Replacement roof questions

Joined
26 Apr 2014
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Location
Wiltshire
Country
United Kingdom
Hi,

This is my first post here so I'm quite new to all this and only know about roofing from what I've read online.

I'm in the middle of having my roof replaced. I have a 3 bed 1935 semi and this winter water started coming in so it seemed time to replace it.

The artificial slates have been laid and a dry fix ridge tile system has been used. It looks like baffles have been put under the felt for ventilation:


This is the view from inside my attic:


The fascias have been nailed to the existing non-rotten wood ones. The soffits are nailed to some battens to ensure they are straight so there is an air-gap. There is a plastic piece where the ridge tiles meet that I assume allows air to flow.

I have the following questions:

1) I've read that some people say you shouldn't overclad fascias with uPVC but replace the existing wood. As the wood is ok how vital is it that this is done, would it be worth the expense now the fascias are up?

2) Is it likely to cost a lot more to do it now?

3) Does the ventilation seem to have been done correctly? One concern I have is that none of the soffits have ventilation gaps:


This is the view looking up onto the underside of the soffits.

Should there be ventilation in them or is it not a problem? Will the lack of ventilation mean the existing timber is more likely to rot?

4) Is there anything else that could compromise the roof or reduce its lifespan?

If different or better photos are needed I can provide some when it's light tomorrow.

Many thanks for your help!
 
Sponsored Links
If the existing fascias were not rotten they can be overclad.

If the membrane (underlay) they have used is breathable which it is likely to be then no further ventilation is required. Or is the underlay old fashioned felt?
 
Thanks for the replies, it's always hard researching things online as there are so many different opinions. The membrane is new and breathable as it's just been installed, the original house didn't have membrane at all.
 
Sponsored Links
the original house didn't have membrane at all.

Just to point out in case anyone gets the wrong impression.

A house not having membrane is not a bad thing, it is quite normal.

A house that does not have a membrane does not need one nor does it need to be re-roofed based on the fact that it does not have one...
 
No, we were perfectly happy with our roof until the tiles curled and started letting water in. The choice to replace the roof wasn't based on the lack of membrane, it was just how it was done in those days.
 

DIYnot Local

Staff member

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.

Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.


Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local

 
Back
Top