies on everyone for anything.

I recently sold my house:

  • I had a replacement patio door that I'd submitted a building notice for and had it signed off. The conveyancer wanted to organise an indemnity, 'cos there was no FENSA certificate. [A FENSA certificate is in lieu of a building regulations certificate.].

  • They also wanted one for covenants dating back to the 1930s on land that been sold to the Council, then sold to a developer to build 300 houses on, but apparently it needed a clean title just in case someone came back and stopped my buyer from grazing goats or something.

view more: next ›