Home  5  Books  5  GBEzine  5  News  5  HelpDesk  5  Register  5  GreenBuilding.co.uk
Not signed in (Sign In)

Categories



Green Building Bible, Fourth Edition
Green Building Bible, fourth edition (both books)
These two books are the perfect starting place to help you get to grips with one of the most vitally important aspects of our society - our homes and living environment.

PLEASE NOTE: A download link for Volume 1 will be sent to you by email and Volume 2 will be sent to you by post as a book.
Buy individually or both books together. Delivery is free!


powered by Surfing Waves




Vanilla 1.0.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to new Forum Visitors
 Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications: Apply now.

The AECB accepts no responsibility or liability for any errors or omissions in the content of this site. Views given in posts are not necessarily the views of the AECB.



Heating and cooling: Smoke Nuisance – is wood wood?

Bottom of Page

1231 to 1260 of 1647

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. ...
  4. 38
  5. 39
  6. 40
  7. 41
  8. 42
  9. 43
  10. 44
  11. 45
  12. ...
  13. 55
  14. >
    • CommentAuthorMikeee5
    • CommentTimeFeb 18th 2016 edited
     
    Thank you LJ 2. We haven't had the signed agreement yet mate, They may choose to fight it in court !!

    A letter to the European Court Of Human Rights to see where I stand with the local authority is still high on my to do list. I guess the result from that action will decide whether or not the Local Authorities will change their processes. They have never been on my property when the fire has been lit. They have assumed the chimney worked correctly and a nuisance and hazard to health did not exist !! I still can't believe we have been left like this for over 4 years. As you know we have exhausted the local authorities complaints procedures , the ombudsmen, Councillors and MPs.

    I can't thank you guys at GBF enough for all the help and support you have provided over the years. The knowledge and professionalism of everyone has been second to none. There is no way we would have got this far without you guys. Yep , I'm going to throw my Scooby Doo ending in. "They would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for you pesky kids " . It was one of the members that suggested checking out our home insurance to see if we were covered for neighbour disputes. Luckily we were and I would urge anyone with nearby neighbours to make sure you have cover, we never saw this coming, it could happen to anyone. The odds of taking this to court and risking tens of thousands of pounds in costs would be far to high, thank god we were insured and have managed to get this far. If anyone asks advice now , home insurance and legal cover for neighbour disputes would be the first thing I would say and then and only then I would suggest a fire hose aiming down the chimney with a smoke sensor triggering system!!!!!


    Mikey 5 and out.....
  2.  
    She's here, she fat but I would just like to hear her sing first before the credits role on this particular cartoon.
    • CommentAuthorMikeee5
    • CommentTimeFeb 19th 2016
     
    Good call Gotanewife . Let's see what happens 😉
  4.  
    Congrats Mikeee5

    If they choose to go to court and it is pointed out that the expert witnesses stated that they need to raise the chimney and they haven't done so then the Judge will take a very dim view and surely find against them.
  5.  
    The only worry I see is that their corrections don't work 'enough' - proving 'fixed' or rather proving 'not fixed' could be another long job.
    • CommentAuthorTriassic
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2016
     
    I see that air pollution from wood stoves is in the news again. Bbc.
    • CommentAuthorDarylP
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2016
     
    I heard that package, the 'scientist' seemed to link WBSs with candles and air-fresheners? If the WBS is leaking combustion products inside the dwelling, that is a problem! :devil:
    • CommentAuthorringi
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2016
     
    I think the issue he was talking about is building being very well sealed, and people not opening windows. (All solved with a MVHR unit.)

    WBS always leak a little smoke into a room, but in most cases it is not an issue, as the ventilation removes the smoke so it can not build it. Particles build in in the air in building, faster then CO2 does.
    • CommentAuthorMikeee5
    • CommentTimeFeb 24th 2016 edited
     
    We have had a proposal from the smelly tubbies via their solicitor. They are proposing to stick a 1.5 meter pipe on top of the stack and fit a different terminal type. Apparently they have been in touch with building control, it doesn't say if they have given consent for the proposal. I think they are trying to do it on the cheap, think it's going to look quite odd in the middle of a pair of semi detached bungalows !! Our solicitor has emailed our expert witness to see if he thinks it is acceptable.
    • CommentAuthorowlman
    • CommentTimeFeb 24th 2016
     
    Depending on the height, most flue manufacturers of twinwall especially, but maybe others as well, require support guy wires once a certain height is exceeded. Sounds like fun and games.
  11.  
    Also if it is done on the cheap i.e. a single walled pipe extension then I would expect an accumulation of tar build-up quite quickly, even twin walled pipe exposed by that much might have problems if he runs the stove shut down a lot. I would also expect guy wires to be needed.
  12.  
    As a man with a 1m flue that pollutes us 'occasionally' I am very doubtful that a 1.5m extension will make a big difference.
    • CommentAuthorsnyggapa
    • CommentTimeFeb 24th 2016
     
    I guess the important thing is that you don't agree to that proposal as a "solution"

    You could agree that if this solves the problem then you would be happy (i.e. emphasis on you will accept it if the results are good, rather than accept it on paper before it is tested in the real world). I assume the main result you want is the nuisance abated rather than the cosmetic look of the houses, which is a separate issue. The problem you may have is that by the time this is implemented, the heating season will be over so you won't know the results for nearly a year. Not sure how that plays out with the legal process - can you "stay" it for a period of time?
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeFeb 24th 2016
     
    I cant see 1.5m doing enough good. sorry. no harm in trying it though. as they say dont agree to this as a solution and write to such effect. When you make sure you that you have a problem ans are expecting it to be fully resolved etc presume solicitor will write. care needed
    • CommentAuthorgyrogear
    • CommentTimeFeb 24th 2016
     
    such a solution would no doubt give your street a certain 'industrial" look.

    would (? WOOD ?) do *wonders* for your home's value, no doubt...

    gg
    • CommentAuthorTriassic
    • CommentTimeFeb 24th 2016
     
    Sounds like the tubbies are clutching at straws, wonder what building control / planning think of their proposed 'solution'? I bet they will be hard pressed to find anyone willing to sign it off as a viable solution!
    • CommentAuthorTriassic
    • CommentTimeFeb 24th 2016
     
    Has anyone asked why they need this wbs, if the house is so cold as to need the heat input, isn't the root cause of the problem poor insulation? Maybe they would be better advised to insulate and draft proof their house, after all it's fool proof and will save them money!
  18.  
    Posted By: TriassicMaybe they would be better advised to insulate and draft proof their house, after all it's fool proof and will save them money!


    It's only fool proof if it's not fitted by a fool!
    • CommentAuthorMikeee5
    • CommentTimeFeb 24th 2016
     
    They are absolutely insulated to the hilt. Cavity wall, loft, between the rafters. They have full gas central heating too. It was a bit wiffy out here tonight, makes you wonder if a 1.5 meter tube on top will solve the problem!
    • CommentAuthorgyrogear
    • CommentTimeFeb 24th 2016
     
    with any luck, they might asphyxiate themselves before a solution is found...

    gg
    • CommentAuthorlongjohn2
    • CommentTimeFeb 25th 2016
     
    Hi mikeee5
    A word of caution - please clearly let your solicitor know, that only a solution that stops the nuisance of smoke and fumes affecting your property will be acceptable. If the proposed 1.5 m flue extention does not cure the problem then an additional remedy must be found. The onus for a solution must lie with your neighbour. It seems the 1.5m height would not required plann ing permission? Don't accept anything short of a cure, it might need to go higher!
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeFeb 25th 2016 edited
     
    Agree with longjohn.
    It is up to them to sort the problem.
    I could lock my car in a garage, turn the engine and and agree with someone that 'it is not a problem'.
    I would be wrong though. :wink:
    • CommentAuthorMarkyP
    • CommentTimeFeb 25th 2016
     
    planning must be an issue here, a 1.5 m pipe sticking out of an existing stack which is already higher than the ridge. Ofcourse you may choose to overlook this aspect in the interests of not delalying a possible remedy. But I would discuss this with your solicitor and make a decision about whether you want to let this aspect slide and wait and see, or raise it with them in some way. It's a risk if they go ahead and someone else complains to the council about it. Your LA planning enforcement team may be more competant the EH dept!
    • CommentAuthorMikeee5
    • CommentTimeMar 1st 2016 edited
     
    Thank you for your input Marky, nice to see you on the thread.

    I spoke to my solicitor yesterday and he said that there was more of an issue for my neighbours to get planning to raise the stack apposed to the 1.5 m pipe, so it looks like the pipe it is then!

    I have just received the agreement in the form of a Tomlin order. It appears that the claim is stayed on the proviso that my neighbours increase the height to a minimum of 1.5 metres with an insulated pipe and fit a cone shaped cowl. They have also to agree to burn wood that is not treated, is no larger than 10cm in diameter and no more than 25cm in length.

    I asked my solicitor what would happen if the remedial work is unsuccessful and he basically said there would be nothing further we could do with this case. He said that my neighbours are doing what the experts have recommended which is what we would have hoped for if it did go to trial.

    Fingers crossed that the remedial work will be successful.

    Well it`s been a long old slog folks. The involvement of solicitors and court action was a result of being let down by professional people in my Local Authority and the blinked view of the ombudsmen. The last time I spoke to my neighbours son he said "as far as we are concerned we are doing nothing wrong". His departing words were "take us to court, do what you have got to do". I am sure it has caused his parents lots of distress and anxiety having to deal with the court action. Now they are carrying out remedial work which could have been done 4 years ago. The fuel that they have stock pilled is of the correct size and moisture content and there is sufficient fuel for the next 2 years.

    I will be writing to the European Court Of Human Rights with my story to see if I still qualify for a hearing for the LA and Ombudmens involvement. You guys will have to let me know if you want me to keep updating the thread with that or whether you wish me to bring the thread to a close. It`s been running a while now, must be some kind of record for GBF. This will be the 1439 post including the private messages I have received !!

    Thank you to all that have provided help and support over the years. I hope the thread will go some way to help others that are suffering from a smoke nuisance problem.

    Mikeee5

    Cough Cough !!
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeMar 1st 2016
     
    Please keep us updated
    • CommentAuthorEd Davies
    • CommentTimeMar 1st 2016
     
    Posted By: Mikeee5I asked my solicitor what would happen if the remedial work is unsuccessful and he basically said there would be nothing further we could do with this case.
    Sorry, but why are you agreeing to this then?

    A stay while they try a fix on the assumption that if it doesn't work the action will then proceed is reasonable. Giving up your rights on the gamble that it will is not.
  27.  
    I agree with Ed !

    I had to look up a Tomlin order and found -
    The order is named after High Court judge Tomlin J (as he then was) from his ruling in Dashwood v Dashwood, that such an order kept the proceedings alive only to the extent necessary to enable a party to enforce the terms of the settlement.

    This implies that you have reached a settlement. Surely the settlement should be that they stop the pollution - NOT that they try the fix suggested by the experts (did the experts guarantee a fix ?? )

    Chimneys are fickle things and what works in one location may not work elsewhere. If the settlement says stick 1.5M of pipe on top of their chimney then once they have stuck 1.5M of pipe on their chimney you are then done - what ever the result of the pollution

    IMO the settlement should say 'stop the pollution' - nothing more is needed. How they stop the pollution is not your concern and the only way that a specific solution should be part of any agreement is if the expert recommending it will put his professional guarantee against it and accept the liability if it fails to produce a fix. - Which by the way I doubt that an expert would do.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeMar 1st 2016
     
    Was it the solicitor saying that they can't do any more, or is it the law that says nothing else can be done, which would seem strange to me.

    Don't agree to it, the new chimney will probably not get past planning and is not going to fully cure the problem. Only cure is stopping the local burning.

    I once settled out of court for a road accident because my solicitor said it was a good deal. It wasn't as I still have problems from it 29 years later.
    •  
      CommentAuthordjh
    • CommentTimeMar 1st 2016
     
    I asked my solicitor what would happen if the remedial work is unsuccessful and he basically said there would be nothing further we could do with this case. He said that my neighbours are doing what the experts have recommended which is what we would have hoped for if it did go to trial.

    I think this is the key. Everybody else here has implied that what they think is reasonable is that what you would have hoped for is that the problem was cured. Why does your solicitor think that just making an attempt to cure the problem is reasonable? Even if the attempt is guided by experts it may fail, and if so the nuisance will persist. If the new chimney is refused planning then as I understand the law you will be entitled to restart proceedings. But ultimately they may need a taller chimney, which might be refused planning or might cost too much, in which case their only way to remedy the situation would be to stop using their stove.

    If it came to that, does your solicitor think that you would lose such a case? If not, why is he suggesting a settlement now? Will your insurance pay to bring a new case if necessary?
  30.  
    Ask the experts for their assessment of the likelihood that these remedial actions will solve the problem? Point out that the result of their findings were put in such a way that their recommendations have been considered legally as proof that the problem will be solved (as no further remedies will be possible) and add that in the event smoke continues to enter the house the only legal remedy you will be left with is to sue them. Ask them if wouldn't mind adding specific comment to qualify their recommendations to the effect that having carried out the remedial work a further assessment will be required in order to understand the efficacy of that work.

    Do not sign anything!

1231 to 1260 of 1647

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. ...
  4. 38
  5. 39
  6. 40
  7. 41
  8. 42
  9. 43
  10. 44
  11. 45
  12. ...
  13. 55
  14. >
   
The Ecobuilding Buzz
Site Map    |   Home    |   View Cart    |   Pressroom   |   Business   |   Links   
Logout    

© Green Building Press