Turn your back for a moment and... nothing happens

Back from a fortnight's holiday having set a number of plates spinning in the hope of finding some answers on our return.

Firstly, the pre-application to the Council designed to identify the sticking points in our desired outline design.  Still in a pile of post apparently, not even allocated a number on the system.  I was told that the Council has to respond within 28 days of receipt, but it may be later than that.  When I asked what happens if the service standard of 28 days isn't met, what sanction is there to guarantee service levels as promised, I may as well have tried to discuss absolute versus relative systems of morality...

Nothing's appeared from Ty-afal as regards seeing one of their airtight, heating-free houses.  Thought given we'd dragged the managing director over from Wales (slight exaggeration - he was in Oxford anyway) he may have followed up with an e-mail.  But no...

And the Energy Savings Trust's promise to clarify the issue over solar PV panels and whether they can be commissioned, de-commissioned, and then re-commissioned on a new house at the same address hasn't happened (they're bombarding me with e-mail surveys for me to tell them how well they did, though, like some rampant floppy-eared puppy, eager to please despite having pee'd on your carpet), so I've written direct to Ofgem, even though Ofgem state up front they don't deal with consumer queries.

Back to usual, then.

Optimistic or merely hopeful?

Two good meetings yesterday, firstly with Ty-afal, then with Knott the architect.  Ty-afal's build technique sounded convincing with timber frame made airtight and layers of insulation applied, underfloor heating set directly into the slab and no heating upstairs because its not needed (!), but I hope when we were talking a ballpark figure of £1k per square metre that was a total build price.  The goalposts got shifted by counsel against SIPs (which I was getting, and still am, quite keen on) on the grounds that nobody knows how they're going to perform over time.  We've asked for a visit to a Ty-afal-built house which should be a future date for the diary.

Knott has his own views on SIPs and timber frame, whilst not being particularly pro- or anti- (apart from sound travelling too easily around timber frame houses) he couldn't see why we wouldn't want to lay a great big slab of concrete down and build out of block with insulation applied to the outside. 

We went through our briefing pack whilst the Girl drew and coloured and the Boy fidgeted.  We discussed some of the key requirements, issues over massing, and the fact that the budget we quoted wouldn't stretch to what we're proposing.  I'm not sure whether we got the message across that we don't just want to be able to call the house 'architect designed', but that it should be obvious when you drive up to it and walk into it.  We want something that's better and different from the norm.  So when Knott at one stage tested how we felt if we had a design with four bedrooms, one at each corner, on the top floor rather than the double height space and galleried games area that I'd sketched I felt like saying that I didn't really need an architect to deliver that.

Next step is for me to put my plans into the Council as a pre-application to inform Knott's thinking.  At the moment I'm yet to see the difference between seven years professional training and a £30 software package, but I'm keeping an open mind.  The good lady wife remains optimistic, whereas I merely remain hopeful - I think there's a subtle difference.

That doesn't sound very sustainable...

For reasons that I won't go into, but revolve around tax and the early encashment of investments, it may be prudent to put the build on ice for the foreseeable future.  With that scenario in mind I called the Energy Savings Trust as I have a plan B of putting solar PV on the roof of the existing house, gaining the existing high rate of feed in tariff (FIT), removing and storing them panels when it's demolished, then putting them on the new house when it's eventually built.

My queries were simple, 'yes' or 'no' ones:

• can you get FITs by fitting solar PV to a vacant residential property?
• can I still get the original rate of FIT if I refit the panels to a property at the same address having demolished and rebuilt

Carly (let's name her) was one of those people who find it hard to deal with questions in the abstract, but when I gave her some modicum of background she cried 'Oh, I can't give you any tax advice!'.  No, I'm not asking you to, you asked me for context.  Please just answer the questions, yes or no...

Not sure I got any kind of answer to either question.  To the first one she just went off on a tangent, firstly wanting to send me general information about FITs (read it, please don't send more); then talking through the sense of putting panels on a vacant property given the energy sold back is deemed (yes, but if its vacant for two years out of twenty-five the return is still worth it if I can get the original rate).  I suppose by implication that meant that it was allowed.

As regards the second, trickier question, all she could tell me was that would be fine with an extension or renovation.  But it's not.  Oh, yes, Carly said, but if it were an extension or renovation...  Trust me, it won't be.  The assumption is, she said, that any new build would have a new solar PV array.  So, I said, I'm expected to throw away the two- or three-year old array and buy a new one - that doesn't sound very sustainable.

She's passing the query up the line where I'll get an email response within five days.  Given this may turn out to be a crucial answer in a few years time if I do have a fight about the FIT rate I asked for a proper written response and said I was happy to write in, setting out the exact question to ensure there are no misunderstandings.  Oh no, she said, we don't even send out brochures. 

So, given I can't write in with the exact query, I fear a slightly misdirected response to a slightly misunderstood query reliant on Carly's communication of it, probably from a do-not-reply email address.  At which point I'll have to repeat the query and they'll have to repeat the work.  All together now: that doesn't sound very sustainable.