Metal clad extension

Eldi_Dos

@Tim, if you are thinking of painting corrugated metalwork I would imagine it would need to be de-galvanised first,although would seek informed opinion on that. I am intrigued trying to work out how the roof is drained.

Jeepers_Creepers

It wouldn't need de-galvanising (what a 'mare!) - there are plenty of good non-ferrous primers out there.

But, I'd certainly remove it and replace it with box-section galvanised sheets instead - that would look a lot better.

Only kidding.

All sorts of alternatives, such as PVC 'timber' cladding, or cedar, or even mesh and render - your call.

I can imagine the builder thought it would be cool, stylish, a statement. One out of three ain't bad.

twopenny

A question for the vendor. They must have expected this. Preferably in writing.
You will need to know not just for future improvement but also insurance if you move in.
Flat roof, drainage as said and construction. Your insurance company will want the details.
There must be something special about this house for you to even consider it.

sevenhills

Doozergirl said:

There's no evidence that it is metal framed, we can only see what it is clad with. 

The vendor must know what it is.

The shape of it looks like the ones in my locality, these have a metal frame and clad in wood, all with double, glassed doors. The wood ones look worse than this metal one. I would think they will be rather dark inside, totally opposite to the all glass conservatories.

Section62

Eldi_Dos said:

@Tim, if you are thinking of painting corrugated metalwork I would imagine it would need to be de-galvanised first,although would seek informed opinion on that.

It would need an etch primer, suitable for use on galvanised steel.

But DIY painting of galvanised sheets isn't a good idea - it is difficult to get a good finish, and even with the right paints it will be less durable than normal painted surfaces.

Section62

pmartin86 said:

If it was me, I would assume a rebuild of the entire structure as part of my personal valuation of the house. If you assume that there is a brick wall, its going to be single skin, or its a cheap timber frame with the cheapest cladding they could manage. I'd run a mile.

I'd be a lot more charitable to the designer/builders.

The choice of material is niche, but the quality of the detailing and workmanship is good - don't underestimate the amount of care it takes to get rows of sheet metal fixings equally spaced and aligned when working with corrugated materials.

The only thing really letting it down is where the metal sheets meet the wooden decking - although I guess it is possible the decking was built/painted by others after the building was finished.

As Doozergirl says - modern methods and alternative materials aren't always cheap or inferior to what people expect to see with 'traditional' buildings.  E.g. there is a long history of using Weatherboard or Shiplap (or Clapboard in the US) where stone or clay (for bricks) isn't readily available locally. Corrugated metal is just a variation on that theme.

stuart45

Most people in the UK feel happier with a masonry building, which is why the developers use brick or stone to clad a timber framed house. It's surprising how many buy a house without knowing it's timber framed.
I saw a programme about pressed steel houses in Holland years ago, where the presenter told the Dutch architect that he couldn't see this happening in the UK in the near future.

TELLIT01

Tim11111000111 said:

I'm looking at buying a house. One thing that is putting me off is that the current owner had an extension done, and it is clad in what I consider to be a fairly hideous corrugated metal (see photos). In Scotland, so we have seen a Home Report already which describes it as "The wall construction to the extension cannot be confirmed. The extension is clad externally with a corrugated metal material, and the walls appear to be below 250mm thick."

Anyone have experience of this? My main question is how easy would it be to remove the cladding and replace it with something more aesthetically appealing? As a last resort we could just paint it to make it slightly more attractive - unless that is a big no-no for some reason?

That looks like a cop out by the people who produced the Home Report.  The was is either below 250mm or it isn't.  A two minute job for them to confirm that by comparing the internal and external measurements.

The cladding should be simple to remove, but how simple it will be to attach more attractive cladding will depend to a degree on the construction of the extension.

Rosa_Damascena

Doozergirl said:

pmartin86 said:

If it was me, I would assume a rebuild of the entire structure as part of my personal valuation of the house. If you assume that there is a brick wall, its going to be single skin, or its a cheap timber frame with the cheapest cladding they could manage. I'd run a mile.

I'd assume that you have no experience of the last 15-20 years of building technology.  

My house has less than 250mm walls and it wasn't cheap by any stretch of the imagination.  The future doesn't sit with cavity wall construction and it should have moved on already.  

The extension has been signed off, so it's fairly safe to assume that it will be of a recognised standard.   The thing with modern builds is that the outer skin is decorative and interchangeable.  It's almost
like a phone cover. 

I would still be factoring in the cost of a full rebuild. Its one way of encouraging the owner to give full details of its construction so the OP does know how much it will cost to change cosmetically.

If the OP is generous they can gift the vendor some vouchers towards an eye test...

cattom

what the hell is that. It needs pulling down and building properly. so the cost of that work needs to be taken into consideration when making an offer on this property.