LondonMix

Up thread I said there is a qualitative judgement that goes into setting priorities regarding young and old, preventative care vs treatment and that's a debate worth having. However, unless we want to reset the entire priorities system for all assessments made by the JVCI (maybe so), in the current system that's been established, this was the right decision. Decisions can't be made ad hoc by public pressure. Also Saffron are you sure the cost benefit analysis looks at the specific budget in any given year when establishing new health protocols or is it based on value for money-- i.e. a more typical cost benefit analysis? Most analysis like this uses some formula that determines how much benefit (additional years of life etc) the treatment will generate across a specified population versus the cost of administering something across the same group and sets up some cut off ratio as the value. I'm not sure how it works for the NHS so this is a genuine question.

Of course I mean the United States not the original colonies that comprise the US. Anyhow, states rights are still a very big deal and each state maintains a huge amount of autonomy and power regarding laws and taxes.

Clux that's not how the system works. You should put the schools you want the most first not the ones that are most realistic. If you had put your preferred school ahead of the one you got into, in the best case scenario you might have been given that school and in the worst case scenario you would still have been given the school you have now but would be on the waiting list for the school you like better that's further away.

Do you think the vote on Brexit will largely be driven by concerns about immigration-- specifically EU immigration? The UK needs positive net migration to help ameliorate the demographic issues associated with the working age population shrinking relative to the retired population. Something like the EU would never be accepted by the public in the US though. The loss of sovereignty would be seen as far too great regardless of the benefits. Not being British, I reserve opinion on this entirely.

Penguin-- I totally agree its in everyone's interest for the builder to be insured which is the argument I would make to the neighbours if there was any resistance on their part. If their builder goes bust, causes damage and runs off, etc suing your neighbours in court while they are in the middle of a crisis is no one's idea of a good time. Particularly if winning forces them to lose their house.

Let's just agree to disagree as it isn't the point I was making. The point is that building control's involvement is more important for quality control than the party wall surveyor, which is a common misconception. red devil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LondonMix Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > Yes, some issues will be resolved by building > > control on the spot both with structure and > > drainage- that was my personal experience. > > Someone doing the amount of work detailed in > the > > OP's post should have full engineer drawings > > before starting and those should be submitted > > (though not necessarily approved) before > starting. > > Yes, for minor work, full plans aren't > necessary > > but I wasn't speaking in the abstract. The OP > > detailed what was being done. > > Neither was I dealing in the abstract. The works > described are very basic and common, with a > competent builder/architet/project manager etc, a > Building Notice would suffice...

I didn't say they should they should do this at the party wall stage though did I? You can't force your neighbours to do much in these circumstances but when picking your battles, these are my recommendations for the most important things to focus on so that you are comfortable the work is safe and being done properly. Similarly, you can't force you neighbours to show you the public liability insurance details of their builder. However, requesting it and raising serious concerns if its not provided is one of the points I wouldn't back down from either. red devil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LondonMix Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Red devil-- believe it or not I've been through > > this process on both sides and am aware of all > of > > that. My point was that if you are concerned > > about work being done safely, ensuring building > > control is involved is more important than the > > partywall survey. Often times people think > that's > > the role of the party wall surveyor and its > not. > > My point is that a neighbour can't ensure Building > Control are involved at the Party Wall stage. > A polite request, yes, but to ensure, nope...

Your surveyor will not be acting for you. Even if you have your two surveyors both have to act in the interest of both parties. That's the law. You have no additional control over their recommendations or the outcome of the award and you cannot fire them if you disagree with what they suggest. The additional cost can be higher than 1k-- the two surveyors have to coordinate with one another which means the time both spend on the award is higher. Also, the process is slower. At the end of the day you will have to live next to each other so its in both of your interests to try to communicate openly and be considerate of each other as best you can. You say you aren't feeling the love from your neighbours. What exactly have they done already to sour things. Its better to try to repair things if possible asap before the work really gets going because by then everyone will be super stressed. I say this as someone who has had two neighbours do work and as someone who has done work and who still exchanges Christmas cards with neighbours and both sides. soyamocha3 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > To Worldwiser > > Thanks for that. > > We are not inclined to do the extension ourselves > because we only put in a brand new kitchen last > year. In addition, unlike our neighbours, we will > be in occupation - they are living elsewhere, so > you can imagine what having that work going on in > our house would be like and living in the > property. We cannot move elsewhere we have way > too much stuff. > > The measurements on your planning permission are > about what we would hope to negotiate. Unless > the wall straddles our > property, we will not be able to touch it, paint > it, hang anything on it etc. We did try and > console ourselves that we could paint it white and > make is appear lighter but that would appear to be > out of the question. > > The reason I would like my own surveyor is that he > will be acting for me and me alone. When I call > him, he will call me back first not the other > party. Obviously I don't want them to hate me > but I am not feeling the love for them right now. > > > To be honest, we will have endure months of > builders, noise, disruption, moving our three full > sheds, paperwork, calls, emails, dirt, dust, lack > of privacy, lack of security and possible damage > because we have quite a old pipes in that area > under the paving - all to eventually end up with a > brick wall right outside our kitchen window and an > additional 40cm of brick is quite a bit when it is > directly in your face. If all they have to do is > find ?1k, I don't think that is much to ask.

Red devil-- believe it or not I've been through this process on both sides and am aware of all of that. My point was that if you are concerned about work being done safely, ensuring building control is involved is more important than the partywall survey. Often times people think that's the role of the party wall surveyor and its not. Yes, some issues will be resolved by building control on the spot both with structure and drainage- that was my personal experience. Someone doing the amount of work detailed in the OP's post should have full engineer drawings before starting and those should be submitted (though not necessarily approved) before starting. Yes, for minor work, full plans aren't necessary but I wasn't speaking in the abstract. The OP detailed what was being done. red devil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LondonMix Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > Speak to your neighbours and ensure they have > > submitted their plans to building control for > > approval- this is how you can ensure the plans > / > > engineering are safe not through a party wall > > agreement. Building control will also carry > out > > regular inspections of the work to ensure its > of > > the right quality and conforms with the plans. > > > That's making a big assumption that the neighbour > will submit detailed plans to Building Control for > approval before works commence. They don't have to > as there are two ways to obtain Bulding Regs > approval... > > One way, called Full Plans, is to submit detailed > drawings and specifications (design and > structural), with the aim to get approval before > works commence. However, approval might carry > certain conditions that have to be addressed, for > instance it may be impossible to ascertain the > existing drainage layout until works > begin...sometimes a solution can only be worked > out on site, or something unforeseen crops up, and > things have to change accordingly. But this is > easily remedied as the Building Control Inspector > will carry out periodic inspections at critical > stages, e.g. foundations, drainage, walls up to > dpc level, and so on. The Inspector is effectively > signing-off the works in stages, and at the end > they will issue you with a final Completion > Certificate. > > The other way is by what is known as a Building > Notice. The builder only has to inform the Council > that works are due to commence no less than 48 > hours before the start date. This is quite common > if the works are not complicated, and I would say > that simple extensions of this nature are not > deemed complicated. > It is also a common route to take as it means the > property owner doesn't go to the expense of > employing someone to do detailed drawings and > specifications, instead they can give the builder > a basic set of drawings, perhaps those submitted > for planning, and everything is then left to the > builder to liaise with Building Control. As > before, the Inspector will make periodic checks to > see that what is being built meets with current > Regs. They will still want to see Structural > Drawings/Calculations for steel beams and columns > etc. But for a simple lintel over a door opening > it can easily be ok'd on site by the Inspector. > > Southwark produce a ''Guide To Extending Your > Home'', which explains this and much more, useful > for the layperson. > > For a Party Wall Award, the Surveyor will require > detailed information/drawings, but this is not > tied into Building Control approval in any way...

The main thing is that once a surveyor has been appointed they act in the interest of both parties regardless of who selected them. In all cases the surveyor is paid by the owner. Also, the surveyor can't be fired once appointed so they cannot come under pressure to act with bias. With that said, I would not select a joint surveyor who was associated with the carrying out the works in anyway.

The party wall award will outline how claims for damage can be made without having to go to civil court. Like I said, the agreement documents the condition of the neighbours house before work starts. This protects the person doing work from spurious claims but it also neighbours from having to dispute if damage was pre-existing. nunhead_man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > >the party wall surveyor is totally independent > and getting your own does nothing of value. > > OK - will this person also cover / value / act on > damage caused - eg drains replacement, patio > damage?

I think that's not at all okay Sue. I think most neighbours might be happy for you to select the surveyor to ensure independence. However, paying for two doesn't add anything if the joint one is good and independent.

Thanks for the last two posts. The rejection of the petition seems like the right outcome unless someone has credible evidence that the JVCI has lost its independence.

Sorry but I disagree with this. The party wall surveyor is totally independent and getting your own does nothing of value. I agree the surveyor shouldn't be an employee of the builder but otherwise using a joint surveyor not associated with the work is absolutely fine. If you feel more comfortable, you can select the surveyor that acts for both of you. The only thing you can get from the party wall award is clear terms regarding when work can be carried out and a documented basis for the starting condition of your house and the process by which damage will be fixed. Speak to your neighbours and ensure they have submitted their plans to building control for approval- this is how you can ensure the plans / engineering are safe not through a party wall agreement. Building control will also carry out regular inspections of the work to ensure its of the right quality and conforms with the plans. Also, be very firm in seeing the liability insurance of the contractor so you know there is money to put things right. Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > red devil Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > You can > > decide whether or not you wish to use their > > moninated surveyor, or you can get your own > > independent surveyor. > > > I really strongly advise you to find your own > surveyor who has no connection at all and never > has had with the building firm concerned. > > But it's a good idea to start looking now, as the > reason I used a nominated surveyor was lack of > time by the time the Party Wall notice was > submitted, as I was really busy. > > As red devil says, you should not have to pay any > costs relating to the surveyor.

Blah Blah-- in what way is the UK a totalitarian state? That makes no sense at all. If the point you want to make is that you think the law is changing systematically to make it harder for illegal immigrants to live here and also to discourage legal migrants from coming by the withdrawal of benefits just say that. The parallels you drew to totalitarianism and Nazism are totally outrageous. Suggesting these changes in law are similar to the persecution of Jews in the holocaust totally minimises what actual persecution and genocide are. Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sigh Dave R. Do you think anyone who stands up for > people is a hypocrit then? I wonder what you do > with your spare time? Do you just poor scorn over > anyone who tries to challenge inequality or > poverty or any other worthwhile issue? > > I disagree LondonM. My point was not that the > Tories are the new Nazis, but that state > sanctioned prejudice has a process of stealth. > That was very clear from my words. But as usual, a > different context is applied at the mere mention > of National Socialism. I could easily have made > comparisons to other totalitarian states. The > government's policies on migrants ARE an extreme > knee jerk reaction to the imagined support of > someone who would go much further if he ever got a > sniff of power (Farage). And as such have impacts > on public perception and then consequences. The > same could be said about the government's attack > on the poor and disabled too.

Yes, I don't mind the extra flats. My main concern is that they don't skirt their affordable housing requirement by splitting it into the two applications. The flats of course have nothing to do with M&S- this is all on the freeholder Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Wasn't the police station over the road also four > storeys? And there are other four storey buildings > around too (e.g. on East Dulwich Rd, and many > blocks of flats in the area). There is a precedent > for buildings of this size, or larger. A couple of > extra flats is barely even a drop in the ocean.

Agree with Miga-- using Nazism as an analogy in this context was extreme hyperbole and actually debases the true horror of Nazism and the holocust. Godwin's meme was designed to prevent people doing that because really Nazism and the holocaust aren't analogous to much-- really only genocide and totalitarianism. Dragging it out as a trope in other contexts is lazy and a bit disrespectful. I mean, do you really think this country is on a slippery slope to the mass murder of immigrants (illegal or otherwise)? Is fining people who house illegal immigrant really equivalent to stripping Jewish citizens of your country of their property?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law Here you go civil servant

To be frank though, unless the wall at its lowest point before the wall is truly gigantic, you are very unlikely to succeed in blocking it. Loft conversions can have a much greater impact on light depending on the direction the garden faces than side return extensions do.

Take photos of your house before the work starts. During work on terraces unfortunately even with the greatest care damage can occur. They (specifically their builders) should be insured against this. Ask to see the builders public liability insurance before hand. If you really think the boundary wall is too high, check to see what it is versus permitted development rules. If it exceeds permitted development, they need to file a full planning application and you can object then. The planners do take loss of light seriously, though often times, because the roof is sloped, there is no discernible difference in light coming into to neighbouring gardens as there is no shadow. Half the houses in ED have had this done. Victorian houses are more than capable of dealing with this type of work. Just make sure that they are doing everything they are supposed to. If the work is under permitted development they should still get building regs sign off. Good luck and hopefully your neighbours and the builders will try to minimise the disruption. Nothing you've described so far sounds out of the ordinary regarding this type of work.

yes

I'm sure this is a fun spectator sport for most English people but having a president of my native country that actively is courting the white supremacist vote is truly horrifying. Comparisons to George Osborne are entirely misplaced.

Congratulations-- its a nice problem to have :) I'm glad so many parents are happy with the first round of offers received and things are bound to only improve as things start moving on the waiting lists.

Did you get St Olaves RoboR?

I agree that they are all fundamentally the same. My point is that people choose to use these terms (that mean the same thing) selectively on certain groups which gives them additional shades of meaning. Polish immigrants are almost never called expats. Americans living in London are almost always called expats. There is a reason for this. Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LondonMix Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Expat has connotations of impermanence. > > Not that I've ever heard of. An expat is merely > someone who is not currently living in their home > country. That would cover those that are away on > a longish-term basis as well as those, like me, > who are permanent. I am an expat, an immigrant > and an emigrant.