Comments on: Warm Front – use it or lose it http://www.consumerfocus.org.uk/blog/warm-front-%e2%80%93-use-it-or-lose-it Consumer Focus - Campaigning for a fairer deal Sat, 04 May 2013 04:20:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: R Reid http://www.consumerfocus.org.uk/blog/warm-front-%e2%80%93-use-it-or-lose-it/comment-page-1#comment-1123 R Reid Sat, 03 Mar 2012 21:32:55 +0000 http://www.consumerfocus.org.uk/?p=20784#comment-1123 I'm not a chartered surveyor, but I am the owner of a 150+ year old house who would have qualified for help in insulating my home. I found that the advice I received from energy advisers was inadequate and ill informed. I did my research and knew what my house needed, but none of the schemes could/would provide it. The house is 1.5 stories so no loft space apart from a small triangle with only enough room for a child to crawl down it; probably only enough for one strip of insulation even if an installer could be found to do the job ie not worth the hassle. It also has solid walls therefore not suitable for cavity wall insulation. The walls are of lime & rubble construction with the added problem of a cement jacket ie harling that was misguidedly applied in the 40's. The floor were part solid concrete & part floor boards with a crawl space; no damp proof course (although the validity of that as a negative is open for debate). Roof was slate with sarking boards & no membrane. I was not offered internal or external wall insulation but if I had I would have had to reject it. Internally applied insulation would have unacceptably reduced the size of the room (for those with rooms in good decorative order there would also have been unacceptably high redecoration costs) Externally applied insulation would have meant expensive alterations to the roof. In my case the breathabilty of the walls had already been compromised by the cement harling however on the plus side this was more than adequately compensated for by the ventilation provided in the form of draughts. Poor uptake of free/discounted insulation offers is probably because of the disruption/inconvenience of the work and the additional costs of redecoration required which many of those qualifying for free insulation because of their low income cannot afford. Also the insulation on offer is not suitable for many older houses; as the previous commentator Mr Rawlins has said it could make the situation worse. The installers of these schemes have a one size fits all policy, they do not seem to work out what is the best solution for that individual property. I suppose even if they did the solution would be outwith the remit of the scheme. As it turned out we decided to gut the whole property, roof included & do our own thing at our own expense. Probably not as we were supposed to do but a darn site better than it was and still probably better than many new build properties. We are still considering retrofitting a heat recovery/ventilation unit (not covered by insulation schemes)for the bathroom/kitchen to try and counteract the lack of breathabilty of the cement jacket & the now much reduced draughts but so far opening the windows regularly seems to be doing the job. I’m not a chartered surveyor, but I am the owner of a 150+ year old house who would have qualified for help in insulating my home. I found that the advice I received from energy advisers was inadequate and ill informed. I did my research and knew what my house needed, but none of the schemes could/would provide it.
The house is 1.5 stories so no loft space apart from a small triangle with only enough room for a child to crawl down it; probably only enough for one strip of insulation even if an installer could be found to do the job ie not worth the hassle. It also has solid walls therefore not suitable for cavity wall insulation. The walls are of lime & rubble construction with the added problem of a cement jacket ie harling that was misguidedly applied in the 40′s. The floor were part solid concrete & part floor boards with a crawl space; no damp proof course (although the validity of that as a negative is open for debate). Roof was slate with sarking boards & no membrane.

I was not offered internal or external wall insulation but if I had I would have had to reject it. Internally applied insulation would have unacceptably reduced the size of the room (for those with rooms in good decorative order there would also have been unacceptably high redecoration costs) Externally applied insulation would have meant expensive alterations to the roof.

In my case the breathabilty of the walls had already been compromised by the cement harling however on the plus side this was more than adequately compensated for by the ventilation provided in the form of draughts.

Poor uptake of free/discounted insulation offers is probably because of the disruption/inconvenience of the work and the additional costs of redecoration required which many of those qualifying for free insulation because of their low income cannot afford. Also the insulation on offer is not suitable for many older houses; as the previous commentator Mr Rawlins has said it could make the situation worse. The installers of these schemes have a one size fits all policy, they do not seem to work out what is the best solution for that individual property. I suppose even if they did the solution would be outwith the remit of the scheme.

As it turned out we decided to gut the whole property, roof included & do our own thing at our own expense. Probably not as we were supposed to do but a darn site better than it was and still probably better than many new build properties. We are still considering retrofitting a heat recovery/ventilation unit (not covered by insulation schemes)for the bathroom/kitchen to try and counteract the lack of breathabilty of the cement jacket & the now much reduced draughts but so far opening the windows regularly seems to be doing the job.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

]]> By: David Rawlins http://www.consumerfocus.org.uk/blog/warm-front-%e2%80%93-use-it-or-lose-it/comment-page-1#comment-1071 David Rawlins Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:17:56 +0000 http://www.consumerfocus.org.uk/?p=20784#comment-1071 As a chartered surveyor and historic building consultant on the front line, I am already seeing use of insulating materials which are entirely detrimental to the performance of houses of more than 100 years old, through a significant increase in levels of condensation, very often due to poor installation but also by use of incorrect products. Increased condensation and dampness through poor installation or use of products that do not allow moisture within the buildings to evaporate out, will tend to make such buildings cold rather than warm. Prime movers such as B&Q and the energy companies may readily make matters worse unless greater recognition of research undertaken by the SPAB, English Heritage, University of Greenwich etc is afforded, and use made of materials that allow for moisture evaporation. As a chartered surveyor and historic building consultant on the front line, I am already seeing use of insulating materials which are entirely detrimental to the performance of houses of more than 100 years old, through a significant increase in levels of condensation, very often due to poor installation but also by use of incorrect products. Increased condensation and dampness through poor installation or use of products that do not allow moisture within the buildings to evaporate out, will tend to make such buildings cold rather than warm. Prime movers such as B&Q and the energy companies may readily make matters worse unless greater recognition of research undertaken by the SPAB, English Heritage, University of Greenwich etc is afforded, and use made of materials that allow for moisture evaporation.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]>