Hi all - can you help me work out what is reasonable in this situation please?
We've bought a house which has a flat roofed extension. The flat roof was renewed in Feb last year (it was leaking). The new roof has a 15 year guarantee. With all this bad weather, we've had a leak; water is leaking in and dripping from the lintel into the extension. We've called out the roofing company who can't see much wrong with the actual roof but proposed that the driving rain onto the external wall, running down the wall has soaked the mortar which holds the flashing (felt) to the wall, eventually leading to a leak.
They have proposed 2 solutions; painting something on to the mortar joint (not sure what) or lead flashing (being, as I understand it a more reliable and long term solution). My question is - who should pay for the lead flashing if that's what been determined is required? It seems to me that the materials/methods used previously have not been sufficient and so why should we have to pay again for the remedy? ok we didn't pay originally but you know what I mean. Then again, the roof itself is fine it's just the joint (seemingly) that is problematic...
Well you can paint a brick sealant on yourselves - so I would opt for the flashing option if they are only offering to do one of the two ! Head to a DIY store for brick water sealer ( I think rustoleum do one ?! )