Yes it should be built to the relevant NHBC standard and the relevant
approved document (or similar)

However sound proofing is a subjective area.

If a person has sensitive hearing (or just notices sounds more acutely) and
lives next to a family who talk loudly or in a certain way, and have rooms
with no carpets and lots of bare [sound reflective] surfaces, then that
person is more likely to hear sounds from the neighbour. But this will not
automatically mean that there is a structural fault.

But there could be design or construct issues that are allowing more sound
through than is acceptable.

You first port of call is to get the builder and local building control to
confirm that the properties were built to spec.

But you should also speak to the neighbour to see if they have the same
complaint. If not, you may be stumped

Have a look at www.inspectorhome.co.uk for advice about new home
inspections.

dg


"Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:4002ddd6$0$9387$(E-Mail Removed)...
> We have just moved into a brand new house (Bloor Homes) and I'm shocked at
> the poor level of soundproofing between our lounge and the neighbours
> kitchen. I can clearly hear them speaking and if there was no TV on in
our
> lounge I would actually be able to hear what they were saying. I did find
a
> 6inch x 2inch hole in the plasterboard, hiding behind the fake fireplace
> they put in but I'm not sure how much difference filling that up will
make.
>
> Before I phone them up to complain, does anyone here know whether house
> builders have to ensure at least a reasonable level of soundproofing
between
> houses by law ?? After all, I could easily prove that my wife & I would
be
> unable to have a "private" conversation in that room and surely we can all
> expect privacy in our own home. Any thoughts ??
>
> P.S It's end-terraced in a row of 3 houses but our house is bigger than
the
> other coming out further at the front & the back .... it's also on Duchy
of
> Cornwall land so has many restrictions on it
>
>

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
derek <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >Look up how the BBC do it.
> >

> In my experience they don't. It's easier and more effective to stop
> unwanted sound being created in the first place. Hence the
> proliferation of SILENCE notices and red lights outside studios.

So you stop the traffic and the planes?

--
*Two many clicks spoil the browse *

Dave Plowman (E-Mail Removed) London SW 12
RIP Acorn

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 18:33:02 -0000, a particular chimpanzee named
"Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

>Oopps - just found Schedule 0 which does give db figures ... any further
>thoughts are welcome though.

This is a new version of the Sound Insulation requirements which only
came into force in July last year, and it's almost certain (unless the
builders worked at breakneck speed) that the old one will apply. The
old requirements only gave a number of 'deemed to satisfy' standard
details, which if the builder worked to, would comply. The only
recourse you have is to show that the construction doesn't meet the
details, which would probably involve removing the plasterboard and
some blockwork!

Even under the new Part E, the requirement for testing of new build
housing hasn't been implimented.
--
Hugo Nebula
"The fact that no-one on the internet wants a piece of this
shows you just how far you've strayed from the pack".

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 00:16:03 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> derek <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> >Look up how the BBC do it.
>> >
>
>> In my experience they don't. It's easier and more effective to stop
>> unwanted sound being created in the first place. Hence the
>> proliferation of SILENCE notices and red lights outside studios.
>
>So you stop the traffic and the planes?

I can't recall much of a problem with either over a couple of decades
of "Last Night of the Proms", or any sound OB's for that matter. But I
suppose these factors must influence the choice of places where
studios are built. Good micophones in the right place are the essence
of good sound.

The point I wanted to make is that "The BBC" doesn't have a solution
to extraneous noise nuisance that can be readily cut/pasted into a
situation of a noise problem in a flimsy new domestic house.

DG

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
derek <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >> In my experience they don't. It's easier and more effective to stop
> >> unwanted sound being created in the first place. Hence the
> >> proliferation of SILENCE notices and red lights outside studios.
> >
> >So you stop the traffic and the planes?

> I can't recall much of a problem with either over a couple of decades
> of "Last Night of the Proms", or any sound OB's for that matter. But I
> suppose these factors must influence the choice of places where
> studios are built. Good micophones in the right place are the essence
> of good sound.

Well, those aren't studios, and a concert hall should be built with the
purpose of keeping both extraneous noise out and the noise from it in.

> The point I wanted to make is that "The BBC" doesn't have a solution
> to extraneous noise nuisance that can be readily cut/pasted into a
> situation of a noise problem in a flimsy new domestic house.

They have/had the solution for how to build a 'quiet' studio, although
they seem to have forgotten how given the White City news complex.

But the rules of sound proofing don't change, which is what I'd guess
what NT meant. There is no magic paint or wallpaper that will help.

--
*If a pig loses its voice, is it disgruntled?

Dave Plowman (E-Mail Removed) London SW 12
RIP Acorn

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 17:47:51 -0000, "Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>We have just moved into a brand new house (Bloor Homes) and I'm shocked at
>the poor level of soundproofing between our lounge and the neighbours
>kitchen.

Sounds (!) like another new homes builder to steer well clear of. On
my list currently is Wilson Connolly, Persimmon, and now Bloor Homes.
Any more?

MM

In message <4002ddd6$0$9387$(E-Mail Removed)>,
"Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> it's also on Duchy of
> Cornwall land so has many restrictions on it
>
>

Given the well-reported views on architechture and community of the
Royal in question, I'd be tempted to have a last-resort plan to bring
the problem to his attention... could be a useful tool with which to
threaten those who should sort your problem out :-)

Hwyl!

M.

--
Martin Angove: http://www.tridwr.demon.co.uk/
Two free issues: http://www.livtech.co.uk/ Living With Technology
.... Beware of Geeks bearing GIFS