Black limestone hearth - cracked joints & lifted flags.

JustAnotherSaver

It's next week before I can get in touch with the guy who did the job so I'm just asking here in the meantime.


Basically in February we had a multi fuel stove fitted. The hearth is black limestone flags.


I've come to paint up the living room & so covered everything, including the hearth, obviously.


Now i don't know how it's happened. If I or my wife has ended up standing in a bad spot on the hearth but one of the flags has lifted...





If i stand back on it it doesn't go down any. If i stand on the face edge then it does seem to lift it a bit more.


The bed underneath the left flag is quite solid, but underneath the lifted flag it's set, but doesn't feel rock solid like under the left side. Plus it's cracked more. Whether this has any negative effects I've no idea, i just thought i'd point it out.






I'm just wondering what they should be doing to put this right?


I'm guessing lift flag off, knock off all the cement on the underside & the joints to the left & rear flag.


As for the bed ... i've no idea.


And then somehow re-fit while aiming to get it level.


Is it literally as simple as that?


Like i say, it was fitted in February but the ends of the floorboards you can see are a little damp. Surely it shouldn't still be like that? I can understand it being damp to begin with due to the water in the cement mix, but 3 months on?


And it can't be coming from the underside because we had the floor renewed in December, including joists & DPC was laid across the top of the joists around this area specifically.

Furts

My reaction is what did you expect with a job like that? It is difficult to get an idea of scale but it appears the installer has laid a huge thick bed of wet mortar straight onto your floorboards then dropped the hearth onto this.

Mortar is not used for bedding timber, mortar shrinks as it cures, timber floor boards move, flex, shrink and swell. The end result will be what you have experienced.

You would need supplier recommendations, or trade membership guidance on the ideal details. But I would typically expect something like 18mm WBP plywood as a spreader across the boards., and the hearth properly adhered to this.

However if the fire has a high output I question why a proper hearth detail has not been considered, or what was there previously. Basically, proper heating sources and floor boards should be kept a safe distance apart.

JustAnotherSaver

The photo like you say, doesn't really show the full picture.

The bed is not 'straight on to floorboards'. It looks like it's touching the boards so it'll only actually be a little bit on the boards.

What the bed is mainly on is, i don't know what it was underneath to be honest. Bricks i suppose. It'd been ruined whatever it was.

This is one photo i found of before it was boarded out & hearth laid etc....





Anyway as a side note, what do you mean by "proper hearth detail"? Do you mean whatever would've been there originally?

Either way, nothing else was considered because i wanted black limestone. My mother has it at her house, has had it for around 5 years now with no problem, i like the look of it & that's what i wanted.

As for what was there previously, it was just some cheapy thing from B&Q that the previous owners had by the looks of it. Everything else in the house appeared to have come from B&Q too.

I don't know what regs say but there'd be probably 700mm give or take between the face of the fire & the start of the floorboards.

Furts

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

The photo like you say, doesn't really show the full picture.

The bed is not 'straight on to floorboards'. It looks like it's touching the boards so it'll only actually be a little bit on the boards.

What the bed is mainly on is, i don't know what it was underneath to be honest. Bricks i suppose. It'd been ruined whatever it was.

This is one photo i found of before it was boarded out & hearth laid etc....





Anyway as a side note, what do you mean by "proper hearth detail"? Do you mean whatever would've been there originally?

Either way, nothing else was considered because i wanted black limestone. My mother has it at her house, has had it for around 5 years now with no problem, i like the look of it & that's what i wanted.

As for what was there previously, it was just some cheapy thing from B&Q that the previous owners had by the looks of it. Everything else in the house appeared to have come from B&Q too.

I don't know what regs say but there'd be probably 700mm give or take between the face of the fire & the start of the floorboards.

You have specified a multi fuel stove, so you will have the make, the model number, the fitting instructions and the technical requirements. These should be checked against your hearth construction, and whilst you are at it I suggest you check your flue. If you do not know about hearths I am not confident you know about a flue, nor for that matter the requisite air supply and ventilaltion.

To say your floor was renewed and you have no idea what was at your hearth location is worrying. This renewal should have been in conjunction with a designed hearth size and detail. There may be nothing but rubbish located there and what you witness is rising damp. You have commented about damp around the hearth so this is a likely cause.

I sense the work has not been thought through, nor supervised, nor inspected. It is easy to say "nothing else was considered because I wanted black limestone" This means your builders and the fireplace fitter could bounce back on your attitude.

I also wonder where you are in terms of Buildings Regulations.

cyclonebri1

I was going to answer exactly as furts, I too thought it was directly on floorboard where it should have been set on thick ply.

You need to get the guy that did the hearth back in to rectify it and to find out exactly what it is sat on because whatever it is, it isn't suitable. I find it hard to understand how boards cut have been cut and removed, or even left short without adding some serious structure between the joists to take the load between them.

He could of course have cut into the joists by a couple of inches and boarded over to keep the levels down.
Bad news if he did and you really do need to know.

Softly softly approach at this stage methinks, then act according to his attitude

Furts

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

I was going to answer exactly as furts, I too thought it was directly on floorboard where it should have been set on thick ply.

You need to get the guy that did the hearth back in to rectify it and to find out exactly what it is sat on because whatever it is, it isn't suitable. I find it hard to understand how boards cut have been cut and removed, or even left short without adding some serious structure between the joists to take the load between them.

He could of course have cut into the joists by a couple of inches and boarded over to keep the levels down.
Bad news if he did and you really do need to know.

Softly softly approach at this stage methinks, then act according to his attitude

But read again my comments about design and details, and technical details and Regulations. Going by memory there is a huge trail of posts involving everything from plastering, to electrics, to plumbing, to payments...

It sounds like all the work has been a disaster area. OP may have been extremely unlucky, but I suspect there is a little more to the story.

This building disaster has been going on for many months. Indeed there is a post running at present about marks in the plaster. Yet it appears OP has not gone about decorating in a professional manner.

Ignorance is not always bliss, employing cowboys is not always going to bring happiness, cutting corners can lead to grief, and perhaps seeking the cheapest has also come into matters.

JustAnotherSaver

You're losing me here.

Why would he have cut in to the joists? I'm assuming we're talking about the guy who installed the fire & hearth here & not those who did the damp work & flooring?

If so, then unless he lifted the floorboards & put them back down again (which he didn't) then he'd not have access to the joists. Clearly i'm having a dim moment here ... but i don't see where the joists talk came from. He couldn't get to them plus i'm lost as to why he'd want or need to?

The final picture there is how it was left (aside from the chimney breast got boarded & skimmed) before the fire installer came out, so this guy hasn't cut up any floorboards.

I also don't know what that base is constructed of because i'm not really the greatest person in the world when it comes to DIY/handyman type knowledge. Laugh all you like but i wouldn't even attempt wallpapering
All i know is the base was solid. There were set tiles in places. I assumed these tiles would span the whole thing as many were broken so i'm guessing these were original. If anyone can match this up with being a 1930s build & be able to work out what must be that base then great. Otherwise ... sorry but i simply don't know.

There was damp around the old boards yes. The original joists obviously had no DPC, the boards & joists were touching damp brickwork. Even i can work that one out how it was showing damp on the surface

But with the new joists & boards ... the ends of the joists were wrapped in DPC. We also reminded the guys about the damp patches on the old floorboards in case they forgot, so the tops of the joists were then covered in DPC. Basically anything that was close to the hearth area had DPC on it so it didn't suffer the same problem.

And it was fine ...

then this hearth was installed & there was a bit of damp showing at the base of the mortar where it met the floorboards
but unlike before, this damp stayed at a level & didn't spread out along the flooboards getting bigger & bigger.

Looking at it again, it appears to have dried but stained. I assume just from the process of the hearth bed drying out.

Having typed all this, i've even forgotten if the original question has actually been answered or not :rotfl: I'll have to have another read

JustAnotherSaver

Furts wrote: »

But read again my comments about design and details, and technical details and Regulations. Going by memory there is a huge trail of posts involving everything from plastering, to electrics, to plumbing, to payments...

It sounds like all the work has been a disaster area. OP may have been extremely unlucky, but I suspect there is a little more to the story.

This building disaster has been going on for many months. Indeed there is a post running at present about marks in the plaster. Yet it appears OP has not gone about decorating in a professional manner.

Ignorance is not always bliss, employing cowboys is not always going to bring happiness, cutting corners can lead to grief, and perhaps seeking the cheapest has also come into matters.

Ahh.

I see where you appear to be going with this one which is a shame.

You do realise that "more to this" isn't always the juicy gossip that people often want on the forum?

That the "more to this" is quite simply down to my total lack of knowledge & skill level as well as my tendancy to overthink & worry??

Yes, it could quite easily be something as boring as that.

Plastering - depending on how far back you went, the original plasterers were jokers & we got unlucky. Long story ... wont bore you. The current ones blended new with old. I was expecting a 'perfect finish' which you could paint easily. I didn't want to waste time & money painting if experienced people could say ... that wont work, don't waste your time & money.

Anything wrong with asking about it? To me ... no.

Electrics - when you go to kill a circuit & it doesn't & one switch works about 5 lights so on & so forth, i'd say that this one most certainly needed looking in to. I also don't want to be fobbed off by conmen so again i feel there was no problem with running this by people who have nothing to gain from me (money) ... i.e. you guys.

Plumbing - i assume you're meaning the radiators. I had a go, needed to call a plumber out twice because through lack of skill i ended up creating 2 leaks. Not because i was doing the process wrong, but because i didn't know how tight to tighten things. I thought it needed to be super tight ... it overtightened.
People say have a go, then they say don't bother. You can't win.

Payments - when you pay up someone £1500 & they claim to have done a job which hasn't worked & you now have mould growing on your walls, i'd say it's perfectly fine to try & look in to how we can best go about getting some money back when they don't get back in touch.

The unprofessional manner - you look in to it online, get told go 50.50 by a few people, think this is sound advice, you carry it out, then you get told this is unprofessional. You then carry out the advice as per the instructions on the paint tub & get told that this is also unprofessional? Can't win.

We also never went the cheapest route. Middle of the park actually.



But to summarise - as you seem to be implying there's something going on here, the only thing going on is my lack of knowledge, skill, my wanting to not waste money (but accept i will be wasting time in doing all this) & me wanting to only do a job once. I don't see any issue in asking online in order to do that. It's not hurting anyone. It's only delaying my job ... which again isn't hurting anyone.

Furts

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

Ahh.

I see where you appear to be going with this one which is a shame.

You do realise that "more to this" isn't always the juicy gossip that people often want on the forum?

That the "more to this" is quite simply down to my total lack of knowledge & skill level as well as my tendancy to overthink & worry??

Yes, it could quite easily be something as boring as that.

Plastering - depending on how far back you went, the original plasterers were jokers & we got unlucky. Long story ... wont bore you. The current ones blended new with old. I was expecting a 'perfect finish' which you could paint easily. I didn't want to waste time & money painting if experienced people could say ... that wont work, don't waste your time & money.

Anything wrong with asking about it? To me ... no.

Electrics - when you go to kill a circuit & it doesn't & one switch works about 5 lights so on & so forth, i'd say that this one most certainly needed looking in to. I also don't want to be fobbed off by conmen so again i feel there was no problem with running this by people who have nothing to gain from me (money) ... i.e. you guys.

Plumbing - i assume you're meaning the radiators. I had a go, needed to call a plumber out twice because through lack of skill i ended up creating 2 leaks. Not because i was doing the process wrong, but because i didn't know how tight to tighten things. I thought it needed to be super tight ... it overtightened.
People say have a go, then they say don't bother. You can't win.

Payments - when you pay up someone £1500 & they claim to have done a job which hasn't worked & you now have mould growing on your walls, i'd say it's perfectly fine to try & look in to how we can best go about getting some money back when they don't get back in touch.

The unprofessional manner - you look in to it online, get told go 50.50 by a few people, think this is sound advice, you carry it out, then you get told this is unprofessional. You then carry out the advice as per the instructions on the paint tub & get told that this is also unprofessional? Can't win.

We also never went the cheapest route. Middle of the park actually.



But to summarise - as you seem to be implying there's something going on here, the only thing going on is my lack of knowledge, skill, my wanting to not waste money (but accept i will be wasting time in doing all this) & me wanting to only do a job once. I don't see any issue in asking online in order to do that. It's not hurting anyone. It's only delaying my job ... which again isn't hurting anyone.

I do not know the details of your building work. However what comes across is somebody who did not engage an Architect, nor a project manger, nor an experienced contractor, nor a Clerk Of works, nor possibly Buildings Regulations.

Instead it appears trades were engaged on an ad hoc basis without checking their credentials, nor seeking adequate references, nor checking or testing their competence.

It is apparent little attention has been paid to detail, and I suspect no specification was drawn up for the works.

You have been let down time and again by those you engaged, but is this any wonder?

The result has been problematic but you decided to take on the work, it appears you supervised, you inspected and you paid.

Fortunately there are a lot of well intentionned people on this Forum to bale you out. You owe many of us a beer, or a coffee!

cyclonebri1

Furts wrote: »

You have been let down time and again by those you engaged, but is this any wonder?


Fortunately there are a lot of well intentionned people on this Forum to bale you out. You owe many of us a beer, or a coffee!

I don't want a beer F, but a single thanks to all that have tried to help this chap in several threads, (I like you have posted in several), would show some degree of gratefulness.
We are trying to help, it's free, but most of the threads from this guy seem like:wall::wall::wall::wall:, sorry, time out for me.

Furts

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

I don't want a beer F, but a single thanks to all that have tried to help this chap in several threads, (I like you have posted in several), would show some degree of gratefulness.
We are trying to help, it's free, but most of the threads from this guy seem like:wall::wall::wall::wall:, sorry, time out for me.

And I owe you a sincere apology here. I hit the thanks button five times - so brilliant was your reply. It only registered once though!

Yes the thanks button is an electronic thingy majiggy, and of little concern. However, it does give a good insight into those who receive wisdom from the Forum

One of my rules in the construction industry is twofold. First for every cowboy contractor there must be a cowboy client. Second, good contractors like to work for good clients. Perhaps if OP does another building project it would be prudent to spend a moment reflecting on this.