Damage to bedroom ceiling plaster during loft conversion - reasonable expectations for repair?

Doozergirl

DRP said:

Doozergirl said:

No ceiling that is based on lath is going to be in 'essentially perfect condition' and even when you try to avoid rain in this country, you can't.  

You never know what you're going to encounter up there and some damage to the ceiling is a reasonable expectation, especially in an old house.  It's great if it isn't damaged.   If that original joist was rotten at one end for example, and someone walked on it and it snapped, you're lucky you didn't end up with a builder in your bedroom, let alone an impression of the timber.  

This is a contingency spend, IMO.  There is major structural work happening on that actual piece of the structure, which includes what is fragile plasterwork underneath.  This isn't avoidable damage by the builder, this is part and parcel of major building work in a precarious part of an old house.  

Old houses gonna be old.  

 

On the basis that you 'don't really want the artex anyway' a patch up is arguably adequate until you decide to do it properly.  Expecting smooth ceilings at the expense of the builder will look like outright manipulation to them.  

If the ceilings were already smooth and suffered similar damage, then the builders would have fully rectified it by patching and skimming. The situation is a bit more complicated because they can't return an artex ceiling to the state it was in,  hence the thread.

Getting them to renovate my ceilings solely at their expense wasn't really my expectation,.

I think you're missing the point a bit.  They aren't to blame and you should be expecting to pay for whatever work you choose to have done.  If you get some form of discount, it's a nice thing.  The artex is just unfortunate - but in older houses artex was applied to hide a multitude of sins...

A lath and plaster ceiling is a century old, as are the joists above that were inadequate walking on, hence the loft conversion.  Not even considering the condition of the brickwork holding the joists or any rot from water ingress. 

They are up there working in a dangerous environment.  

Section62

DRP said:

Because before the incidents that caused the damage we had ceilings 'apparently' (more accurate description than 'essentially'?) in perfect condition, without big holes, splits and damp damage. Replacing the artex could have waited years, but now that they are in bits it moves up the renovation priority list a fair bit

I would agree that if overboarding to stabilise the ceiling is necessary, the onus on paying for it shifts much more to us. 

That's probably the nub of it.  Both you and the contractor should have looked over the ceiling at the project planning stage and realised that lath and plaster is fragile and very likely at or very near end of life.

Ideally, the existing ceilings should have remained in place to protect and keep the rooms below usable, with the intention that once the work was completed above that they would be replaced, preferably (IMV) with boards fitted to new supports that were put in place during the loft work.

I appreciate that having a patched up ceiling is not great, but if you were willing to live with the artex on a temporary basis then you are treading a very fine line of being perceived of trying "outright manipulation" (as Doozergirl more concisely phrased it) if you now try using damage (which is part and parcel of this kind of work) as leverage to get quite substantial betterment.


The thing is that the contractor might be more than willing to replace the ceilings at their cost.... but on the other hand many contractors will be used to clients trying it on, and souring the relationship you have with a contractor can prove costly.

I suppose the key thing is to avoid conveying any sense that "there was nothing wrong with the ceiling to start with" in the discussions you have with the contractor.  Far better to come from the angle that you knew you'd need to do something about them eventually, but just couldn't afford to do so now.  The latter avoids the contractor feeling the need to go on the defensive, and may predispose them towards finding a cheap (to you) way of achieving the desired end result.

DRP

Doozergirl said:

They can return it, more or less, to the way it was.   Perhaps not perfect, but certainly to a point that no one would notice unless they were looking for it. 

Regardless, they aren't to blame here.  It is what it is.   Entirely expectable! 

Thanks for the comments. 

In fairness, the builders have accepted that they do have some responsibility (not really 'blame'), because the causes of damage are over and above what should be expected. 

Having a number of large smooth patches in the middle of an artex ceiling is not returning it to the way it was, in my opinion!

I've had a phone call from HQ so we can have a sensible discussion next week about this with the builders.

Thanks all. Interesting to hear different PoVs

FreeBear

Bendy_House said: I don't see any need to overboard the ceiling first; provided the Artex is secure, then usually a coat of a bonding/keying agent (eg BlueGrit) would get the surface ready for a decorative skim.

Skimming over artex that is on an old plaster & lath ceiling is just asking for trouble - Artex can hide unseen cracks, and if the ceiling had been painted with distemper at any point, the bond will always be suspect. A good chance that the skim coat will crack and possibly fall down.

Overboarding is a crap shoot in getting screws in to the joists - Fixing to the laths assumes that the original nails are in good condition and will take the extra weight (do feel lucky ?). Personally, I'd take the whole ceiling down, de-nail, and fix plasterboard up. Yes, a very messy job, but it reduces the loading on the joists and gives you a nice flat surface when done.

Ganga

FreeBear said:

Bendy_House said: I don't see any need to overboard the ceiling first; provided the Artex is secure, then usually a coat of a bonding/keying agent (eg BlueGrit) would get the surface ready for a decorative skim.

Skimming over artex that is on an old plaster & lath ceiling is just asking for trouble - Artex can hide unseen cracks, and if the ceiling had been painted with distemper at any point, the bond will always be suspect. A good chance that the skim coat will crack and possibly fall down.

Overboarding is a crap shoot in getting screws in to the joists - Fixing to the laths assumes that the original nails are in good condition and will take the extra weight (do feel lucky ?). Personally, I'd take the whole ceiling down, de-nail, and fix plasterboard up. Yes, a very messy job, but it reduces the loading on the joists and gives you a nice flat surface when done.

Plus if done right when the floor upstairs in the loft conversion is walked on the ceiling will not crack again.