Search results

And how would he be found, exactly? Is he even in Cardiff (surely not, who'd admit to living in Trogland anyhow)? :roll:

Are you saying that, by identifying the tying-in, there is no need to pick up the bottom? If so, you can't rely on that: the flue is unlined and chemical action of the smoke on the lime mortar will have knocked its stickability into a cocked hat - especially to the whiffs.

Woah! That trimming (not trimmer Nose :wink:) joist looks like it's actually been cut close to the bearing? Whatever the reason, it's not there to provide direct support to the stack following removal of the masonry at ground floor level: it just supports the trimmer and trimmed joists...

Yep, slower than usual. Not sure if that was the intention, mind :wink: :lol:

Note that Mik said officially... Don't tell anyone and they won't come looking.

Depends on your ground conditions. If you had 3m of loose organic fill, 1.2m deep wouldn't perform too well.... Minima: 600 sands, 900 low shrinkage clays 1000 medium/high shrinkage clays.

NASC TG20:08 should address a lot of your concerns then.

Hi tbrain: anything spanning at foundation level will require a pukka design for the LA. Walls do not have to be built in the centre of footings; again a simple calculation will demonstrate that, for trenchfill, a wall sat on the edge of a 450 footing will be fine.

Why is that so, though? If you didn't serve someone who was ****ed that would be ok. So what's the difference? Your shop, your taxi, your rules.

The courts will usually expect both parties to try mediation before a case returns to SCC for judgement. You can't be forced to; but it can have an impact on the outcome if you don't.

Unfortunately they are out there and, if you're not going to get turned over, you have to work to the lowest common denominator and have signed paperwork. Sadly, these days, it's the only way. Counterclaim is a classic tactic, aimed at getting you to drop the case. SCC is overrun these...

No British soldier from the WW1 trenches is now alive. Very poignant. RIP Harry.

Oh he's got commonsense all right: the sense to play the bloody race card in trying to extract some pecuniary advantage for himself. :roll:

If his offer was in writing and she accepted that quote then that's the contract consideration. If he did that work then he's entitled to payment per the agreed sum. If he did extras and didn't agree on price before doing, then that's up for valuation if they can't agree. Why has the muppet...

Hmmm. Old building, so solid walls and meterbox is thus recess rather than hole - still can't see that it would have had anything other than *possibly* a minor contributory effect on the situation

I find a meter box being a contributory factor to a collapse somewhat difficult to believe. I can, however, believe that a BCO would have kittens about the distance from a return, when there is no need to.

Meester Woody, I think you meant the Act does not....

Clay and peat are totally different materials. Stick a pic up, should be able to see what you've been digging out.

Peat is a no-no for bearing onto.

Punch the fu*ker Tim. :lol: