- Joined
- 11 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 19
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
The very mention of 'cracks' can strike fear into any home owner - but I think the seriousness of cracks is often grossly exaggerated.
I have some hairline cracks (mostly less than 1 mm) in the external walls of my terraced house (along with probably most of the old housing stock in London - and a fair few of the new ones I expect...). They were professionally monitored within the last 5 years and haven't increased. They have probably existed for much longer. No actual bricks are cracked - they seem a very hard type (except the lintels perhaps), not prone to spalling either.
My insurers say the cracks should be repointed. But is this really necessary? There may be a case for repointing the lintels - the red bricks are less robust. But as for the rest - it would look horrible, and be pointless in my opinion.
The house dates from about 1900 and won't be falling down any time soon. It is probably built on shallow foundations, on clay, and is about 50 metres from a tree-lined railway line. I feel that anything short of complete underpinning (not an option) is not going to prevent further movement in the future. Cracks can be remortared, with mastic as well perhaps, but at some point they will open up again, or, if they've been effectively bonded, new ones will appear elsewhere - necessitating even more pointless repointing!
However I can see there may be some benefit in preventing excessive water ingress. Is there any alternative to repointing which would limit it - clear mastic perhaps, or some form of water repellent which could be sprayed along the line of the cracks, or even injected?
I have some hairline cracks (mostly less than 1 mm) in the external walls of my terraced house (along with probably most of the old housing stock in London - and a fair few of the new ones I expect...). They were professionally monitored within the last 5 years and haven't increased. They have probably existed for much longer. No actual bricks are cracked - they seem a very hard type (except the lintels perhaps), not prone to spalling either.
My insurers say the cracks should be repointed. But is this really necessary? There may be a case for repointing the lintels - the red bricks are less robust. But as for the rest - it would look horrible, and be pointless in my opinion.
The house dates from about 1900 and won't be falling down any time soon. It is probably built on shallow foundations, on clay, and is about 50 metres from a tree-lined railway line. I feel that anything short of complete underpinning (not an option) is not going to prevent further movement in the future. Cracks can be remortared, with mastic as well perhaps, but at some point they will open up again, or, if they've been effectively bonded, new ones will appear elsewhere - necessitating even more pointless repointing!
However I can see there may be some benefit in preventing excessive water ingress. Is there any alternative to repointing which would limit it - clear mastic perhaps, or some form of water repellent which could be sprayed along the line of the cracks, or even injected?