Skim plastering over ceramic tiles?

[Lobster]

I'm in the midst of removing all the luvverly tiles which somebody lovingly stuck all over every single vertical surface (and many horizontal ones too) of our bathroom back in the 70's. Yes, you can imagine. Anyway, the plan is to get a plasterer in to skim everything flat and smooth once I'm done.

All down one wall, however, I have discovered another layer of tiles underneath the 1970s set. Not so unusual in itself, except that this comprises a band of tiles about 4 or 5 deep, at about waist height, all set into the adjacent plaster, ie the surface of the old tiles is flush with the plaster. The old tiles and the adjacent plaster are clearly both very old (spot the horsehairs) and presumably date back to the original build (1912).

Question - before I get stuck into into the next layer of tiles, which will mean more work for me and the plasterer, can anyone tell me if it's possible/reasonable to key or treat the surface of the tiles with something appropriate to enable them to be skimmed over? They are glazed white ceramic, and very sound. My gut feeling is 'no' but does anyone know better?!

Thanks David

[Grunff]

If you paint the tiles with melamine primer, then PVA, you might just get the plaster to stick sufficiently - but I really wouldn't do this. Just chisel them off.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Try and get them out, soak in bricak acid, and sell for a fortune on ebay?

[Lobster]

!! Well I decided to lay into them actually; Grunff rather confirmed my suspicion that it was the Right Thing To Do. (No way were the tiles going to come off in one piece anyway though!)

Very odd - the original layer of tiles were stuck direct to the brickwork with mortar, then evidently the plaster was applied, bringing it up to the same level as the tiles (you could see where mortar had splayed out from under the tiles, and was concealed by plaster). I think this stretch of tiles was probably running the length of the original bathtub; that's my theory.

Anyway... moving on, what's even more strange is that around the bottom of two walls which are external, there is solid wood let into the wall, up to about 6-7" up (ie looks a bit like skirting, but is flush with the skimmed plaster. FWIW original skirting in this house was about 5" deep). Furthermore, there is similar wood visible all the way up the wall on the one corner which is external (a band about 1.5" wide all the way up, again flush with the plaster). I can't tell how 'structural' this wood might be without attacking it. All this was hitherto concealed under the 1970's tiles.

Can anyone hazard a guess as to what these timbers might be? If they stay put they are going to cause me grief since AIUI it's a no-no to apply plaster on top of wood, right?

Thanks

David

[Andrew Gabriel]

Yes, you can plaster a sheet of glass if you PVA it first.

The original tiles may have been providing a moisture barrier. Check the wall behind to see if it's damp. If it is, then when it is replastered, that area should be done in sand and cement with a waterproofer added, to prevent the moisture coming through to the plaster finish coat.

Could the horizontal one have been a wall plate (timber which joist ends would have sat on) -- are there filled holes where joists might once have gone into the wall on top of the wall plate?

Providing it's not too thick, I think most plasterers will just plaster over it. You could nail plasterboard strips over the timber beforehand if you want.

[a]

our kitchen was like this - tiles bonded to the bricks with mortar about an inch thick (about halfway up the wall), then plastered the rest of the way up to the ceiling. A right pain getting it level after taking the tiles off!