Brickie

Possibly you’re thinking of Tuck Pointed brickwork-a fairly common practice at one time to give the illusion of very accurate,thin jointed work.

+1 Treat the movement joint as you would a door or window reveal with the ties in to the frame @225 vertical spacing both sides of the mj.

I have a mate who carries out basement digs on this basis at times,and I believe the percentage is tiered as an incentive to keep costs down (I.e. 15% to £150,000 dropping to 10% thereafter,just as an example.) At first glance it might not seem like much of a carrot but bear in mind that if he ‘milks’ the job & breaks the threshold then,come the end of the job,he’s still tying up all the annoying loose ends,but earning a far smaller commission for his trouble.

You should be fine to remove the infill beneath the arch. Going forward,the chimney stack will need ventilating with an air brick,top & bottom.

+1 to that.

Make sure you get absolutely spot on dimensions from the window company. Not done a TF myself for years but we used to have to leave a gap top & bottom around the frames to allow for differential settlement between the TF & masonry-worth checking what’s required now as the bricklayer will need that info too.

I was taught that the mix should get weaker from first to second coat or it’ll pull- @nod?

I’d think you’d want a decent scaled drawing. Might not be the thing to attempt early on.

Saw this on Social media-very clever! Never done anything similar myself. intrigued by the bond used-assume it’s a ‘Wild Bond’ that the lads who went to the continent in the 90’s used to talk about. The only rule appears to be not to repeat the same course for a nominal vertical distance.

Swap that half block out for a full one & have two 100mm pieces either side of the next block along. The small cut on the RHS isn’t the issue here-leaving very little bond at the corner on LHS for the next course is.

‘Paint grade’ might be the phrase to use when asking merchants.

Couple of thoughts (apologies if I’m repeating anything @Russell griffiths or anyone has said-skipped through the thread)- 1/ you’re overthinking,the runs are long enough that the perp joints could be opened or tightened slightly to make it work bricks,especially if they are ‘new’ imperials-likely to be longer than 215mm. Just make the piers brick dimensions I.e 890mm,1340mm etc but check brick dims with your manufacturer. 2/ unless you’re footing is going to spot on forget about trench blocks. 3/ if it’ll work for the maximum lengths,hide the mj’s round the corners behind the down pipes from the roof.

I hear you @Canski -I don’t currently employ anyone (&have only ever had max two on for me) but the lack of engagement with the task in hand is par for the course. Got a lovely fella working with me (not for me) but Jeez-can’t lay to the line,puts ties in the wrong course,forgets tray damp,overall has no concept of problem solving. Just have to keep telling myself ‘he doesn’t work for me,he doesn’t work for me.’

Be worth popping outside during a downpour & checking that nothing’s overflowing from that gutter. If that’s blocked & sending additional rainwater down to splash up,that will exacerbate the problem.

That’s been done by a DIYer,I’d say,the small cut up the left hand side reveal is a big no-no to a proper bricklayer. They’ve re-used the bricks from somewhere else too-you can see a mastic or paint line on some of the half bricks on the right. I would apply brick acid with a paint brush so you keep it off the mortar joints and wash off with the hose. Looks like it will need a good few times to see any improvement though.

Think @Temp means above the lead line.

Doubt it’s slate from the 50’s.

I’d be tempted to drill dowels into them all just for peace of mind.

You could make some plywood protection for them once they’re installed. Much prefer to build in as I go.

Think he should’ve used a water level to transfer a metre above ffl from adjacent rooms. Any discrepancy would’ve become apparent at that point & a plan could’ve been made.

Either that or get them to cut that course out & rebuild I guess. Either way I’d monitor it & keep a record.

Either or. I’d imagine they might have built the main house all the way up,struck the scaffold & then built the annexe separately but maybe not. Longer term-I’d say all you can do is fill it & monitor.

Not a problem,and not dumb. What I think maybe has happened is this-the brickwork has been built to 24 courses (“first lift”). The scaffolders,by accident or not caring,have butted the wall with a tube when putting the first lift in and left it with 2 or 3 course tipping back,giving the 5mm gap we see in the photo. The gap would be at our below the scaffold board height so not necessarily seen by the brickies (or they saw but didn’t care.) The offending tube stayed in position during the rest of the build and so did the 5mm gap.

So around 1.5m. If they built 24 courses from dpc 24 x 0.075m=1.8m,scaffold ledgers would normally go in a bit below that so that there’s a bit of work showing that you can plumb off. Starting to feel like Columbo. In all seriousness,I’ve come across this many times on sites-scaffolders often can’t be arsed to cut boards or tubes so they just force them in,walk away & to hell with the consequences.

Looks like a movement joint where the two meet-obviously can’t see if it’s continuous behind the render but if it is,that would probably rule out differential movement/settlement. I think it my earlier scaffold lift theory looks more & more likely-what height from ground floor is the crack approximately?