Neighbour's asbestos roof

Mankysteve

Even though the risk of white asbestos much much lower than Red and Gray asbestos. There is still a risk involved higher than the removal of standard roof titles and procautions should be taken.

Not to mention the law breaking. Someone whom not following the prober reg is properly going to be illegal dumping which will then have to removed at Tax payers cost as the council will have to handle the material to the required standard.

diable

muckybutt wrote: »

You should know better then than to post such an irresponsible post then :mad:. IT IS ILLEGAL FULL STOP. Tit !

So are lots of things, c0ck ;o)))))

numberwang

LOL at some of these replies! Thanks for advice given & the counter arguement info on how harmful it is, will definitely look into that.

At the same time I still think they are operating outside of the law & not my concern how much it costs for them to clean up. They should have more sense!

Niv

Mankysteve wrote: »

Even though the risk of white asbestos much much lower than Red and Gray asbestos. There is still a risk involved higher than the removal of standard roof titles and procautions should be taken.

Not to mention the law breaking. Someone whom not following the prober reg is properly going to be illegal dumping which will then have to removed at Tax payers cost as the council will have to handle the material to the required standard.

Red and grey? Are you based in the UK? The three common types of asbestos are referred to as :
White (crysoltile)
Blue (crocidolite) and
Brown (amosite)

in the UK. So which are the red and grey? I have never come accross those terms in years of asbestos surveying.


Niv

dave82_2

If the roof tiles contain Chrysotile only they probably don't have to be licenced to remove them. They should dispose of them correctly though.

moonrakerz

numberwang wrote: »

At the same time I still think they are operating outside of the law & not my concern how much it costs for them to clean up. They should have more sense!

You think they are operating outside of the Law - you think what they are removing is asbestos...........

don't you think that you should check your facts before making wild accusations ?

diable

moonrakerz wrote: »

don't you think that you should check your facts before making wild accusations ?

this forum would become very boring if everyone did that, Hamish Mc T would have nothing to post about.............

numberwang

moonrakerz wrote: »

You think they are operating outside of the Law - you think what they are removing is asbestos...........

don't you think that you should check your facts before making wild accusations ?

LOL no, I absolutely know it's asbestos (had ours analysed & removed by a licensed asbestos removal company a while back). Neighbours house is same but *think* they are operating outside of the law by smashing it off the roof with a mechanical digger arm...

Sounds like you need to check some facts too

hethmar

Im not sure what the "fibres" are that the OP mentions. I remember pulling off an asbestos roof on our old sheds, probably 40 years ago now and cant remember fibres, they were just like shale.

sharnad

moonrakerz wrote: »

You think they are operating outside of the Law - you think what they are removing is asbestos...........

don't you think that you should check your facts before making wild accusations ?

she had she has told the council

I would also get on to enviromental health so they can come and check it out