Roofers

bjd said:
Out of interest, is the scaffolding still up? I had issues trying to get scaffolding removed from a site ...
This was something else that we didnt find out until the first day of the job when we got home from work.
They didnt use full scaffolding. They done the work from a tower and ladders.
 
Paulwirral said:
Nictrix said:
Yep I agree, find out what he is going to do about the problems I am going to point out first before losing the plot.
The tiles next to the gutter are a steeper angle then the rest of the roof.
I assume you mean to slow the rain water the angle would be less?
To top it off the rain is missing the gutter at a few points around the building as well.
Sounds like they did a quick job , left the tilt lath off the fascia board to avoid possibly re hanging the gutters . Even if they are in a federation it's the long way to get sorted out , these organisations are run by ex company directors who charge roofing companies a fee to guarantee quality but are more interested in the annual golf golf jolly paid for by said charges , cheque book federations is what we used to call them .
Scaffolders are the last to get paid so prefer to strip the scaffold and take it directly to the next job rather than storing it and handling it twice .
When we originally questioned the angle of the tile next to the gutter they said it had to be done that way as the original roof did not have battens so once the battens were on it raised the roof and this was the only option other than replacing all the gutter boards.
 
First pic from skylight to ridge showing extra row of tiles
DSCF1934_zps50ebe078.jpg
Slightly further down the same part of roof the battens are visibleand the valley seems very wide to me
DSCF1935_zps6836c9f6.jpg
Next is further down the same part showing the gutter tile angles, the shoddy cutting to the tiles and around the waste pipe
DSCF1933_zps3c7afa3d.jpg
Two pics from the skylight that was fitted which the angle of the drain doesnt look good, also one from inside where they cut a section of rafter out to fit the window
DSCF1937_zps2d121121.jpg
DSCF1936_zpse5fca855.jpg
DSCF1942_zps9c9fb6f3.jpg
Enjoy
 
I'm guessing that used to be a slate roof on the original boards ?
Sorry to confirm your suspicions but that job is a disgrace , a blind monkey with a broken arm could have done it better , the eave course needs raising as you say , a lath on edge would do it but deeper fascias and re hung gutters would be better . There's a short course of tiles one from the top when they should have measured the spar length and set the tiles out at an equal gauge . The soil pipe flashing should have a tile underneath and the lead dressed to it . The valley gutters should be back bedded with mortar and the lath ends cut off . Your roof lights are to low .
It looks a very amateur job to be honest , if they are in a federation or trade body contact it before going into any legal argument as they won't intervene if you take legal action .
If they aren't in a trade body I would pay an independent surveyor for a report and give it to the roofer , though I doubt very much they will understand it .
Good luck
 
Paul has highlighted some faults RE bigger fascia which is needed to take the bottom course up at least 50mm possibly 75mm :o & the batten courses were not set out right initially
Your biggest issue though is the batten ends showing in the valley :cry: thats a major no-no & they should be covered by the "valley" which should channel water into the gutter
Imo there is some major time & materials involved in putting that right , i would not hand over any money other than possibly the material cost on the basis you want someone else more competent to complete the works correctly
If they left that like they have they obviously cannot put the work right as they won't know how to
 
It was a tile roof on top of the boards. This created part of the problem with the gutters as there were no battens under the original tiles.
Guys were here today and addressed a few problems but not all.
Made a few excuses about why certain things were done like the extra row of tiles is because that part of roof was a different size from the rest so had to do it this way.
And the eaves course is the way it is because exactly what you say about needing deeper facias but this was not part of the job so did it their way which they say is normal.
Will get an independent to look at it as I doubt they are part of any organisation or federation.
 
The battens have now been cut back but this is obviously still wrong if the channel is supposed to be above the battens
 
Paulwirral said:
Just out of interest , what type - colour of tile was on the roof before it was replaced ?
Not sure on what kind of tiles as I am not that clued up. All I know is that they were crumbling and breaking up and have been for a few years.
Heres a pick of the roof across the road that has the same tiles.
DSCF1943_zps58693a49.jpg
 
Thankfully your roofer hasn't taken you to the cleaners with salvage , a few years ago it was possible to sell the salvaged slates or sometimes the tiles for more than we got paid for the job !
I used a little discretion there as I didn't want to give you even more bad news , hope you get it sorted out .
 
Thanks, I did wonder why you were asking.
Basically all the old tiles were removed and thrown in a skip.
I dont think I even seen a complete tile after they were removed from the roof, they were just breaking up.
 
Back
Top Bottom