a hundred years of enthusiastic gardeners adding compost had raised the flower beds higher than the air vents under the floor and caused fungus up through the floorboards here, solved with a spade and building external drainage channels [g]
Quite possibly, but that does not make you competent. Many of the sellers of quack "natural" or homeopathic medicines honestly believe in what the sell. They lack the intelligence or will to research the subject properly and find out they are selling snake oil.
That should be interesting.
That argument has taken place, it wasn't a very long one.
All the experts will tell you there isn't in nearly all cases. Nearly all the damp proofers will tell you there is in nearly all cases.
The expert will often point to condensation being the problem, the damp traders rarely.
The test is fairly easy. If the "surveyor" uses only a wood moisture electronic meter they will diagnose rising damp. If the survey was free it will show rising damp. If the test is being done for a house buyer it will show rising damp.
There is no rising damp in the vast majority of cases.
Which requires the person evaluating the problem to have the knowledge, training and intelligence to diagnose the problem correctly and recommend the right solution - which is never a chemical DPC. People who have entered the trade via the "monkey see, monkey do" route of "on the job training" rarely manage to learn enough about the subject to diagnose the problem or prescribe an effective solution.
Most chemical damp proofing works because the vegetation and soil around the house is moved to give access to drill lots of useless holes. Some years ago a local damp proofing company had severe cash problems (shortage of) so they adopted the innovative solution of using water as their "chemical". After a few months they realised no one was actually complaining so they continued with no complaints for several years until an aggrieved ex-employee complained about them to Trading Standards.
Would these be electric motors or steam?
/Would these be electric motors or steam?/q
Come on! he is an 'honest contactor'.....
Jim K
A good point :-) I am a bit concerned about his " plastering rendering woodworm treatments" though. Plastering the woodworm seems a bit excessive.
On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 10:19:03 PM UTC, snipped-for-privacy@care2.com wrote:
r: rising damp,'
This is amusing. Some points... I know of no data published with proper ep idemiological sources and appropriate double blind trials or equivalent sta tistically robust verification that PROVE mould (specifically) such as Aspe rgilus niger which is the normal one present causes harm to humans. It may do. It may not. The link provided from the NHS is so unspecific that it mi ght as well have said "Walking on roads or driving a car may be dangerous t o your health". There are data of people suffering in mould ridden houses but no evidence saying it is the alleged toxic products of the mould that c auses the problem. Likewise the presence of pure water vapour in the atmos phere cannot of itself be regarded as hazardous. Relative humidity varies! The real answer is no one knows for sure and that since it is not pleasant and since if you can get rid of a source of dust/spores/any irritant you mi ght as well do so. There is no longer any fungus called Merulius it is now generically Serpul a and that took place about 20 + years ago. Dry rot is never caused solely by rising damp and I know more about control ling dry rot than anyone else in the country if not the world. re "Eco-dry and Kingfisher approved contractors and installers." It would be interesting to compare the entry qualifications to be able to c laim this with the entry qualifications to be a fully accredited surveyor f or the PCA which requires you to pass the CSRT which exam in turn is equiva lent in standard to an A Level or possibly if you pass with credit to a fir st year university degree level but limited to just one aspect of one subje ct so perhaps about 6 weeks' worth of work? I applaud the advice to reduce ground levels and put in pea shingle or the like. RD does exist. Our friendly journalist bricklaying Geoff is really the only source amongst the educated who denies it. He has been asked over at least the last 20 years to provide evidence and, indeed, the BWPDA and he met to discuss the matter and I was at the meeting and no evidence was forthcomi ng. The BRE however have plenty of such data and although they got some th ings wrong (the 5% guideline for one) the basics were right. Any scientist who reads the data know that the case is made. There ARE people who do no t believe in evolution and think Darwin was evil or wrong! Any surveyor wit h a modicum of sense and objectivity knows that RD affects buildings as he knows that most of the companies diagnosing it also misdiagnose it and call other sources of water rising damp when it is not! Equally it is unreasonable to presume that all DPC companies are out for a scam. There is, as always, a range of such companies from the ethical to t he scammers but I will be the first to agree that there are more people sel ling DPCs that are not needed that that are. All rising damp travels through mortar (not motor) so that is not specific to 100 year old buildings with a slate DPC. The advice on dry rot given by Mr Robinson is correct but dry rot is never caused by RD, only a specific s ource of water over a period of time normally measured in weeks and months. re requires the person evaluating the problem to have the knowledge, training and intelligence to diagnose the problem correctly and recommend the right solution - which is never a chemical DPC.
When I was surveying I found that a significant minority of houses needed b oth a dpc and plastering and there would have been no other control measure s to effect suitable conditions to live in. One could simply have ignored the need for a DPC and replastered but that would not have fixed the water in the wall and in time the chances are that the damp would creep up over t he render and affect the lime plaster above in 10 or 15 years. Unless the s ource was fixed you take that chance. The source could be fixed by putting a hydrophobic chemical in the mortar not the brick. To say you never need a dpc therefore lacks substance.
re BRE said it only occurs with some sandy lime mixes,
What publication please? I have every single BRE publication since the mid 60s and I do not recall this. My experience indicates that all lime mortar s not just sandy ones are prone to RD.
Well that's my tuppence happ'pth's worth!
I have a slim memory of reading a report of theirs based on research efforts building lots of brick piers in a large tank of water, that suggested it was difficult to observe any RD in most of them, but some with very soft bricks and lime mortar did exhibit it. It was a long time ago though...
ditto, but it sounds like the anonymous poster is better informed.
NT
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.