Press Releases

On September 12 the Met Office issued a warning to UK utility companies for predictions of a severe winter with greater snowfall and colder than average temperatures this year. For the restoration industry this may mean an increased risk of flash-flooding and an increase in burst pipes across the country. The question is, are you ready? The predictions from the Met Office have prompted them to write to various government contingency agencies and, using a traffic-light analogy, put them on amber alert. The intention is not to scaremonger, but to ensure that the necessary areas of industry are ready. The aim of this article is to give our Network Members a similar chance to prepare. The calculations, based on North Atlantic Oscillation are said by Ewan McCallum, chief meteorologist at the Met Office to be 66% likely to be proved correct. If so, the result will be hardened ground surfaces, freezing and potentially increased snowfall. All of these factors will mean a greater chance of flash flooding across the UK. Harder ground surfaces, caused by the ground freezing will mean that any water that does form either from snow, burst water pipes or simply rain, will not be absorbed by the ground. The effect of this will be ‘runoff’ or water simply running over the ground rather than sinking into it. 

Greater snowfall and below average temperatures are expected this winter in the UK

This can lead to increased flooding as the water attempts to disperse in any direction possible, including people’s homes. Flash flooding of this sort is particularly prone to valley areas, as seen at Boscastle and Lynmouth. While the flooding tends to be localized, it can be severe. Add to this the increased chance of snow this winter and there may be further problems; Melting snow is a potential cause of surface water that run-off, as is to a lesser extent ice and sleet. Further to the natural causes of surface water, the predicted drop in temperatures is also likely to cause damage to water pipes both in the home and underground. Those of you called to an escape of water this winter can expect to find a leak from the familiar burst pipe. This common problem can often be more difficult to deal with than first expected as a large amount of resulting damage may be found behind the surfaces.

Next month the NFS Newsletter will feature an article on dealing with the damage from a burst pipe to help you prepare for the coming months.

 As for the pipes beneath the ground, the damage is likely to be a great deal easier to detect. The resulting ‘rivers’ that may occur in the roads are of particular concern to areas such as London where many of the houses are below ground level. To prepare for this kind of flooding Technicians will want to revise dealing with sewage contamination, as this is often the result in basement properties.  

There may be a risk of Flash Flooding similar to that seen in Boscastle.

This winter may bring increased work for the Damage Restoration Industry, to take advantage of this operators will need to ensure they have sufficient (working) machines, equipment, solutions and staff. Not forgetting of course, that all operators will need the proper training to deal with what winter will bring.

Most uni students know mould can be a ‘real head ache.’ Unfortunately what many people fail to realize, is that mould can actually cause a real head ache! The health risks of mould are numerous; from head aches and nose bleeds to pulmonary hemosiderosis and cancer. Perhaps the most worrying part of this is that mould is not a hypothetical risk in water damage claims, it is a real and dangerous risk.

The National Flood School is proud to be recognizing such a risk, having run the UK’s first IICRC Applied Mould Remediation Technician course in September. The 4 day course was attended by 15 members of the National Flood School Network and instructed by Jim Holland, a leading American expert who assisted in the writing of the S520 Standard for Professional Mould Remediation.

Despite the undeniable risks involved with mould, the Association of British Insurers (ABI) are confident that, “the US is very different from the UK, where the climate and methods of construction make the problem far less likely. Providing insurers take the right steps this is unlikely to become an issue.” Chris Netherton supported this by saying, “mould is something that can be dealt with effectively before it becomes a significant risk”, but he was also keen to stress, “although we have different buildings and construction methods 

in the UK, this will not mean that mould which isn’t dealt with properly will become any less hazardous to human health.” As such the key to controlling the risk of mould is in professional training.

Malcolm Henshaw and Richard Gundle geared up for the Mould Remediation Course.

Not only must restorers be professionally trained so as to avoid creating the conditions for mould growth following a water damage claim, but they must also be trained to deal with mould should it confront them. Mould can begin to grow within 12 hours of water damage, visible within 48 hours. Should a restorer then attempt to deal with mould using conventional drying methods they are likely to worsen the problem severely. This is due to the fact that mould is aggravated by heat, therefore raising the temperature through the use of dehumidifiers may cause the mould to germinate. In addition, the use of air movers would simply spread the mould throughout the property. There is also the risk that conventional drying equipment used for mould remediation will become contaminated, leading to

the mould being spread to a new property the next time the equipment is used.

The failure to correctly remediate mould can not only be hazardous to health, but also financially crippling. According to the Insurance Times, a claim in the US reached $8bn (£4.5bn) involving a wrongful death due to negligence in failing to ensure that a property was safe for human habitation.

Richard Gundle, an NFS Network Member was faced with his first mould remediation claim just four days after complet ing the Mould Remediation Course at the National Flood School. Faced with a basement covered in mould (pictured below) following a pipe that had leaked, Richard found the course invaluable, “the course was vital, I know exactly what to do and financially this one job has covered double the cost of the course and more.”

An area of the mould infestation confronting Richard Gundle.

For more information on mould remediation, or to find out when the next Applied Mould Remediation Course is running, contact the National Flood School.

Situation:
A major franchise operator had been called to a small conservatory where a policy holder had drilled into a water pipe as a result of DIY ‘home improvements’. They installed a dehumidifier and air mover into the room that had laminate flooring with plasterboard walls. However, after three weeks the room was not drying properly. The franchise operators decided to lift the laminate floor covering to aid drying. Upon removing the floor covering, they found standing water trapped between the laminate and concrete/sand mix sub-floor. Convinced this was the answer to their problems they left the property for a further 5 weeks. After a full 8 weeks of drying, the franchise operator finally declared the conservatory dry.

However, the policyholder was not so convinced and asked a damp proofing specialist he knew to give a second opinion. Using damp meters, the policy holder’s friend agreed that the room was still wet. Fuelled by this, the policy holder also asked a surveyor from his local estate agents to take a look. Again the opinion was that it was wet. The policyholder demanded the £1600 bill be waived and the installation of a replacement polymer

floor at a further cost of £1600. Convinced they had done all they could, the operators contacted Chris Netherton to find out where the problem lay.

Inspection:
On arrival Chris conducted a two hour assessment, collecting forensic evidence using a variety of meters and a boroscope (see caption competition!). Non-invasive moisture tests proved inconclusive as the building had evidence of a damp-proof membrane, bridged by steps and mortar. What was causing concern however was the fact that the outside wall seemed thicker than normal.

Using the boroscope to inspect the wall with minimal destruction, Chris found that the wall had a double layer of plasterboard, with mould growth behind the second layer. Although this was obviously concerning, it did not explain why there would still be moisture, but should have been discovered by the original

technicians.

Next Chris turned to the concrete and sand mix subfloor. Strangely, the floor sounded hollow when tapped despite appearing solid. Deciding to investigate further, Chris drilled a small hole in an inconspicuous area. It was not long before polystyrene began to appear. The floor was a floating concrete floor no more than 300mm thick on polystyrene. This had created a moisture barrier and as a result was holding substantial amounts of water that were slowly wicking their way up the walls.

Conclusion:
The original franchise operator had failed to conduct a full assessment. Furthermore they had failed to respond to a request for an Equilibrium Relative Humidity (ERH) test as per British Standards for resilient floor coverings (BS 5024) from the claims manager.

Result:
The recommendation was to use a floating floor drying machine costing a total of £850, saving dramatically on the initial cost and greatly pleasing the policy holder.

Moral:
Sometimes spending a little longer on an assessment can result in a lot less time on the drying.