Re roof vs new roof??

[Dickorydockwhatthe]

We have 1930s house with French clay tiles which are hard to obtain. We've lots quite a few tiles in high wind. I've just had quote for a re roof which is £7,600 which basically reuses the tiles giving them a clean plus adding a few new ones which are missing, re felting, boarding etc it's completely naked under so needs doing but just wondering whether there's any benefit in getting new roof or just redoing ours with new tiles

Check local council regulations - you may find that a new roof requires permission because it’s out of character or something.
I have zero idea - but would check as that might influence your decision. Fwiw I would go with re roof using existing tiles, plus some new ones. But that based on recycling material and looks - so a very personal decision not based on any practical reasons what so ever !

Same here. Tiles fall off in the spring after frosts and have caused damage. Didn't see the point in putting the same tiles on if they are prone to frost etc. Got a few quotes for re-roof with new tiles that are similar in style ranging 15-18k.

I found on-line that if you have 25% of your roof changed, you need building regulations. When I mentioned this to the roofers, a lot were reluctant to get building control in, comments such as "it's a load of crap" "you can apply for it after you sell" "they don't bother coming out..". A lot of opinions varied too, you don't need insulation, you don't need felt, holes (ventilation) are good etc.
Still looking for someone to do it 6 months on.

I reroofed a Victorian house about 10 years ago, it needs doing again I would say

In your position, I would get quotes for both & decide based on how long you think you will stay, knowing a buyer would check roof/ request discount if needs repairs

That's what I'm worried about. Although nice keeping original tiles and alot cheaper not sure if it is the best option long term. How do people even afford new roofs though 😫

If the house is 1930s it means the tiles are around 90 years it is suggested (by a roofing company) that tiles have a life of around 60 years.
The labour to remove and clean the tiles will be greater than them just taking them off and throwing them in a skip.
Personally I had new tiles when faced with this problem 3 years ago. The roofer also said if he reused the existing tiles he could not provide the same level of guarantee. (perhaps he would wouldn't he!)

www.google.com/search?q=how+long+do+clay+roof+tiles+last&oq=how+long+do+clay&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0i457j0l3.22496j0j4&client=ms-android-vf-gb-revc&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

Our 1950s house had a clay Dutch Pantile roof and we went for a new roof last year, we don’t regret it for a minute. Same colour, just modern tiles, not fancy pantiles but it looks absolutely fine.

What we did do though was speak to our neighbours (who also had pantile roofs) and we piled up our decent pantiles and asked them all to help themselves for spares.

One neighbour then took the opportunity to re-roof and took about 80% of our old tiles. He didn’t pay us a penny and I do think that he was a CF but actually most other neighbours didn’t want too many tiles so it all worked out in the end.

And apart from the CF other neighbours paid us for their spares in bottles of wine so a win win all around!

We got a new roof with new tiles.
When our tiles came off, they crumbled between your hands...

Look at slate, it never wears out.

We're in a similar situation with a 1930's clay roof. A builder suggested that clay tiles are quite expensive and have a good resale value so it would be worth us looking into replacing the roof and selling the old clay tiles to a reclamation yard. I haven't got quotes yet to decide either way but may be worth you looking into.

I would be sure those tiles on your roof have another 90 years in them, the ones you can buy today will have a much shorter life expectancy. We just re-roofed our parents house, same situation as you, no felt or insulation so added all that in. Roof was 60 years old but the tiles had been reused back then so about 100 years old, they were in fantastic condition. Had an 80% recovery rate (as we did it ourselves and were being careful with them) and then just infilled with matching replacements and wouldn’t be surprised if we’ll get another 50 years plus out of it.

Only thing I would say is it doesn’t really look like we did anything as the new tiles were blended throughout. Hadn’t got that shiny new roof look. Is so much warmer in there with the insulation though 👍

Agree with pp though, if you’re paying a company to reroof then the addition labour cost of trying to save your tiles may not be worth it in the end

Slate definitely does wear out. We had a re-roof on our 300 year old house a few years ago. They re-used around 60% of the existing, huge welsh slates but we had to have new slates to make up the shortfall. We live in a conservation area so it was slightly problematic, but the roofer ended up 'hiding' the new slates within gables that are not visible from the road.

I think though, that it's best to go for as near possible the same material as the original for a re-roof. Putting slate on a 1930s house might look a bit odd, same as adding concrete tiles to a 300 year old house would ruin the look of it.

If the tiles are original I would be tempted to do all new as they will be at the end of their natural life. However, if you don't think you are going to stay in the house long you could do the stop gap of patch replacements for cost reasons.

If the tiles were well in lifetime, patch and replace would be the obvious choice.
I think if you do go for this you need to be prepared for escalating costs over estimate, as likely more tiles than you expect are not good enough to go back on.
The main thing is to pick the most reputable firm you can, talk to as many as you can. Research the subject yourself, it is so much harder to spot when someone is talking rubbish if you are completely clueless, just knowing what questions to ask and comparing their answers will help you sort the sheep from the goats.

We re reroofed our slate house about 10 years ago. All slates taken off and cleaned, plastic sheeting put down and the slates put back with new nails/pegs.

We haven't (touch wood) lost a slate since and it used to be a regular occurrence. The roofing guys said it would be good for 80 years plus.....they may have been talking bollocks who knows.?

Good luck, I hope you can find a reputable roofer. My house was 172 years old and had the original slate roof, apparently it was 'queen' slate quality. Unfortunately had suffered from years of bad repairs and my surveyor ( I had hoped to stay and had a structural survey done for myself - needed £200K spent to renovate :( ) said it needed to be stripped off and redone. I ended up selling at auction.

Just to say on the moneysavingexpert board someone is trying to buy a house with 'spray foam' insulation in the loft - it's unmortgageable. Apparently very bad practise and very expensive to remove.

Meanwhile if money is a struggle, you could choose to simply replace the tiles that blew off and ignore the rest entirely. It would be hundreds not thousands, and yes, ok so the roof would ideally be felted etc etc but there is no magic money tree sometimes and plugging the holes sometimes will buy you time until you can consider the whole thing. I have stripped and re-slated my own roof in places before, to save money, it was easier than I thought so if you're brave you could even consider that!

Get someone you trust up on the roof. Our last house supposedly needed a new roof when what it needed was all the broken tiles replaced. But it was not leaking it just looked old compared to the other houses with new roofs.

If you ever might be tempted by a loft conversion you might save a lot of cash in the long term doing it now.