www.ultimatehandyman.co.uk

Razor wrote:On the plus side you should be able to soak the tiles in some hot water and reuse them

I was making a list of the basic errors but found so many all I can say is the job is utter 5hite.

So now that you have pointed Chekatrade in the direction of this thread and pointed out how many potential customers visit this site what are they doing about it?

Yeah, once I realised that the work was shite, I threw them out. I have no regrets.

It is all about saving them money and time: connect the bath the same way means using the old pipes, tiling over coving means not having to measure and cut each tile, grouting tile edges means not having to fit edging tiles, not having an electrician check means savings, leaving old coving in place means not having to remove old, and so on. And they tried to pass the painting onto me, despite it being in the quote. Lazy shites.

I have received the CheckATrade review form. Someone on this site said that good trades people do not need to advertise, and do not need CheckATrade. I thought what they meant was "we don't need to be exposed to honest customer reviews". But I was wrong, and he was right. But the CheckATrade review will hurt these rogues. But, I still do not understand how they got so many glowing reviews. Some, if not most, MUST be fake.

This will take a few weeks to get moving in terms of sorting it out. I have the name of a good builder, but they have been away this week. And I have the details of a good fitter who did work for a colleague, and no-one would dare do bad work for her, assuming they did not want to be a dead end in a family tree ...

Thanks for the pics, you can clearly see the tiles havent bonded to the substrate.

Also i ALWAYS try and tile as cleanly as possible.....

Good to see you're on the right track now mate... thumbs up :)

First bit of good news. Adam, the project manager for a good local builder, came round and said the standard of work was low, as others here have said. He will write a report. The turnover of his company is £1 million a year, which adds authority to the report. I pinged off another tile today, and it came away with almost no effort. There has been more than enough time for the adhesive to cure. Very shoddy work.

royaloakcarpentry wrote:Sounds like the plasterer was not too good and this is why the tiles are further from the wall at the top.

The wall was skimmed with the old coving in place. So the plaster will be thicker in the middle of the wall, and thin at the top, as he tried to leave a step at the old coving. That makes it harder for the 'tiler'. Had the 'tiler' thought through what he was doing, he would have removed the coving before the plasterer arrived. As others have said, he ain't no tiler. And there are lots of other reasons to remove the coving, so he ain't no bathroom designer either. Then again, those aren't the skills you need to ride a horse and say "yeehaaa".

Today I looked again at tiles I had removed. He had clearly put adhesive on the tiles, not on the walls. I think that is not right. And most of the adhesive on one tile had not even made contact with the wall. Only two small areas (15% of the tile area) had made contact with the wall. So what was the point of all that adhesive?

A letter sent by registered mail demanding full refund within 28 days has now been received by the cowboys. A second bathroom fitter will arrive on Wednesday next week to quote, and write a short report on the state of the bathroom. This chap did excellent work for a colleague, and most of his work is for a posh bathroom showroom. He does everything himself.

I've had a couple of fitters around to quote, and neither is willing to write a short report on the quality of workmanship. Basically they do not want to be involved in a dispute, and I can understand their viewpoint. Does anyone have any suggestions as to how to get an inspection?

Regarding the work, I am confident (confirmed verbally by a fitter) that the walls were not primed, the shower area was not waterproofed, battens were not used, and adhesive was applied to (some if not all) tiles rather than the walls. Are all of these necessarily signs of bad workmanship? When I write my own summary, I want to make sure I am technically accurate, and that I do not make claims that are not accurate.

hmmmm you have to be careful with how you word it and no, what you point out is not 'bad workmanship' when written down

i.e waterproofing or tanking is not a requirement, it's just good practice. Somebody could argue that maybe 70% of bathrooms fitted are not tanked in the shower area

Walls may not need to be primed, it depends on the adhesive used
Applying adhesive to the tile is not against regulations, it's how that tile is then placed on the wall and what contact it has.
What would be cause for concern is if the adhesive is used thicker than manufactuers recommendations
or the coverage on the tiles is under BS, or the tiles are over sized for the adhesive, or the weight limit of the tiles is over reccommended allowances.....
Battens don't have to be used, in fact I rarely do
Lipping of the tiles should be within BS allowances, the amount of lipping allowed would depend on the grout joint width


You really need to refer to BS5385

You should be able to get a surveyor to do a written report for you. Who ever does a report will want paying. I certainly would, even if I was also quoting for the work.

Bath on batten is good practice and done by most. Many baths come with fixing brackets and this could be the case with yours. I doubt it is bracketed to the wall though.

Looking at the size of tiles they may be too big for ready mixed adhesive and may have been better bedded onto cement based adhesive.

Cement based adhesive is better for a bath/shower area IMO.

Tanking for a shower area is now considered good practice although we do many refurbs where the plaster is immaculate after 15 years or so. They do recommend that plaster is not a suitable tiling background in wet areas, IE a shower.

You know for 100% that to batten the walls to provide support for the bath is best practice and has not been done.
Bath should be filled with water and siliconed around the edges left overnight then tiled following day. Not done.
Walls primed or depending on adhesive cross primed (2 coats). Not done
Adhesive applied to the walls and trowelled with horizontal ribs. Not done
Possibly incorrect adhesive used. 300mmX300mm is the limit for ready mixed adhesive. (You can buy ready mixed for larger tiles but you can bet your uncles monkey that they haven't bought it.

Or sorry you saying the bath wasn't fixed? I thought you meant they didn't use a batten to tile off of

BTW the TTA will do a report... for about £800!

Thanks. I need to be careful what I say in my summary, so they can't pick it apart. The fact that many of the tiles comes off with very little effort tells me they were not put on properly, and in many cases very little of the adhesive was in contact with the wall. So those are two clear faults.

According to the instructions on the two adhesives used, the walls should have been primed. I was told by the fitters (email) that they used primer, so that is a blatant lie, and incorrect according to the adhesive manufacturer.

The fitter who visited yesterday told me that in his view the bath (a Carron delta) is too thin to use with a shower. And of course there are lots of other faults. One fitter told me that they had tiled to the very edge of the bath, which is bad, as movement of the bath could pop off a tile.

I will contact a surveyor. That is a good idea. I am sure they are used to the legal aspects, and know how to word it to protect themselves.