Asbestos in 1960s house

Catbells

A young family member bought a 60s house 18 months ago and is doing it up so she can work from home.  Asbestos has been found in several places  - ie walls and ceiling.  Asbestos tiles are on the floor too which will get walked on so I'm wondering if she should get these removed before she has vinyl laid on top.  She's been told asbestos is very widespread and to remove all of it would be hugely expensive and best thing to do is to leave it undisturbed.   I feel she should at least have the floor tiles removed.   What is the best approach to take?  Thanks. 

Dustyevsky

Asbestos may have been found, but you are not defining what type, its % of the material it's within, or the state of that material. Those things are important.

With floor tiles in good condition, the risks are minimal, especially with another covering over it.

Section62

Catbells said:

Asbestos tiles are on the floor too which will get walked on so I'm wondering if she should get these removed before she has vinyl laid on top.  She's been told asbestos is very widespread and to remove all of it would be hugely expensive and best thing to do is to leave it undisturbed.   I feel she should at least have the floor tiles removed.   What is the best approach to take?  Thanks. 

The asbestos in the tiles is unlikely to be a major problem unless disturbed.  If covered over with vinyl there should be negligible risk in daily use.

What leaving the tiles would mean is having a bigger problem to deal with when the vinyl needs to be replaced, as this could potentially need to be treated as contaminated as well (depending on the method of fixing), and also unless the vinyl is laid onto the tiles correctly, there is a risk of the joints and any defects in the tiled surface showing through on the finished surface of the vinyl (probably not immediately, but when it has been walked over enough).  It is important to use the right materials and techniques to get a good long-lasting finish.

Are any of the floor tiles broken or loose?

danrv

Those floor tiles are common in houses of the 60’s and 70’s.
The black ones I know are Thermoplastic and about 9” square. Asbestos content is minimal at 1% and is contained in the matrix of the tile compound.
I’m soon to be laying carpet over these in my lounge and have been working carefully with broken ones when fitting skirting,

I think best to lay flooring over them as suggested rather than take them up. The tile adhesive may also contain asbestos.

trailingspouse

If it bothers her, it might be worth at least getting a quote to have the work done - what is 'hugely expensive' to one person might be a worthwhile investment for peace of mind to another.

It's also worth thinking about how it might affect re-sale further down the line. If buyers might be put off, again it might be a worthwhile investment. It depends how long she's planning to live there.

Catbells

Thanks and good to hear its not a life or death situation.  I was more worried than she was.  From what Section 62 says it sounds as though it would be good to get a high quality vinyl covering (not  tiles) so that it will last longer and won't need replacing for 10 years or so.  She'll be putting a drug runner down too so minimum footfall.  She also said there was some artex (?) on the ceilings which she's planning to get plastered over.    
Just occurred to me that asbestos was mainly used for fire protection and insulation wasn't it?   So removing it would cause the insulation to be reduced. 

Catbells

danrv said:

Those floor tiles are common in houses of the 60’s and 70’s.
The black ones I know are Thermoplastic and about 9” square. Asbestos content is minimal at 1% and is contained in the matrix of the tile compound.
I’m soon to be laying carpet over these in my lounge and have been working carefully with broken ones when fitting skirting,

I think best to lay flooring over them as suggested rather than take them up. The tile adhesive may also contain asbestos.

Thanks.  I don't know if they are the ones you refer to as these ones look brown from the picture she sent and not black.  I guess there were many different types.

Catbells

Catbells said: She'll be putting a drug runner down too so minimum footfall.  

Of course I really meant a rug runner inn case you were wondering 

FreeBear

Catbells said: Just occurred to me that asbestos was mainly used for fire protection and insulation wasn't it?   So removing it would cause the insulation to be reduced. 

Asbestos in things like artex and floor tiles was primarily to give the material a bit of strength. At a 1% content, the insulation & fire resistance would be minimal.

Dustyevsky

Catbells said:

Catbells said: She'll be putting a drug runner down too so minimum footfall.  

Of course I really meant a rug runner inn case you were wondering 

I thought it might have been a local term related to 'drugget.'

Dustyevsky

Section62 said:

Catbells said:

Asbestos tiles are on the floor too which will get walked on so I'm wondering if she should get these removed before she has vinyl laid on top.  She's been told asbestos is very widespread and to remove all of it would be hugely expensive and best thing to do is to leave it undisturbed.   I feel she should at least have the floor tiles removed.   What is the best approach to take?  Thanks. 

What leaving the tiles would mean is having a bigger problem to deal with when the vinyl needs to be replaced, as this could potentially need to be treated as contaminated as well (depending on the method of fixing), and also unless the vinyl is laid onto the tiles correctly, there is a risk of the joints and any defects in the tiled surface showing through on the finished surface of the vinyl (probably not immediately, but when it has been walked over enough).  It is important to use the right materials and techniques to get a good long-lasting finish.

All of which might be avoided by using a laminate with suitable underlay, but that's not always easy if there's a issue with door clearances etc.