Wall between House and Integral Garage

[fattynomates]

If they are only carrying floor load then you won't need a beam. You are correct that 50x150 joists will span 3.3m with no additional support. Have a conversation with the SE but you shouldn't need the beam.

Thanks , what I thought as well , I’m thinking of getting someone from building control out before getting the SE out again, they have signed off similar from talking to neighbours so should be something on record.
I can then just go back to the SE and request a refund or take them to the ombudsman

 

[George_engineer]

Thanks , what I thought as well , I’m thinking of getting someone from building control out before getting the SE out again, they have signed off similar from talking to neighbours so should be something on record.
I can then just go back to the SE and request a refund or take them to the ombudsman

How much did you pay?

 

[fattynomates]

How much did you pay?

£350 per calculation and £120 for initial visit

 

[George_engineer]

Right, I think I understand...

I would argue it is a load bearing wall. But how it was built, the ceiling joists of the garage/ bedroom 4 floor joists (coloured in green) run into the side of the floor joists (pink) in bedroom 4 above the cloakroom:

The 3mm gap is from when the timber has shrunk post construction.

If the wall below is removed without a beam, the pink floor joist probably would work in practice... this is because in real life, loadings don't get close to their design limit. But I would say that this floor joist (pink one) probably wouldn't be designed for that load.

As supplementary evidence, the designer did draw a proper foundation for that wall so they intended it to take load. There's also the buttress effect on the outside wall that shouldn't be ignored.

You can ask for money back but the standard for professional advice is 'reasonable skill and care' and from what you've posted here I think I'd have come to a similar conclusion as your SE.

 

[fattynomates]

Right, I think I understand...

I would argue it is a load bearing wall. But how it was built, the ceiling joists of the garage/ bedroom 4 floor joists (coloured in green) run into the side of the floor joists (pink) in bedroom 4 above the cloakroom:
View attachment 295742

The 3mm gap is from when the timber has shrunk post construction.

If the wall below is removed without a beam, the pink floor joist probably would work in practice... this is because in real life, loadings don't get close to their design limit. But I would say that this floor joist (pink one) probably wouldn't be designed for that load.

As supplementary evidence, the designer did draw a proper foundation for that wall so they intended it to take load. There's also the buttress effect on the outside wall that shouldn't be ignored.

You can ask for money back but the standard for professional advice is 'reasonable skill and care' and from what you've posted here I think I'd have come to a similar conclusion as your SE.

Thanks for the reply, just to add as well im not removing the full wall, just the section between the garage and kitchen, and there is also a beam down the centre of the garage running front to back that is also supporting the floor above.
I have building control coming tomorrow I'm hoping the houses that have had the same done before are on the record as not having a RSJ so will be the same, If i do need to have an RSJ would another option be to replace the Beam you coloured Pink with something that is able to support the additional load?

 

[Loofah]

What did BC say?

 

[fattynomates]

What did BC say?

Said you should be able to just double up the beams to provide extra support if needed, won’t be sure until wall is down so best thing is to support it then get them Round when all is exposed

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Looking at the layout and secion I don't see how it can not be loadbearing, unless you BCO puts it in writing then:

a: they're unqualified to say what is and isn't structural (why is he asking to double up the beams if some extra support is needed? Won't be sure until the beams down - what sort of answer is that?)
b: they may turn up on site to inspect it and ask for some calcs to back up what you've done anyway
c: you may get a different BCO tuning up on site who disagrees and dismisses anything your BCO said today

 

[George_engineer]

I think doubling up the joist is a reasonable option but I'd want it checked in a calculation. The doubling up should also be specified as you need it to act as one member. That is, nail size & spacing, or bolt + tooth plate size & spacing.

I did mention it previously but the outside wall should be checked if the buttress wall is removed.

Part A rules have limits on the lengths of walls and openings (max 3m). Based on the original floor plan, by entirely removing the internal wall, the overall length would be 9.675m with openings totalling 4.31m - potentially more with a new bi-fold. This would fall outside of Part A rules and need an engineered design - likely a wind post where the removed wall was, or to the side of the bi-fold if it's more convenient.