External wall insulation (EWI) cladding causing aesthetic and physical damage to period properties?

[MAB]

As I walk around local roads in my area I see increasing examples of poor quality installation of irreversible External Wall Insulation (EWI) cladding causing aesthetic and physical damage to unlisted period properties or those not in official 'conservation areas'. Brickwork exteriors and associated detailing are a major part of many Victorian, Edwardian and 1930's period homes, but are just covered over leaving a bland, characterless, rendered box with deeply inset windows. Looks even worse on a terrace or semi-detached house where one half still retains its period features up against the current trend for a 'grey plague' painted smooth rendered box.....

It also looks like many 'cowboy installers' have moved in to exploit the Government backed insulation schemes, just as previously happened with sprayfoam roof insulation, etc.

 

Solid wall external insulation problems: nearly all homes need it replaced or repaired:-

https://hoa.org.uk/news/solid-wall-insulation-problems/

 

[Redbeard]

In terms of changing the appearance, yes it does. In terms of damaging the property, yes it can. In terms of damaging all properties to which it is applied, no it doesn't. Like all insulation measures it needs care and risk analyses. My guideline is that the end result must not look stupid. If it does, it probably is, and there are probably several more stupidities thrown into the mix. 'Cowboys' never give any discipline a good reputation, but there are good guys out there. I just feel sorry for those who get not-a-good-guy.

[Beelbeebub]

The "render onto foam insulation that is screwed to the wall" method has some risks. 

 

In theory a well done ewi solution should protect the building from thr elements and preserve the wall by keeping it warmer and drier. 

 

The aesthetic will almost certainly change if you start with brick or stone. There ain't really a way to mimic that - and I'm not sure we should try. 

 

Lean into the fact our buikdings are changing to adapt to new circumstances. It has always been so. Structures are extended, modified, uses change, windows are added and subtracted, uses change again etc.  Many of our houses were never built with electrical wiring or central heating. A good few didn't have plumbing and some didn't even have indoor toilets. These new technologies were added as circumstance changed. The addition of ewi is just another chapter. 

[Roger440]

12 hours ago, MAB said:

As I walk around local roads in my area I see increasing examples of poor quality installation of irreversible External Wall Insulation (EWI) cladding causing aesthetic and physical damage to unlisted period properties or those not in official 'conservation areas'. Brickwork exteriors and associated detailing are a major part of many Victorian, Edwardian and 1930's period homes, but are just covered over leaving a bland, characterless, rendered box with deeply inset windows. Looks even worse on a terrace or semi-detached house where one half still retains its period features up against the current trend for a 'grey plague' painted smooth rendered box.....

It also looks like many 'cowboy installers' have moved in to exploit the Government backed insulation schemes, just as previously happened with sprayfoam roof insulation, etc.

 

Solid wall external insulation problems: nearly all homes need it replaced or repaired:-

https://hoa.org.uk/news/solid-wall-insulation-problems/

 

 

The fact that most are poorly installed cant be a surprise, except to the morons signing off said schemes. Everytime free money is on offer, the cowboys arrive. Every, single, time.

 

Of course, with EWI, its compounded because its a job that really does need careful analysis, and fitting. And the potential damage of it not be so, very significant.

 

The visual aspect is valid, but we cant stop people upgrading houses, otherwise noting will ever change. But i certainly wouldnt do it to my house! 

[sgt_woulds]

In an ideal world, all insulation upgrades - EWI, and espescially IWI - should require building control submission, approval, and sign off.

 

They should not be permitted until a full report is produced by the installer and submitted to BC for assessment, including;

 

WUFI,

Visual assessment of existing building and issues to be resolved before insulation works commence (pointing, broken gutters, existing cold bridges, etc)

Method statement outlining how the installation will be handled - particularly highlighting cold bridging issues and weatherproofing

 

This would then be agreed in priciple by BCO (surely A.I. can assist with this stage), pending final inspection (by a trained BCO assessor) and sign-off after completion.

 

This would weed out the bandits and make the whole industry more proffessional - even the good guys sometimes make mistakes and a system of peer review is essential.

 

Unfortunately it will never happen, as Building Control departments for all councils have been defunded in real terms in the last 20 years, and the private BC companies already have more work than they can handle.   

 

 

 

 

[Roger440]

10 hours ago, sgt_woulds said:

In an ideal world, all insulation upgrades - EWI, and espescially IWI - should require building control submission, approval, and sign off.

 

They should not be permitted until a full report is produced by the installer and submitted to BC for assessment, including;

 

WUFI,

Visual assessment of existing building and issues to be resolved before insulation works commence (pointing, broken gutters, existing cold bridges, etc)

Method statement outlining how the installation will be handled - particularly highlighting cold bridging issues and weatherproofing

 

This would then be agreed in priciple by BCO (surely A.I. can assist with this stage), pending final inspection (by a trained BCO assessor) and sign-off after completion.

 

This would weed out the bandits and make the whole industry more proffessional - even the good guys sometimes make mistakes and a system of peer review is essential.

 

Unfortunately it will never happen, as Building Control departments for all councils have been defunded in real terms in the last 20 years, and the private BC companies already have more work than they can handle.   

 

 

 

 

 

The interesting thing seems to be, that those works carried out under eco4 scheme do NOT have building control sign off.

 

What i simply cannot find out, is how that can possibly be. Its notifiable work. So how can work done under eco4 not have BC sign off?

 

Of course, its no surprise that such work is generally poor, to put it mildly.

 

 

[ADLIan]

I believe approved contractors (to PAS????) can self certify

[Roger440]

10 hours ago, ADLIan said:

I believe approved contractors (to PAS????) can self certify

If thats the case, then it would certainly explain the standard of work.

 

Question then is, how did we arrive at a postion where one group of people working on houses can self certify, but others, including the major house builders cant.  Has the distinct whiff of corruption. Either way, the results merely prove self certification doesnt work.

 

Mind you, nor does building control!

[sgt_woulds]

 

As with MCS certification, the idea is that the installations are monitored by a governing body and the installers would have to rectify or lose their 'licence' to self certify - in practice this never happens.

 

The governing body just protects itself and it's members, inspections are few, and rectifications are rarely enforced.  Mostly it is about hushing things up. 

MCS is a perfect example, as is the NHBC.   

 

I started installing solar before MCS set itself up as the governing body - no consulation with the (3) existing installation companies, it just plugged itself into the PV goldrush when the Feed-in-tarrif was introduced and started making life difficult (and expensive) for us, and easier for the cowboys to get started. 

 

There were very few of the cowboys who ever faced any consequences for their appalling installations; luckily for us in the end, as fixing all the gash installs kept us going when the FiT ran out and all of the goldrush companies went bust...

 

I can give you a perfect example of how such a certification body works:

 

 

We installed solar panels on a newly finished house local to me.  I had already suggested to the homeowner that he should have a proper building insection whilst the scaffold was up as I put it 'without scaring you I've seen a few things that concerned me' !

 

This of course was duley ignored until his roof started leaking - as we were the last ones up there we got the blame.  Our company offered to pay for the scaffold (3 floors and 6m wide it wasn't cheap) but only if he got the buildg company to come out and inspect with us at the same time.

 

The builder refused, and the NHBC (eventually) got involved.

 

To cut a long story short, on the scaffold on the day of inspection was me, the homeowner, the builder rep, and the NHBC.

 

Both the NHBC and the Builder were increadibly rude and ordered me to remove the panels for inspection.   I counted to ten a lot that day!   

 

I replied that I was happy to comply, but first could we look at the issues with the roof itself - at which point the homeowner chipped in and asked me to explain.  I walked up the roof and lifted the 'chimney' (fake grp) off without effort.  I then walked the length of the ridge and randomly picked ridge tiles up - this was easy, since none of them were fixed.  I repeated the same excercise with the lead flashings and pointed to all the gaps were the water was getting in.  At which point the builder - who was red in the face by this point - begrudgingly said they would 'get the roofer out'.

 

'OK' I said, 'but before you do that, can I show you something else?'   I then lifted the first row of tiles and felt and showed them the missing cavity closer.  I pulled out the strip of insulation plugging the top of the cavity and shown a light down to the bottom of the wall.  'Do you think the house would perform better if the cavity was filled?  Also, Mr NHBC, could you tell me how many cavity ties are required for this type of construction?'

 

So the house was demolished and rebuilt and the building company were forced to pay for temporary accomodation for 7 months.  The snagging list after the rebuild delayed them from moving back in for a further 3 months!  

 

I fully expected the NHBC at that point to tell the builder to inspect every other house on the estate.  It would be amazing if the others were not also built to the same 'quality'.  Of course this never happened!

 

I meet the homeowner regularly as his son attends Cubs with my own.  He is mystified why all of his neighbours were not concerned when they saw his house pulled down and rebuilt.  Of the ones he spoken to, none of them have been contacted by the NHBC or the building company.  They are all left in blissful ignorance.  

 

 

This will be the situation with PAS too.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[-rick-]

21 minutes ago, sgt_woulds said:

As with MCS certification, the idea is that the installations are monitored by a governing body and the installers would have to rectify or lose their 'licence' to self certify - in practice this never happens.

 

This poor self certification does seem to be at the root of many many problems with UK construction. We seem to do it an awful lot more than other countries. In an attempt by governments to reduce bureaucracy and the cost of running building control they've created a huge mess where contractors can get away with terrible work and this drags the whole industry down as the good contractors find it difficult to compete.

 

I watch a selection of people building houses, etc, on youtube and they all seem to have to deal with a lot more inspections/controls than we do. Either building inspectors or possibly supervising engineers who have to put their licence on the line to sign off the work. (ie, they sign off the design and then inspect).

 

I'm not sure how we could move back to that sort of system in this country, seems like a mountain of work to undo decades of bad practice/habits and loss of experience.