Some local authorities used to sample and test for free, but I don't know if they still do, ask you local council Environmental Health Department. If not, ask them for the name of a local consultant, or look in the Yellow Pages. Then carefully take a small sample and post it off.
decades left
Whether you or they worry or not you should check, particularly if you are proposing to work in someone elses house. Unless you have suitable liability insurance, which I doubt. Seriously, if you discover it does contain asbestos, it probably isn't a job you should get involved in.
See above.
-- Holly, in France. Holiday home in the Dordogne, website:
It might be worth measuring across a few of the patterns - if they are all identical it may be that it is anaglytpta which has been painted over a few dozen times. If the patch area is damaged but still patterned possibly a bit can be cut out to get a better idea of what the coating was?
No, that ws my first suggestion but it absolutely isn't. We have anaglypta in our house from the same era and it's been painted even more often than the neighbour's. The seams still show. Remember that in those days papers were overlapped, not butted at the edges.
Done that too but we don't recognise it.
I just thought some older decorating guru here might recognise it ... :-)
But it still comes in rolls ... and would have been far too expensive to use over all the walls as well as the ceiling in this modest house. Although the first owners were pretentious ... Hmm.
Thanks for the suggestion, I'll look more closely.
This is generally a really bad idea (unless you use a fake address). The detection of a trace of harmless chrysotile cement will bring the asbestos removal mafia down on you like a ton of bricks.
If one really must be this silly a visit to
formatting link
beforehand could save a lot of money.
Neither insurance nor licensing is a requirements so why should it be an issue?
I'm sure the neighbour will be really impressed when as a result of such mindless enthusiasm they end up with a blighted house they can neither insure nor sell and a needless bill for tens of thousands of pounds from a "recommended" disposer (who a surprising number of times turns out to be a relation of someone in the Environmental Health Department). Chrysotile cement disposal is a scam of enormous magnitude fuelled by those who make huge profits out of it.
It sounds like it could be a product called Lincrusta Walton, related to linoleum.
Invented in 1880 by a guy called Walton. (the same guy invented Anaglypta). Made from LINseed oil and CoRk dUST. Apparently still made. Anaglypta was made from paper and cotton fibres.
It was supplied in semi rigid sheets and IIRC you could order it by the metr^^^ foot.
If it's Lincrusta there will probably be joints but I daresay they could be successfully disguised because it has a solid constitution rather than being expanded, embossed or blown. ISTR it being very popular in doctor's and dentists waiting rooms at one time. :-(
Loads on Google about it, maybe even some restoration hints. Eg.
formatting link
'd be *lucky* if the same pattern is still available, and it's probably as expensive as hell.
That's how I feel about it too, Peter. For the sake of removing about square yard of wall covering, which is already loose and coming off anyway, and leaving the rest of the room intact it would be a trifle over the top to call in the 'experts'.
My original question was to see if anyone knew what the original finish might be so that it could be reproduced. There have been some interesting drifts and observations but it's getting a bit out of hand now :-)
I reckon that a skim of plaster of some kind and a comb then a couple of coats of paint will do the job to the neighbour's satisfaction if not Spouse's. By far the worst job will be cleaning the room first :-(
They could hardly come and take a sample if you gave them a fake address :-) But yes, you could get the test done that way if you took your own sample in.
IME it won't, it will bring you a reasonable person who will tell you whether or not the product contains asbestos, which type and in roughly what quantity, and the best way to deal with it. In this case, probably by damping it down and bagging it up. I'm not sure about current disposal regulations in Britain, I believe some local authorities have tips/skips for artex, asbestos cement etc?
Possibly, I will have a look.
suitable
I believe the situation in Britain is that any tradesperson working on any job should have liability insurance or they accept that they will be responsible for any damages that they cause. Plumber flooding a house for instance. If Mary's husband were to remove this product, particularly if he knew there was a possibility that it contained asbestos, and if the householder were then to worry and call in the EHO, who then came and found elevated levels of asbestos in the air, IMO and IME he would be held liable. I have, whilst working for a local authority, had to give expert witness statements in cases such as this. Not with artex though, but with various asbestos boards and with asbestos cement.
I did not say that the neighbour should use a "recommended disposer". IMO it would be quite over the top to use an asbestos removal company for domestic artex removal. I would do the job myself in my own house, the risk of releasing any significant quantity of asbestos fibres is minimal. I'm not saying that the asbestos is necessarily a problem, but I think the liability issue is, and I wouldn't do it as a paid job for someone else. I guess in this case it would depend on the the nature of the relationship and the degree of trust between the Mary's husband and the neighbour.
Have you any evidence of this? How many is 'surprising' ? Certainly some EHOs and some consultants have, what shall I say, overly close relationships with asbestos removal companies. But most of them are ordinary, decent, honest people. This sort of thing happens in every walk of life, the asbestos industry IMO and IME is no different.
I don't know what the current requirements are or who handles/manages the disposal sites so I can't comment specifically. My personal opinion is that asbestos cement should be handled carefully and disposed of separately in a known site where it won't be disturbed in future. I don't think that bagging and double wrapping etc are necessary in many cases. Holly
on third image from end for lincrusta (very slow loading site for some reason)
My only experience of lincrusta is helping my brother put a a frieze of it in his Edwardian semi. That was 12 years ago and I think it was about £75 a roll -- nota very long roll either.
Why on earth would a small amount of Chrysotile cement warrant a person, reasonable or otherwise, visiting a site at taxpayers expense to give "advice"? Are you aware of a single case, anywhere in the world, of asbestos related illness caused by occasional exposure to Chrysotile cement products?
I wasn't under the impression that this was a trade arrangement but may well be mistaken. If it is the presence or otherwise of Chrysotile cement will not make any difference.
For what?
Expert in what way?
Indeed, the saga I related recently about a school which ended up with a bill for tens of thousands of pounds to remove one asbestos cement wall was the result of one. As I recounted the "specialist" remover was furious to discover the wall had been sprayed with a marker dye the day before they removed it to identify it if it got dumped. The EHO wasn't that impressed either - didn't think it was "fair" to do "tricks" like this.
Who don't understand risk assessment and whose credo is "got to cover my backside first"
It is different, the profits are guaranteed (the licensing scheme sees to that) and enormous. Many of the licensed firms are cowboys and the scope for bribery and corruption is much greater than in many other local council areas. There is considerable money to be made by detecting a whiff of asbestos, no matter how harmless.
Even a small amount of asbestos cement, which incidentally can occasionally contain blue asbestos aswell (and before you ask, yes, I am quite sure of this) can release significant amounts of fibres if it is smashed up etc. It just needs handling carefully, and people who don't know need to be advised of this. If the service weren't available at taxpayers expense there would be many real asbestos problems which went undeceted. How is the EHO or analyst going to know if there is a problem if they don't visit to have a look? In this case we are not talking about asbestos cement, where the asbestos is tightly bound in the material, but artex, which breaks down and releases fibres more easily. I still don't think there is a problem in this instance, as I have said, except with a possible liability issue.
Not scientifically documented evidence but I haven't looked into it recently. It would be impossible to prove exactly where any particular asbestos fibre which caused a problem had come from anyway. There have been cases of asbestos related diseases where the only known exposure to asbestos has been to chrysotile. There are also people who have worked with it all their lives with no symptoms at all, some with lungs full of the stuff causing asbestosis. I don't know the real level of the risk and I don't even know what recent research has been done. Also whether the chrysotile comes from a cement product, a board, an ironing board, a heat mat, a rope seal or whatever else is irrelevant, the chrysotile fibres are the same.
But none of that is the issue here. My initial and only point was that I don't feel it would be a good idea to work on any asbestos product in someone elses house.
I thought it was more a 'law of the land' thing, but I could well be mistaken too.
No, the asbestos itself makes no difference to whether the tradesperson is liable or not, hence my example, which you snipped, about a plumber.
For clean up costs, using licensed asbestos removal contractors, if air tests resulted in levels of asbestos in the air which are above the recognised limit. Whether you or I think this is reasonable is not the issue. If the levels are above recognised limits then things can, and do, get 'out of hand' and the person responsible for causing the elevated levels may be held liable.
In that I was an asbestos analyst, accredited under the various quality control schemes which were in place at that time.
I hadn't previously read this story, but yes, supposing it is true, it is a good example of how things ought not to work. I have known others. It shouldn't happen and as in so many cases everyone gets tarred with the same brush.
Anyone working in this area has sometimes to make very difficult decisions with enormous pressures from people on both sides of the situation. They also have to comply with the legislation whether or not they agree with it. Yes, aside from the crooks there will also be some people who will take the easy option and cover their backside first. There will be more who do the best at risk assessment that their training and experience allows, but will err on the safe side if necessary.
Some, a small proportion IME.
Planning is another one.
snip
How is that relevant? These days virtually none. I have probably had more than enough exposure for one lifetime. What about you?
One last thing which might interest you is that all houses in France have to have an asbestos survey before they can be sold, paid for by the vendor rather than the taxpayer.
-- Holly, in France. Holiday home in the Dordogne, website:
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.