New bathroom not done correctly?

moneyistooshorttomention

When I bought current house a couple of years back - everything was ripped out of the bathroom and it was completely re-done.

Part of this was that a large part of the (concrete) floor had to be re-done and a sizeable amount of the bathroom floor was newly done concrete. The firm told me I had to wait several days for the concrete floor to dry before I could have vinyl flooring laid on it. I did duly wait the length of time they said before it was put down.

Fast forward to now - and I suspect they may not have "told it like it is" to me and the concrete needed rather longer than that. Am I correct and, if so, what to do to sort things out now?

Reason I'm thinking that is basically because a strip of vinyl up against one of the skirting boards just won't clean up whatever I do - and I suspect it's got some mould grown underneath it. I've now got to the stage where I don't really think any of the vinyl looks as new (if not with a bit of semi-dark staining on it as per the nearest couple of inches to that bit of skirting board). It ought to all still look brand new - as it's only been a couple of years and I've been reckoning on not replacing the vinyl until 10-15 years after the bathroom was gutted AND when I can afford it (neither of which is the case right now).

Also I keep reading about things like workmen needing to put damp proof membrane down underneath new concrete floor. I don't recall seeing anything other than seeing new concrete poured into the "gouges" (ie most of the floor then) in my bathroom.

Any thoughts on this? I've just got the awful suspicion that I've landed up with that done by cowboys masquerading as normal workmen and might have to rip up my vinyl I shouldnt have to replace for at least 10 years and have some new vinyl put down?

NB; Furts - if you're reading this - I have a distinct suspicion I know just what you'll be thinking about those workmen ........oh dear....

Furts

I will chip in with some thoughts, if that is OK by you.

Fundamentals of building are a concrete floor slab is laid on a membrane, typically 1000 or 1200 gauge polythene. This serves two purposes. First it stops the water and fines (like cement - a vital ingredient) from soaking away into the underlying hardcore. Second it stops moisture coming up through the concrete - it is essentially a damp proof course.

Concrete does not strengthen by drying out. Consumers think it does but this is incorrect. It gains strength by chemical reaction with the cement and water.

Gradually the concrete will dry out - the water will be used up, and the surface will be drying out, even though it should not be allowed to.

Your couple of days was too little time by an enormous margin - a slab can take a couple of months to dry out. (Google floor screed drying out times - something should come up)

In addition concrete is deemed to take 28 days to reach most of its strength, but two thirds of this will be in the first seven days.

Concrete shrinks as it strengthens, so nobody should be serious about doing anything to your floor for at least the first 28 days. This because it is still strengthening and it is also shrinking, and it is also drying.

Apologies for the generic, anorak, approach to building, but I suspect you will get the drift.

moneyistooshorttomention

I had a horrible feeling that it might be something like that:(

Basically it looks like they should have said "Leave it at least a month for the floor to dry out before putting vinyl down". But they definitely did say only a few days (think it was 5 days they specified?) - so I was doing exactly as they specified.

I'd be willing to bet there is no membrane there - as all I ever saw going down was newly-mixed concrete (ie because of the pipework being changed underneath the floor).

I obviously don't wish/don't intend to rip up the whole floor in that room now because of them.

Can I presume I'd be okay if I rip up my vinyl (darn it:mad:) and buy some new vinyl all over again:mad: - and that now the floor has been laid for around 2 years that I should be able to expect new-vinyl-all-over-again should stay okay and last me long as long/as well as expected?

Will that be sufficient to sort the problem out?

Doozergirl

Who laid the vinyl?

Concrete requires a month per inch laid to dry out fully.

The way to avoid that is to lay a liquid DPM over the top of the concrete before laying the vinyl. This is also what one would do if the floor had no DPM and the solid floor was original.

krey

1mm per day is the drying time for concrete, do the maths yourself.

moneyistooshorttomention

Doozergirl wrote: »

Who laid the vinyl?

Concrete requires a month per inch laid to dry out fully.

The way to avoid that is to lay a liquid DPM over the top of the concrete before laying the vinyl. This is also what one would do if the floor had no DPM and the solid floor was original.

I don't know exactly how deep the concrete is - but I'd hazard a guess at somewhere between 6" and 12" deep. So this being over 2 years later would mean it being dry by now presumably (even though covered by the vinyl) - as I doubt it's more than 24" deep.

I definitely waited the number of days they had said before the vinyl was laid. It looks rather as if they knew what would happen to my new vinyl - but had figured out it wouldnt rebound back at them (bar their reputation obviously and I guess they don't care about that....) for telling me that that few days would be okay (as they only told me verbally - not in writing).

At a practical level I guess it will be sufficient for my bathroom to be as per plan for me to darn well have new vinyl laid again - and at my own expense again. I guess that should sort my bathroom out? On the other hand - is it possible to have a flooring firm take up my vinyl carefully/treat it with something to make it look normal again (ie kill any mould) and then re-lay it and it will look normal again?

What is a liquid DPM? I guess that's a liquid damp proof membrane? Is that something they could have done in no time flat on top of damp concrete and I'd be none the wiser they'd done it and would still just look at the concrete and think "Oh concrete" and not realise something had been done on top of it? (ie as typical female customer who knows very little about DIY type matters)? The floor just looked like damp concrete to me and gradually got dryer-looking as the number of days they had said passed and no-one told me they were laying a "liquid DPM".

ryder72

Are you sure you arent confusing concrete with screed?

IN either case, you should have allowed more drying time. Putting vinyl on a wet screed/concrete would trap humidity under the vinyl encouraging mold growth and I would personally leave it a couple of months atleast before attempting to cover it up.

chrisw

I can see that you might get mould under the vinyl, but I can't see how that would show up on the top surface of the vinyl.

Doozergirl

Could you just try to accept facts without assuming what other people think? It wouldn't matter to the concrete guy whether you laid it the day after or the year after. It's not his house.

Maybe the concrete guys didn't know how long to leave it for vinyl to be laid because they don't lay vinyl.

Given that vinyl is vinyl, I'm sure some elbow grease would do an amzing job on it but we don't actually know what the problem is until it comes up. I'd be very surprised if marks on the underside showed through to the front. They won't rot.

You still haven't answered who laid it? Is it a lino type vinyl or an LVT like Amtico?

I highly recommend seeking some mindfulness classes.

Mr.Generous

Some chemicals and products can stain through vinyl from under it, not unusual with flooring. I suspect its not a case of cleaning it. Unless the concrete is damp proofed you could have the same problem again. I had a garage base done years ago where they ran out of membrane and just poured the concrete anyway. You could actually see beads of water appearing when it rained (land slopes down to the garage).
I put guttering up to divert rainfall from the slab as a first step.
Because it was just a garage I tried using waterseal painted onto the bare concrete, then later floor paint. It worked and the floor has remained dry ever since.

Davesnave

If there were pipes under the floor of this '70s property, which was 'ripped up' to access them, they were most likely to have be laid within a screed over the DPM.

If this was the case, and it was done carefully, the DPM would still be intact.

I know in my own 70s property the pipes are laid under the screed and this is no more than about 80mm thick. It's easy to remove them, although in most places I left in situ rather than disturb.

If the screed, however thick, was replaced with concrete, it shouldn't have been covered up with vinyl so quickly, but at least the DPM would be OK.

Just trying to be positive here, but I agree a liquid DPM would be a solution if the vinyl is replaced.