True - I suppose I'm talking about the sort-of degree of heating one would expect in an occupied property which was occupied by peole who could afford to heat the property to the extent they would like.
I've never had mould problems in bathrooms, either - although, admittedly, some of my bathrooms have had little extractors. I do tend to keep my bathrooms fairly warm.
Not necessarily true. It's obviously the case that there are no sources of humidity within an unoccupied house, but humid air can get in from outside and, in the absence of any heating, the dampness never dries out - so mould can occur.
) in house which has been totally unoccupied (and certainly unheated) for about 25 years (I recently inherited it, and am currently trying to 'renovate'!). When I first saw it, walls and ceilings were all very damp, and there was a lot of mould, particularly on ceilings.I think that probably stems mainly from the (many) reports we are seeing of extensive mould (and other horrors) in very 'low end' rental properties often owned by very dodgy landlords (including some councils!) and occupied by people who currently can't afford enough food, let alone heating, after they have paid their (possibly extortionate) rent.
It would, but extracting large amounts of heated air without the sledgehammer would obviously have energy and cost implications
Where possible. If people have to dry washing indoors, it's probably worth at least considering a dehumidifier.
Exactly - and increasingly so as the temp difference between walls and humid air increases.
I generally don't go anywhere near GD but, in general, when one hears about mould in rooms other than bathrooms it is most commonly in properties which are not 'reasonably heated' (however you chose to interpret that).
I disagree.
How can that be condensation?It so happens that I'm writing this whilst sitting in the one currently heated room (fan heaters
As I said, I presume that fairly warm humid air comes in from outside (during warmer weather) and then, when the building cools, condensation occurs. There's nowhere else the humidity can go!
Certainly some of that, as well, but that was identifiable as such. Most of the dampness/mould was in places where it clearly wasn't the result of leaks.
Back out?
There you go.
Yes, but you cannot class it as the sort of 'condensation' we are discussing when a constant supply of water is being introduced into the building.
It used to surprise me how cold empty properties were (colder than outside) but had no condensation.
Once humidity has condensed onto surfaces, I imagine that return of that, in the absence of heating, into the air (by 'evaporation'), hence some prospect of it going 'back out', would be a very slow and incomplete process, wouldn't it?
I'm not sure what you mean. As I said, it's pretty obvious what is water damage due to leaks and what is just 'dampness'. The scope for leaks was actually limited to rain water getting through roof/windows etc. There was no plumbing above ground floor and, in any event, the water supply to the property had been turned off.
I didn't "class it" it as anything - I merely responded to your suggestion that one can't get condensation in an unoccupied building.
Interesting. For the inside of a property to be colder than outside would be rather odd, unless there had been a recent rise in outside temp. However, I have to say that I don't think I have ever previously been in a residential property which had been unoccupied and unheated for a as long as this one, so I suppose I don't really know what I should have 'expected'!
Fair enough. As I said, I presume that can only happen if the outside temp has risen and the inside not yet 'caught up'?
Again as above.
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
