| Author | Message | ||
     Joe Jenkins Senior Member Username: Joe Post Number: 318 Registered: 07-2006 |
We commonly install salvaged slate on new roofs. Of course, we clearly specify in the contract that the slate will be salvaged. Salvaged slate will match an older roof, while new slate often will stick out like a sore thumb. Here's a photo of a job we did a couple years ago where the owner added on to an old house. We wanted to match the existing slates, so we used what we had that came as close as possible. If we had used new slate, it would have looked like a total mismatch. The front section is original, the rear section is what he added on:  | ||
| Ward Hamilton Advanced Member Username: Olde_mohawk_masonry__historic_restoration Post Number: 46 Registered: 04-2007 |
In that case, new slate was implicit - no other argument can be made. I am sorry you have to deal with such a clown. | ||
| Harkin Banks New member Username: Harkin_banks Post Number: 4 Registered: 09-2008 |
Ward, Thanks for your reply. His proposal included "Buckingham slate". It did not say "new", "salvaged" or "to match existing". Perhaps I was naive to assume that I would get a new roof, but that was certainly my assumption from the very beginning. It was not "specified" to be new (nothing but "slate roof" was specified), but as a homeowner (and not a roofer), I really had no idea that salvaged slate was even used for anything but roof repairs. I personally feel that I was mislead, and I can't imagine that any homeowner should assume they are getting salvaged slate on a new roof. I don't trust him, and he has been nickel and diming me non-stop since the project started, and if I can get $250 of my money back, I think I should. | ||
| Ward Hamilton Advanced Member Username: Olde_mohawk_masonry__historic_restoration Post Number: 42 Registered: 04-2007 |
When you say "It was supposed to be new" do you mean that it was specified? Or was that your assumption? If it was specified, I wouldn't pay him for it. The cost difference is irrelevant; where else has he tried to cut corners? HOWEVER, if you merely assumed that a new addition would get a new roof, hold on a minute. It sounds like he was attempting to match your main roof. The difference in price for 2.5 square of new vs. used slate should be a virtual non-issue when held up against the average price of a 230 sq' addition. I think the larger issue should be: Did he directly ignore spec'd new slate? If so, keep a sharp eye on him. IF NOT, what are you trying to do, nickle and dime to save $250? Walking on the roof - unnecessarily - is a no no. If the slate are as dirty as you say, he probably got them cheap or even free. He could have had the decency to hose the roof down. The real issue isn't the $$$ difference, its the question of integrity. | ||
| Joe Jenkins Senior Member Username: Joe Post Number: 316 Registered: 07-2006 |
Your written contract should have specified either new or salvaged slate. It's easy to install new slate on an older building addition when there is an older slate roof on the main building, but it's difficult to find anyone who can match the older slates with appropriate salvaged slate. Ideally, the addition will have slate that matches the original roof. New slate rarely matches old. | ||
| Walter Musson Senior Member Username: Walter_musson Post Number: 96 Registered: 07-2006 |
Sounds like your roofer may be trying to pull a fast one. If you paid for new slate in your contract - then you should be getting new unless he came to you before he began and said there is an 8 week lead time , but I can install recycled for $300 less. These times and numbers are just for illustration , but you get my point. He should have discussed this prior to the install. | ||
| Harkin Banks New member Username: Harkin_banks Post Number: 3 Registered: 09-2008 |
Tim, It looks fine, and it's a pretty close match. It didn't need to match exactly as the shed roof faces a different direction from the cape roof (they are not side-by-side or connecting). It doesn't appear to be leaking (it's only 2 weeks old though). The slate is very dirty and at least a few are visibly cracked. My main issue is that I signed on for a new roof, but got a salvaged one. He didn't ask me if this was something I was comfortable with. Personally, I'd rather have a new roof that is slightly off over a salvaged one. Shouldn't I be entitled to share in the cost savings of the salvaged material? One other question. The guys who installed it have been walking all over it (w/o ladders or any protection). Isn't that really bad for a slate roof? | ||
| Tim Dittmar Member Username: Tim_dittmar Post Number: 23 Registered: 05-2008 |
Harkin- the key word "match"- did he match it in appearance, size, etc? Does it look good, not leak that you can tell- in the overall, are you pleased with the work functionally, esthetically? Maybe you weren't clear w/ him but if what you got ain't broke or disfunctional, you've done quite well compared to the experience/s of others. I regard 16x9 Buckingham as the absolute best(size-wise, too) were I to have a personal slate roof- Congratulations!! | ||
| Harkin Banks New member Username: Harkin_banks Post Number: 2 Registered: 09-2008 |
I'm currently building a 230 SF addition to the side of my 1930 cape. The addition has a shed roof, and the contractor doing the work installed a salvaged slate roof without my approval. It was supposed to be new. Since I'm the one who is obviously taking all the risk on this, I want to make sure I at least get a full refund of the material cost difference, and I also want to understand any other issues I should be aware of. I'm pretty mad about the whole thing, but I'm not sure I want to make him tear the whole thing down either. Is there a typical price difference between new and salvaged slate? The original roof that he was trying to match was a Buckingham Virginia slate - 9" x 16". |
