(With apologies to anyone who had already seen this on
free.uk.diy.home)

My parents are convinced that they need to sign away several thousands
of pounds on a treatment known as Protectacoat for a house which has
solid brick walls with pebbledashed render - this is at least 50-60
years old and now there is some penetrating damp.

Protectacoat apparently seals the existing render with some sort of
rubberised layer and claims to provide a waterproof barrier against
further ingress of rain. This sounds highly suspect to me.

I'm wondering whether it would be better (and possibly cheaper) simply
to have the existing pebbledash render removed and a new one
re-applied?

I'd appreciate any thoughts on this.

Thanks

Paul

"Paul" wrote in message
ups.com...
(With apologies to anyone who had already seen this on
free.uk.diy.home)

My parents are convinced that they need to sign away several thousands
of pounds on a treatment known as Protectacoat for a house which has
solid brick walls with pebbledashed render - this is at least 50-60
years old and now there is some penetrating damp.

Protectacoat apparently seals the existing render with some sort of
rubberised layer and claims to provide a waterproof barrier against
further ingress of rain. This sounds highly suspect to me.
It is highly suspect. The last lot I ripped off was not only harbouring
damp, but various colonies of insects. Worse than useless because water gets
behind it and can't get out.
Would probably work if the render was sound but, if that were the case, you
wouldn't need the treatment.

Paul wrote:
My parents are convinced that they need to sign away several thousands
of pounds on a treatment known as Protectacoat for a house which has
solid brick walls with pebbledashed render - this is at least 50-60
years old and now there is some penetrating damp.

Why is the damp penetrating now and not during the last 60 years?

Do you have a blocked gutter?

Owain

"Paul" wrote in message
ups.com...
(With apologies to anyone who had already seen this on
free.uk.diy.home)

My parents are convinced that they need to sign away several thousands
of pounds on a treatment known as Protectacoat for a house which has
solid brick walls with pebbledashed render - this is at least 50-60
years old and now there is some penetrating damp.

Protectacoat apparently seals the existing render with some sort of
rubberised layer and claims to provide a waterproof barrier against
further ingress of rain. This sounds highly suspect to me.

I'm wondering whether it would be better (and possibly cheaper) simply
to have the existing pebbledash render removed and a new one
re-applied?

I'd appreciate any thoughts on this.


Search for comments on this sort of product in www.periodproperty.co.uk
There have been numerous comments, all negative.

In article . com,
"Paul" writes:
(With apologies to anyone who had already seen this on
free.uk.diy.home)

My parents are convinced that they need to sign away several thousands
of pounds on a treatment known as Protectacoat for a house which has
solid brick walls with pebbledashed render - this is at least 50-60
years old and now there is some penetrating damp.

By what means has this been shown to be penetrating damp?
If the investigation involved the company intending to do
the work, you're almost certainly being ripped off. They
probably wouldn't diagnose condensation for example, as
they don't know how to fix that (although it is the cause
of most damp problems).

I'm wondering whether it would be better (and possibly cheaper) simply
to have the existing pebbledash render removed and a new one
re-applied?

You need to find the cause of the damp. Pebbledash is
remarkably waterproof (much more so than plain render as
the pepples tend to deflect much of the water off the wall
in the first place, and are not absorbant anyway).
If pebbledash fails, it usually falls off the wall
completely.

--
Andrew Gabriel

"Paul" wrote in message
ups.com...
(With apologies to anyone who had already seen this on
free.uk.diy.home)

My parents are convinced that they need to sign away several thousands
of pounds on a treatment known as Protectacoat for a house which has
solid brick walls with pebbledashed render - this is at least 50-60
years old and now there is some penetrating damp.

Protectacoat apparently seals the existing render with some sort of
rubberised layer and claims to provide a waterproof barrier against
further ingress of rain. This sounds highly suspect to me.

I'm wondering whether it would be better (and possibly cheaper) simply
to have the existing pebbledash render removed and a new one
re-applied?

I'd appreciate any thoughts on this.

Thanks

Paul


=================
IF........ if the walls are allowing damp penetration then it's quite
probable that some of the render has 'blown'. If this is the case then it
might be worth having the house re-rendered since patching can be an
expensive and possibly unsightly business.

Several thousand £££s for a glorified coat of paint / water-proofing
solution seems very much like a rip-off.

Last year I had my 'semi' re-rendered (plain - not pebbledash) for just
under £1900-00 so this is some kind of guide price if you're in the West
Midlands.

Cic.

Paul wrote:
My parents are convinced that they need to sign away several
thousands
of pounds on a treatment known as Protectacoat for a house which
has
solid brick walls with pebbledashed render - this is at least 50-60
years old and now there is some penetrating damp.

It is my understanding that solid walls have to 'breath'. Do you know
a reputable painter and decorator?,one should be able to give you the
correct advice after seeing the walls.

Stuart Noble wrote:
"Paul" wrote...
My parents are convinced that they need to sign away several thousands
of pounds on a treatment known as Protectacoat for a house which has
solid brick walls with pebbledashed render - this is at least 50-60
years old and now there is some penetrating damp.

It is highly suspect. The last lot I ripped off was not only harbouring
damp, but various colonies of insects. Worse than useless because water gets
behind it and can't get out.
Would probably work if the render was sound but, if that were the case, you
wouldn't need the treatment.

Look at the cause of the damp, guttering, cracks, build-up above damp,
etc. If the dash is sound but gets excessively wet for periods due to
such problems, then the remedy is generally simple - cure the cause.
If the render is knackered, it needs removing and scraping back up (not
hard cement mortar, use 1:1:6, refuse any offers of render with
"plasticiser" in it which is not what you might think!).


I had a "protectacote" (SP?) salesman around, who seemed to be in a bit
of a hurry, but promised that their contractors would make good damaged
render, and apply this miracle coating. A demo. involved a clear tube
with a disc in the middle painted with the "stuff". One half of the tube
contained wated, which when inverted did not penetrate the paint. The
other half was connected to a rubber bulb/tube, which could be squeezed
to push air in, which bubbled through the paint. At first sight this was
impressive. I don't know how long it would be efficaceous for in a
"real" environment, though, with dust and what-have-you; the decorative
effect won't last 30 years IMO, and what do you apply then?

Stuart Noble wrote:

"Paul" wrote in message
ups.com...

(With apologies to anyone who had already seen this on
free.uk.diy.home)

My parents are convinced that they need to sign away several thousands
of pounds on a treatment known as Protectacoat for a house which has
solid brick walls with pebbledashed render - this is at least 50-60
years old and now there is some penetrating damp.

Protectacoat apparently seals the existing render with some sort of
rubberised layer and claims to provide a waterproof barrier against
further ingress of rain. This sounds highly suspect to me.

It is highly suspect. The last lot I ripped off was not only harbouring
damp, but various colonies of insects. Worse than useless because water gets
behind it and can't get out.
Would probably work if the render was sound but, if that were the case, you
wouldn't need the treatment.


Actually that is not true.

Ive go a couple of areas of (new) render where drving rain soaks the
render and if it then freezes, its started pushing the paint off and
rubbishing the render.

Someone whos opinion I trust reckons that a coat of muckite over the
paint will stop it.

I agree its not a cure all for everything, but it has its place.

Obviuously if damp gets in behind it, its worse than useless.

Mike wrote:
"Paul" wrote in message
ups.com...

(With apologies to anyone who had already seen this on
free.uk.diy.home)

My parents are convinced that they need to sign away several thousands
of pounds on a treatment known as Protectacoat for a house which has
solid brick walls with pebbledashed render - this is at least 50-60
years old and now there is some penetrating damp.

Protectacoat apparently seals the existing render with some sort of
rubberised layer and claims to provide a waterproof barrier against
further ingress of rain. This sounds highly suspect to me.

I'm wondering whether it would be better (and possibly cheaper) simply
to have the existing pebbledash render removed and a new one
re-applied?

I'd appreciate any thoughts on this.



Search for comments on this sort of product in www.periodproperty.co.uk
There have been numerous comments, all negative.



I was told by a "reputable" damp company that my soft sandstone wall
should be sealed with a moisture impermeable coating.

I didn't do it after looking at info from the above site and getting
some technical info from the Society for the Protection of Ancient
Buildings (http://www.spab.org.uk/).

They were clearly either cowboys or just incompetent as there would be
no way for trapped moisture to escape thus accelerating the decay ... I
would imagine that pebbledash would be effected in a similar way.

If you can find the source of the penetrating damp (gutters, down pipes,
gullies, roof tiles etc etc) it might be simple to eliminate it rather
than the symptom.

Have you compared the cost of re-rendering to this proposed treatment?

Alex

" They were clearly either cowboys or just incompetent as there would be
no way for trapped moisture to escape thus accelerating the decay ... I
would imagine that pebbledash would be effected in a similar way.

Providing a coating adheres to the surface, and is in itself waterproof, no
moisture should get in in the first place. This is near impossible to
achieve with render because invariably there is a gap between it and the
wall

If you can find the source of the penetrating damp (gutters, down pipes,
gullies, roof tiles etc etc) it might be simple to eliminate it rather
than the symptom.

Penetrating damp is usually just rain hitting a porous wall. You're lucky if
there's an obvious source. If the wall is already painted, or you can bear
to make it so, solvent based masonry paints are very effective IME

Stuart Noble wrote:
" They were clearly either cowboys or just incompetent as there would be

no way for trapped moisture to escape thus accelerating the decay ... I
would imagine that pebbledash would be effected in a similar way.


Providing a coating adheres to the surface, and is in itself waterproof, no
moisture should get in in the first place. This is near impossible to
achieve with render because invariably there is a gap between it and the
wall

I am not an expert but I would imagine your comments are assuming you have:

a) a physical DPC to stop moisture rising behind the render
b) no chance of moisture condensing or getting in to say a cavity and
c) no water contained within the wall already before treatment.

In my case a) & c) were certainly not true as the solid 2 foot random
stone wall had been damp for over a hundred years (and still is on the
outside ).

The coating suggested was not a render but a clear proofing agent which
would totally seal the wall thus frost etc would just blow the surface
right off (which had already happened in some areas without any "help").



If you can find the source of the penetrating damp (gutters, down pipes,
gullies, roof tiles etc etc) it might be simple to eliminate it rather
than the symptom.


Penetrating damp is usually just rain hitting a porous wall. You're lucky if
there's an obvious source. If the wall is already painted, or you can bear
to make it so, solvent based masonry paints are very effective IME

Or pouring down a wall keeping it permanently wet maybe which was the
root of my comments?


Alex

Stuart Noble wrote:
"Paul" wrote in message
ups.com...

(With apologies to anyone who had already seen this on
free.uk.diy.home)

My parents are convinced that they need to sign away several thousands
of pounds on a treatment known as Protectacoat for a house which has
solid brick walls with pebbledashed render - this is at least 50-60
years old and now there is some penetrating damp.

Protectacoat apparently seals the existing render with some sort of
rubberised layer and claims to provide a waterproof barrier against
further ingress of rain. This sounds highly suspect to me.

It is highly suspect. The last lot I ripped off was not only harbouring
damp, but various colonies of insects. Worse than useless because water gets
behind it and can't get out.
Would probably work if the render was sound but, if that were the case, you
wouldn't need the treatment.



Looking at http://www.protectacoat.co.uk/ this looks like a render
system in any case which means they may actually remove render rather
than just covering it.

AlexW wrote:
Looking at http://www.protectacoat.co.uk/ this looks like a render
system in any case which means they may actually remove render rather
than just covering it.

Why do you say that? I have looked, and can't find any info. on what
their product is. I remember the salesman demonstrating his model, and
saying that any defective would be replaced before the "Protectacoat"
was applied, but not that it was a render in itself.

Chris Bacon wrote:
AlexW wrote:

Looking at http://www.protectacoat.co.uk/ this looks like a render
system in any case which means they may actually remove render rather
than just covering it.


Why do you say that? I have looked, and can't find any info. on what
their product is. I remember the salesman demonstrating his model, and
saying that any defective would be replaced before the "Protectacoat"
was applied, but not that it was a render in itself.

Some of their before and after pictures show a terrace with (perfectly
nice!) brick work which *appears* to be have been rendered in the after
picture ... of course they could have rendered and then applied it on
top as you suggest ... so a better approach might be to phone them and
ask what its all about!

The web side is a bit vague though! Plenty of testimonies ... I wonder
how many are 10 years down the line?

AlexW wrote:
Chris Bacon wrote:

AlexW wrote:

Looking at http://www.protectacoat.co.uk/ this looks like a render
system in any case which means they may actually remove render rather
than just covering it.



Why do you say that? I have looked, and can't find any info. on what
their product is. I remember the salesman demonstrating his model, and
saying that any defective would be replaced before the "Protectacoat"
was applied, but not that it was a render in itself.


Some of their before and after pictures show a terrace with (perfectly
nice!) brick work which *appears* to be have been rendered in the after
picture ... of course they could have rendered and then applied it on
top as you suggest ... so a better approach might be to phone them and
ask what its all about!

The web side is a bit vague though! Plenty of testimonies ... I wonder
how many are 10 years down the line?


Or get a demo ... which you did as I see from your earlier post!

In article , Stuart Noble
wrote:
Providing a coating adheres to the surface, and is in itself
waterproof, no moisture should get in in the first place. This
is near impossible to achieve with render because invariably
there is a gap between it and the wall

Moisture will get in to the wall because it is being generated
within the building and the internal surfaces are far from being a
perfect water barrier. IMO it is much better to have a wall that
can breathe.

The website talks about their holding company Turner Enterprises
Ltd 01660216 which Companies House confirms has been trading since
1982. But it doesn't say who your contract is with: Protectacoat
Limited 02330326 was dissolved in April 2004, last accounts made
up to 2000. If there is any connection between this and the
current business I'd be on my guard.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser
http://www.sda.co.uk/qsedbuk.htm

Tony Bryer wrote:

In article , Stuart Noble
wrote:

Providing a coating adheres to the surface, and is in itself
waterproof, no moisture should get in in the first place. This
is near impossible to achieve with render because invariably
there is a gap between it and the wall


Moisture will get in to the wall because it is being generated
within the building and the internal surfaces are far from being a
perfect water barrier. IMO it is much better to have a wall that
can breathe.

That is why you have impermeable membranes and controlled ventilation in
(some) cavity walls.

As usual th short answer is it depend on what is happening, why the wall
is damp, and what harm its doing.

Just to expand on a couple of points

1 - I'm told that Protectacoat will remove 'loose / blown' render and
pebbledash and dub it out to the same thickness; then they apply a base
coat of fibreglass resin based render; on top of this goes a trowel
applied layer which is then rollered to give a 'decorative' effect.
There is no indication of the thickness of this coat.

2 - The inside of the wall is definitely damp but whether this is
condensation or saturated masonry I can't really tell.

Thanks everyone for your comments; you've crystallised my reservations
about the wisdom of using this process.

Paul