Page 2 of 2
Posted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:51 am
by mickg
I agree with Mark, what may look the same is most certainly not the case
Posted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 11:54 am
by Tony McC
Romex/Rompox and Weatherpoint and, for completeness, GftK, all come from different manufacturers in Germany. The chemistry is similar, but performance is different.
All of the pre-mixed resin mortars tend to be 'patio grade' at best. The better performing products are mixed on demand and usually have one or two bottles of summat to be added to the aggregate, which may be pre-coated.
The Cobbletech mortar is critically different to Westherpoint, but hails from the same German manufacturer and is sold exclusively via Marshalls.
GeoFix is not quite as good as the stale crusts from last week's bacon butties when it comes to jointing pavements. Easyjoint, Joint-It and countless others are, at best, patio grade products.
Anyway, back to the OP and the ballsed-up brick paving. They pavers were incorrectly laid and that more-than-likely comes down to the insurance company sending "builders" to fix paving. Paving is a specific skill, not something that can be made-up on the spot by jack-of-all-trades. Any eejit laying mortar over sand wants their arse kicking and then sending back to their real calling in life, which is probably rounding-up stray supermarket trolleys.
If the decision is taken to joint them using a resin-based mortar, then a truly permeable mortar should be used to get that surface water away from the pavers as quickly as possible. Romex Dran and GftK 850 should work well and minimise the risk of frost spalling but the only real fix is a lift-and-re-lay to get rid of that mortar bedding.
Posted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 1:49 pm
by lutonlagerlout
And butter and joint the bricks as you go with a 3:1 mortar
LLL
Posted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:55 pm
by cookiewales
lutonlagerlout wrote:And butter and joint the bricks as you go with a 3:1 mortar
LLL
And that is hard work at the top end of the scale 
Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 3:44 pm
by Lynne-Holmes
If I go the resin based mortar route, should I drill holes into the mortar base to increase drainage or leave it as it si
Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 4:59 pm
by lutonlagerlout
lynne the resin based mortar route is just a cover up
really the lot needs to come out and be done right
LLL
Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 6:25 pm
by Lynne-Holmes
Can't do it.... No money! 
Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 7:39 pm
by lutonlagerlout
welcome to my world!
if money is that tight traditional pointing is cheapest material wise but would cost a bit labour to do that lot
weather point you could do yourself but would cost £££ for those joints
sounds like a rock and a hard place lynne
LLL
Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 9:07 am
by Tony McC
But why should you be paying? The balls-up was caused by the "builders" so they should be paying to put it right, even if it means them claiming on their insurance.
Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 9:33 am
by Lynne-Holmes
Tree roots caused my patio to crack and it is being replaced on insurance. My patio was a 10cm deep slab of concrete, with quarry tiles mortared to it and that is what is being paid to replace.
I asked if I could have bricks instead.
And, right at the start of the job, I asked whether they would they be laid on sand. They said no.... Because this way was stronger and less likely to give me weeds. I did not dissent. It only came out later that they had never laid a brick patio before! So, you were spot on when you said general builders were sent by the insurance company.
We agreed any extra costs would be borne by me.
So, if I had accepted quarry tiles, there would have been no problem. If I had asked for bricks on sand, they would have done it. They could do the insurance company's brief. And they tried to give me what I wanted. I was the one who raised the bar without knowing what I was doing. Lesson learned. Now, I have to give them a simple, clear instruction that they can do. And accept that my patio is not as good as it would have been if I had known what I was doing from the start.
Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 11:28 am
by Tony McC
This sounds like a bit of a grey area.
I'm a firm believer in the principle that if you ask a contractor (regardless of skill set) to undertake a task, then the work should be right. It should be installed to best practice; it should be functional and aesthetically acceptable.
If the task is beyond the skills of said contractor, then they should put up their hands and say so. If they take on the work, I believe that to be a firm and undeniable statement that they are claiming they can carry out the task to the same or higher standard than would be achieved by a tradesperson skilled in that particular discipline, whether it's brick paving, setts, blacktop, drainage or whatever.
If they say, however, that this is not their usual thing but they'll "give it a go" then the onus falls on the property owner. The contractor has freely admitted, in advance of commencing the work, that it is beyond their normal skill set, and so the property owner is able to say "No Thanks" or to let them have a go.
A good contractor knows his/her limitations. I was a good sett layer but I've never been able to saw a piece of timber in a straight line to save my life, so if someone wanted a timber fence building as part of the job, I gave it to a subbied joiner. Horses for courses, as they say!