and we think our housing stock is bad

[Jim GM4DHJ ...]

[JNugent]

Parliament (which must be the body to which you meant to refer) has been doing that for a century and a half at least.

The worst of the houses we lived in when I was a boy was in a location known as the "by-law estate", which mean that Parliament had passed an Act empowering the local authority to specify certain housing standards, back in the mid 1800s. Maybe earlier.

You didn't even know about that mid-C19 legislation, did you?

OTOH, we once lived in an older (Georgian) house with three floors and a cellar, two bathrooms, a proper hot water system, a well-equipped kitchen (by the standards of the 1950s, let alone the early 1800s) and gardens back and front.

It was built - and had stood - since the days before any building regulations.

I know which house I remember more fondly.

[Dave Plowman (News]

Generally speaking, if parliament doesn't do the government's bidding, we end up with a general election. But carry on with your usual red herrings. Tories are getting plenty practice at that.

So I take it you think building standards in the UK just fine then?

[The Natural Philosopher]

A person knowledgeable in such matters remarked to me that the avreaqge life of a house was around 100-150 years. Beyond that they were usually demolished as not being worth repairing. Older stiok that was worth repairing is still around today.

Most victorian terraces would be better off flattened, frankly.

[Steve Walker]

Building standards for new homes are somewhat lower than they should be, but can be too high for other things.

I was talking to my parents the other day and their house has solid brick walls. It would be highly beneficial for them to add internal insulation, but as soon as you start to, you have to bring things up to modern standards - which would involve adding insulation that made rooms (particularly the hall, boxroom, kitchen and bathroom smaller by enough to make things less than ideal.

Ignoring the regulations and just adding what can easily be accomodated would make a huge difference, but not be acceptable.

[Andrew]

Yes. But they are not always being enforced because developers are not obliged to use LA building control. They can use private building control companies like NHBC who are more easily 'distracted' from deviations from approved documents

[Andrew]

So do it the acceptable way and ignore the regulations. There is no way that the LA BCO will get to know and when Part L came out a conference of LA BCO's came to the conclusion that non-compliant work to individual properties by their owner could never be policed.

[JNugent]

You say that "the government" should set building standards and when I point out that it's actually been *happening* for over 150 years (which you didn't even *know*), that's a "red herring"?

Come off it - and stop trolling.

I am not in the building trade.

My house (built in 1963) seems pretty good to me. If all houses are built to that standard or better, it's hard to see what would be wrong with that.

[JNugent]

I doubt that most residents of them would agree with you.

Mine is a 1960s semi (built in the style of the 1930s).

[Kemle]

Thats overstated. The govt always has an eye to the state of the seats before attempting to put up the more controversial policy changes.

[Steve Walker]

Oh, if they do it, they will not be involving building control, but it does show how stupid the rules are.

[The Natural Philosopher]

That is the insanity of well meaning legislation of all sorts.

Minimum insulation standard = I cant actually afford to insulate at all. Or I must clad your tower block in death trap materials Minimum wage = I can't afford to employ you at all.

I was watching a you tube video yesterday in which a yank mechanic said 'in order to get them to burn less gas they made the piston rings so loose to reduce the friction, that they all burn oil instead'.

[The Natural Philosopher]

I bet they would if they got a better house in exchange.

I've lived in em and worked on em.

[John J]

A friend runs a drain clearance company. He was engaged in unblocking a downpipe at ground floor level in a 3 storey government office block in Beverley. The blockage was somewhere about a few feet above the ground floor level. After much trying the blockage moved but lodged in the horizontal underground section resulting in the contents of the full pipe descending as a column of fluid and forcing it's way out of the WC bowl on the ground floor. His only option was to shut and jump up onto the lid of the toilet and stand there while a fan of shit sprayed out from between the lid and the seat. He has a series of entertaining items on the company website.

[RJH]

Is that really the case - you can't just do a bit at a time?

Quite - do you have a link to the regs?

[Jim GM4DHJ ...]

[Andrew]

Using rockwool plus a rainscreen is perfectly acceptable.

Using rigid sheet PIR (with faked BBA certification) on a tower block that does not even have a flat outer surface combined with a highly flammable rainscreen is a leap of faith. Even if without the fire the angular outer surface of the block wouldhave made it nearly impossible to prvent air leakage between 'warm' side of PIR and building outer skin.

Minimum wage = massive subsidy to employers who suddenly had a million+ new cheap employees from all over the world and whose real income would be topped up by the taxpayer with £20 billion housing benefit and social housing.

[Andrew]

Basically Part L Says that if you replace more than 25% of a flat roof or more than 25% of the internal plaster or external render of all the properties thermal elements (outside walls) then you need to bring the insulation of the whole property up to a much higher standard.

Or at least that is what it used to say back in 2004 and the October

2006 revision.

[Steve Walker]

There's nothing to stop you doing one room at a time.

The problem I was referring to was the difficulties of adding much insulation to certain rooms.

The merged building regulations are available at

And a look at shows that you have to bring them up to modern standards, unless it can't be done for technical or excessive cost reasons - and just making the bathroom smaller, requiring the bath, washbasin, toilet and airing cupboards to be moved and maybe an 800mm shower enclosure instead of a

900mm are not really technical reasons.

Similarly, reducing the dimensions of a box room, so a bed will only fit in one direction, preventing you laying it out as you want and using the rest of the space as a hobby area, would presumably not be a technical reason.

[Dave Plowman (News]

Rather obviously regs for existing houses are going to be different. Otherwise most historic buildings would need to be demolished.

Can 'they' really stop you adding whatever insulation you want to the inside of a house? Unless dangerous, of course. Different if trying for a grant to do the work.