've been a folower of you over a year now, and it's clear to me that you're a cautious individual when discussing any topic. This caution has led me to follow you, and even when I come across opinions that I don't fully agree with, I've always concluded that you're earnestly trying your best. You stand out as one of the few surveyors genuinely dedicated to supporting homeowners and properties in the UK. Unfortunately, the sales tactics in the UK are not exclusive to spray foam companies; they extend to all home improvement products. Homeowners are often targeted to purchase products, whether they be solar panels, heat pumps, or double glazing. As a foreigner, this is a practice I have never supported. The government is well aware of how businesses operate, and with over 100,000 telesales jobs in the UK (a sector larger than the surveying industry), it seems they have not considered taking action against these uneducated business practices. Targeting homeowners plays a significant role in the UK economy. As an installer with over 20 years of experience and an approved installer worldwide, I have a perspective to offer. My experience in countries like Canada, where moisture levels are high and timber frame houses are common, has shown me that the extensive use of closed-cell foam there does not lead to the issues we see in the UK. The problem here appears to be the lack of education among businesses and a limited understanding of spray foam science within the UK spray foam industry. The industry has grown rapidly recently, which has not been beneficial for UK homeowners. Many in the spray foam business come from backgrounds in plumbing, solar, renewals, or roofing, but how many of them truly understand the science behind spray foam? The common narrative online and elsewhere-that spray foam causes rot or other issues-is misleading. Those who target spray foam as a harmful product are, in the vast majority of cases, simply wrong. The Spray Foam Industry has been always very limited in terms of compliance, first and foremost we shall always follow the certifications products strictly, The issue What I found in the UK is the spray foam industry having to comply with just not the UK codes, always with insures surveyor associations etc etc, by the time you are looking at this comment you are already very well educate in some of the the facts I will be talking about, moisture management, Interstitial condensation, Static condensation risk analysis and also Dynamic condensation risk analysis ( WUFI) I'm sure by having experience with some of the UK Manufactures and some of the UK science I would imagine that your perspective in spray foam has changed. -Spray foam as a product should suit any project as longs the Condition of the roof allows to do so.( fit for purpose ) spray foam does work. it all depends to the density used and the application method. The last airtightness test showed 3 (m³/h/m²) at a pressure differential of 50 pascals (Pa). The previous Build ( Mirror house ) Showed 10(m³/h/m²) of 50 (Pa). using rigid boards. ( last results were 35% expensive than Spray foam) - Working with various codes worldwide, we've found the British Board of Agrément (BBA) to be the most recognized and thorough. The BBA's approach is meticulous, resulting in minimal errors. Spray foam products, certified for retrofitting homes and as LR (low resistance) and HR (high resistance) roofing underlays, demonstrate that adherence to these certifications should mitigate any issues. Interestingly, it appears we are unique globally in leaving rafters exposed. As I initially mentioned, BBA's guidelines, specifically section 3.2.6, state that the product must be applied between, or both between and under, the timber rafters, with an Air and Vapour Control Layer (AVCL) applied on the insulation's warm side. According to the BBA, full encapsulation of the roof structure, including rafters, is advisable to prevent vapor barrier breaches and mitigate thermal bridging. Given that the thermal mass of spray foam surpasses that of timber, the latter can act as a cold bridge. Therefore the rafters are still exposed to heat transfer and moisture absorption from the coldest part of the roof covering. a good example can be found in here www.energyvanguard.com/.../a-frosty-heat-loss.../
From the perspective of a surveyor, a company that adhere to the British Board of Agrément (BBA) standards, including the provision for full encapsulation of the roof structure, is a matter of both compliance and quality assurance. However, it's not as straightforward as it might seem. If a company follows the BBA guidelines rigorously and implements full encapsulation of the roof structure along with a vapor control layer (VCL) (Only HR roofings underlays) using the paint method, one might presume that surveyors should approve these methods based on their adherence to recognise standards From my viewpoint, the concerns extend beyond the technical specifications of spray foam insulation. They also touch upon the interests of surveyors and their professional associations. The requirement for full encapsulation of the roof structure, accompanied by a VCL, does not directly benefit surveyor businesses. I do think that can potentially impacting the demand for their services. The United Kingdom boasts a significantly high number of surveyors compared to other countries. For example Germany has approximately 1,000 ( RICS) individual surveyors, suggesting that the prevalence of professional residential surveyors and the issues they encounter may be lesser in magnitude there. This disparity raises questions about the relationship between industry practices and the perceived interests of surveyors. However, the potential for perceived conflicts of interest, stemming from the economic dynamics of the surveying profession and its business models, complicates this issue. It suggests a need for ongoing dialogue and collaboration between installers, surveyors, and British bodies Codes to align technical practices with the overarching goal of maintaining high standards of building performance and integrity. Despite many surveyors cautioning against spray foam, it's crucial to acknowledge the impracticality of a trade meeting everyone's standards. Properly assessing spray foam requires an understanding of moisture management and the underlying science. I've never saw a profesional surveyor providing a condensation risk analysis or, when necessary, recommending a Vapor Control Layer (VCL) or ventilation system. This highlights that the issue extends beyond just untrained installers; a lack of knowledge among professional surveyors is a significant industry problem. Without delving too deeply here, to illustrate: a recent email from a customer relayed a surveyor's claim that a product felt soft because it had been diluted with water. The surveyor, likely familiar only with closed-cell foam, misunderstood the natural softness of open-cell foam so he questioned the integrity of the installation company( BBA approved ) saying this ( -a clear misinterpretation, Great example off inadequate industry understanding. -I've seen a video where you discuss using a combination of open-cell foam and fibreglass, which can lead to what's known as a double vapour barrier, particularly when leaving the fibreglass in place at the ceiling levels. Interestingly, it seems we're unique in the UK for keeping fibreglass at these levels, and this practice largely stems from the constraints placed on the UK spray foam industry. According to section 9.1.10 of the BBA ( in England and Wales, roofs and loft spaces are deemed to adequately limit the risk of surface condensation as long as the thermal transmittance (U-value) doesn't exceed 0.35 W·m^2·K^−1 anywhere, and the connections with other building parts are designed following section 6 of this certificate.) For spray foam businesses aiming to adhere to this clause, we find ourselves forzed to leave the fibreglass in place at the ceiling levels, us included. This necessity arises because, with just 100mm of open-cell foam application-which is often the max we can apply due to rafter thickness and its thermal conductivity being around 0.038 W·m^2·K^−1-just the foam alone isn't enough to prevent or eliminate surface condensation. Thus, the presence of fibreglass must be considered in our assessments. So, we circle back to the same dilemma. If we're to follow the guidelines to the letter, achieving compliance across the board is challenging. It won't be until third parties fully understand the science behind what we do that we'll see progress in resolving these issues. Remember how, over a decade ago, British homeowners faced difficulties selling properties with cavity wall insulation? At that time, thousands of homeowners struggled to secure mortgages due to the insulation in their cavity walls. It turns out, the products weren't the issue. This presented a challenging period for the surveying industry, which found it difficult to assess cavities after they had been filled. Today, however, inspecting filled cavities has become common practice. So, it's clear that spray foam isn't the first product to encounter skepticism. Now you might be wondering, how do I judge surveyors? It's simple. I see the surveying industry as quite vulnerable. Universities are still teaching moisture management using methods from the 50s, like Glasser's, but the dynamics of properties and insulation products have evolved significantly. And from what I've seen, spray foam isn't straightforward. Sometimes, not always, but sometimes, I hear surveyors getting it all wrong about spray foam. And from what I know through experience, when new products are tested by manufacturers, they don't often think about educating surveyors, training them, or providing them with the resources to assess such new and complex products. Building science and spray foam science are just on two different levels. I can understand some of the misconceptions. That's why this is my second time responding to a video from a qualified surveyor. The first time was because he used a picture of my work from 2020, which was professionally installed. I want to Thank you for your time reading this comment. All the Best Mr Geoff Kind Regards Adrian Fernandez
A very interesting read. I agree that what spray foam does to the dynamics of a roof are very complex which is why it is difficult for residential surveyors in the UK to evaluate the likely forward performance when assessing a home for lending purposes on a visual inspection basis only. This critical point seems to have been overlooked by those entering the market when deciding their distribution strategies. Instead of demonstrating skill and judgement of the requirements of the BBA and KIWA certificates and selling it professionally most passed all responsibility to small teams of contractors, who subcontracted direct sales firms, who cold called homeowners and mis diagnosed the install. I have to disagree slightly with your assessment of the BBA certificates. They are (and there are many) the ones who suggest BS 13788 (the Glasier) model as the first test of a risk. This is a far too simplistic a model which can easily be manipulated to produce a positive result by selecting a nominal value for the vapour permeability of bitumen underfelts. This should always have been recognises as an Achilles heel by the BBA and KIWA in my opinion. The historic wide spread use of bitumen in the UK is another factor that has caught many international supplies on the back foot. The attempts to impress surveyors that this could be an acceptable application in a climate such as ours has been unimpressive and I have to say one which still seems unacceptable to many surveyors in the UK. Finally you may be surprised to hear that there has been no formal guidance from any surveying organisation or government to assist surveyors, hence the lack of knowledge. Any group that has tried has been issued legal letters which has not developed a free and safe space for surveyors to openly discuss the issues. I thank you for your observations. you too seem to have a very good grasp on what is happening. it would be great to discuss this further with you. This is my opinion only not the views of any professional institution I am a member of.
Thank you for your thorough response, Mr. Geoff. I wholeheartedly agree with your insights on sales strategies. However, it's unfortunate that the spray foam installation industry seems to be inundated with numerous franchises aggressively promoting their services and products. Personally, I don't endorse this approach to conducting business. It appears to be ingrained in the business culture, especially in Britain.Similar sales tactics are prevalent in the home improvement industry as well.Spray foam holds tremendous potential, especially when we examine the data on how homeowners are living. It's evident that air-permeable products alone aren't sufficient to meet new standards. While surveyors & Government may suggest that 300mm of fiberglass insulation on ceiling levels is adequate, homeowners increasingly prefer more effective insulation systems for better performance. There's no need to resort to high-pressure sales tactics; the product should speak for itself. Regarding BBA BS 13788, it's crucial to acknowledge the limited vapor permeability of bitumen felts. Through thermal modeling calculations, we've seeing that some water vapour can escape from the overlapping of the felt. Dynamic calculations have shown this phenomenon occurring in certain regions of the UK, primarily in the south. You're correct in pointing out the potential manipulation of static condensation risk assessments. Various factors can be adjusted to favor certain outcomes, such as altering water vapor permeability or changing the center of the rafters or the thickness of the bitumen felt. It's important to clarify that spray foam holds certifications for application into HR roofing underlays. In contrast, rigid boards, for example, do not support this application. Therefore, there is no certification supporting the application of Rigid boards into retrofit homes where HR roofing underlay has been fitted. Hence your comment reflecting the truth. Please allow me to correct the understanding regarding BBA's recommendations Regarding HR certification and BS13788. While it's true that the BBA recommends following BS13788 standards, it's essential to note that merely adhering to static calculations is insufficient. BBA explicitly states the necessity of providing a dynamic condensation risk analysis, also known as hygrothermal analysis. This sets it apart, as other assessments, like BuildDesk, have their limitations, such as the inability to assess product airtightness. Dynamic assessments can be conducted using tools like WUFI for thermal modeling calculations. BBA certification is closely tied to documents like these. BBA employs external independent companies to conduct assessments, which span 5-20 years and comprehensively manage moisture within the roof structure. These assessments also evaluate risks such as rotting rafters within a long period of time. I believe you have been in touch with Richard Yeo regarding this type of Calcs, he is the right person to discuss the assessments. BBA's stance is clear: while dynamic calculations demonstrate the suitability of spray foam applications on bitumen felts, a vapor control layer (VCL) must be integrated to maintain the dew water threshold at 0 kg/m³ across all UK regions. This requirement is clearly outlined in their certification.( The answer to this in my previous comment) I understand your concern regarding the importance of clear communication within our industry. Experienced installers should be able to discern discussions about our field. From my perspective, there seems to be a dual issue at play. It's not just about uneducated installers improperly applying spray foam, but also professional surveyors recommending its removal without adequate knowledge. This results in homeowners wasting significant sums of money and enduring unnecessary stress due to misguided advice or decisions. This cycle needs to be halted. The notion of a blanket ban on spray foam is not entirely realistic. For instance, we've consistently been able to assist customers in selling their properties despite challenges. Some lenders, like Halifax, have proven difficult to work with due to their reluctance to listen and learn. However, by presenting sufficient evidence of compliance, we've been able to sway their stance. It's essential to address these issues and foster better understanding and cooperation among all parties involved. It will be my pleasure to keep in touch with you. please find my email adrian@sprayfoamtech.uk Regards Adrian
Geoff, an excellent and philosphical comment, and that the issues behind spray foam are not just about the product, but go much deeper to the ingrained attitudes of the property industry.
I have come to recognise that by not understanding the true nature of the supply chain when products are directly sold to the public the government makes a recurring critical error in delivery of what should be a worthy initiative.
've been a folower of you over a year now, and it's clear to me that you're a cautious individual when discussing any topic. This caution has led me to follow you, and even when I come across opinions that I don't fully agree with, I've always concluded that you're earnestly trying your best. You stand out as one of the few surveyors genuinely dedicated to supporting homeowners and properties in the UK.
Unfortunately, the sales tactics in the UK are not exclusive to spray foam companies; they extend to all home improvement products. Homeowners are often targeted to purchase products, whether they be solar panels, heat pumps, or double glazing. As a foreigner, this is a practice I have never supported. The government is well aware of how businesses operate, and with over 100,000 telesales jobs in the UK (a sector larger than the surveying industry), it seems they have not considered taking action against these uneducated business practices. Targeting homeowners plays a significant role in the UK economy.
As an installer with over 20 years of experience and an approved installer worldwide, I have a perspective to offer. My experience in countries like Canada, where moisture levels are high and timber frame houses are common, has shown me that the extensive use of closed-cell foam there does not lead to the issues we see in the UK. The problem here appears to be the lack of education among businesses and a limited understanding of spray foam science within the UK spray foam industry. The industry has grown rapidly recently, which has not been beneficial for UK homeowners. Many in the spray foam business come from backgrounds in plumbing, solar, renewals, or roofing, but how many of them truly understand the science behind spray foam? The common narrative online and elsewhere-that spray foam causes rot or other issues-is misleading. Those who target spray foam as a harmful product are, in the vast majority of cases, simply wrong.
The Spray Foam Industry has been always very limited in terms of compliance, first and foremost we shall always follow the certifications products strictly, The issue What I found in the UK is the spray foam industry having to comply with just not the UK codes, always with insures surveyor associations etc etc, by the time you are looking at this comment you are already very well educate in some of the the facts I will be talking about, moisture management, Interstitial condensation, Static condensation risk analysis and also Dynamic condensation risk analysis ( WUFI) I'm sure by having experience with some of the UK Manufactures and some of the UK science I would imagine that your perspective in spray foam has changed.
-Spray foam as a product should suit any project as longs the Condition of the roof allows to do so.( fit for purpose ) spray foam does work. it all depends to the density used and the application method. The last airtightness test showed 3 (m³/h/m²) at a pressure differential of 50 pascals (Pa). The previous Build ( Mirror house ) Showed 10(m³/h/m²) of 50 (Pa). using rigid boards. ( last results were 35% expensive than Spray foam)
- Working with various codes worldwide, we've found the British Board of Agrément (BBA) to be the most recognized and thorough. The BBA's approach is meticulous, resulting in minimal errors. Spray foam products, certified for retrofitting homes and as LR (low resistance) and HR (high resistance) roofing underlays, demonstrate that adherence to these certifications should mitigate any issues. Interestingly, it appears we are unique globally in leaving rafters exposed. As I initially mentioned, BBA's guidelines, specifically section 3.2.6, state that the product must be applied between, or both between and under, the timber rafters, with an Air and Vapour Control Layer (AVCL) applied on the insulation's warm side. According to the BBA, full encapsulation of the roof structure, including rafters, is advisable to prevent vapor barrier breaches and mitigate thermal bridging. Given that the thermal mass of spray foam surpasses that of timber, the latter can act as a cold bridge. Therefore the rafters are still exposed to heat transfer and moisture absorption from the coldest part of the roof covering. a good example can be found in here www.energyvanguard.com/.../a-frosty-heat-loss.../
From the perspective of a surveyor, a company that adhere to the British Board of Agrément (BBA) standards, including the provision for full encapsulation of the roof structure, is a matter of both compliance and quality assurance. However, it's not as straightforward as it might seem. If a company follows the BBA guidelines rigorously and implements full encapsulation of the roof structure along with a vapor control layer (VCL) (Only HR roofings underlays) using the paint method, one might presume that surveyors should approve these methods based on their adherence to recognise standards
From my viewpoint, the concerns extend beyond the technical specifications of spray foam insulation. They also touch upon the interests of surveyors and their professional associations. The requirement for full encapsulation of the roof structure, accompanied by a VCL, does not directly benefit surveyor businesses. I do think that can potentially impacting the demand for their services.
The United Kingdom boasts a significantly high number of surveyors compared to other countries. For example Germany has approximately 1,000 ( RICS) individual surveyors, suggesting that the prevalence of professional residential surveyors and the issues they encounter may be lesser in magnitude there. This disparity raises questions about the relationship between industry practices and the perceived interests of surveyors.
However, the potential for perceived conflicts of interest, stemming from the economic dynamics of the surveying profession and its business models, complicates this issue. It suggests a need for ongoing dialogue and collaboration between installers, surveyors, and British bodies Codes to align technical practices with the overarching goal of maintaining high standards of building performance and integrity.
Despite many surveyors cautioning against spray foam, it's crucial to acknowledge the impracticality of a trade meeting everyone's standards. Properly assessing spray foam requires an understanding of moisture management and the underlying science. I've never saw a profesional surveyor providing a condensation risk analysis or, when necessary, recommending a Vapor Control Layer (VCL) or ventilation system. This highlights that the issue extends beyond just untrained installers; a lack of knowledge among professional surveyors is a significant industry problem. Without delving too deeply here, to illustrate: a recent email from a customer relayed a surveyor's claim that a product felt soft because it had been diluted with water. The surveyor, likely familiar only with closed-cell foam, misunderstood the natural softness of open-cell foam so he questioned the integrity of the installation company( BBA approved ) saying this ( -a clear misinterpretation, Great example off inadequate industry understanding.
-I've seen a video where you discuss using a combination of open-cell foam and fibreglass, which can lead to what's known as a double vapour barrier, particularly when leaving the fibreglass in place at the ceiling levels. Interestingly, it seems we're unique in the UK for keeping fibreglass at these levels, and this practice largely stems from the constraints placed on the UK spray foam industry. According to section 9.1.10 of the BBA ( in England and Wales, roofs and loft spaces are deemed to adequately limit the risk of surface condensation as long as the thermal transmittance (U-value) doesn't exceed 0.35 W·m^2·K^−1 anywhere, and the connections with other building parts are designed following section 6 of this certificate.)
For spray foam businesses aiming to adhere to this clause, we find ourselves forzed to leave the fibreglass in place at the ceiling levels, us included. This necessity arises because, with just 100mm of open-cell foam application-which is often the max we can apply due to rafter thickness and its thermal conductivity being around 0.038 W·m^2·K^−1-just the foam alone isn't enough to prevent or eliminate surface condensation. Thus, the presence of fibreglass must be considered in our assessments.
So, we circle back to the same dilemma. If we're to follow the guidelines to the letter, achieving compliance across the board is challenging. It won't be until third parties fully understand the science behind what we do that we'll see progress in resolving these issues.
Remember how, over a decade ago, British homeowners faced difficulties selling properties with cavity wall insulation? At that time, thousands of homeowners struggled to secure mortgages due to the insulation in their cavity walls. It turns out, the products weren't the issue. This presented a challenging period for the surveying industry, which found it difficult to assess cavities after they had been filled. Today, however, inspecting filled cavities has become common practice. So, it's clear that spray foam isn't the first product to encounter skepticism.
Now you might be wondering, how do I judge surveyors? It's simple. I see the surveying industry as quite vulnerable. Universities are still teaching moisture management using methods from the 50s, like Glasser's, but the dynamics of properties and insulation products have evolved significantly. And from what I've seen, spray foam isn't straightforward. Sometimes, not always, but sometimes, I hear surveyors getting it all wrong about spray foam. And from what I know through experience, when new products are tested by manufacturers, they don't often think about educating surveyors, training them, or providing them with the resources to assess such new and complex products. Building science and spray foam science are just on two different levels.
I can understand some of the misconceptions. That's why this is my second time responding to a video from a qualified surveyor. The first time was because he used a picture of my work from 2020, which was professionally installed.
I want to Thank you for your time reading this comment.
All the Best Mr Geoff
Kind Regards
Adrian Fernandez
A very interesting read. I agree that what spray foam does to the dynamics of a roof are very complex which is why it is difficult for residential surveyors in the UK to evaluate the likely forward performance when assessing a home for lending purposes on a visual inspection basis only. This critical point seems to have been overlooked by those entering the market when deciding their distribution strategies. Instead of demonstrating skill and judgement of the requirements of the BBA and KIWA certificates and selling it professionally most passed all responsibility to small teams of contractors, who subcontracted direct sales firms, who cold called homeowners and mis diagnosed the install. I have to disagree slightly with your assessment of the BBA certificates. They are (and there are many) the ones who suggest BS 13788 (the Glasier) model as the first test of a risk. This is a far too simplistic a model which can easily be manipulated to produce a positive result by selecting a nominal value for the vapour permeability of bitumen underfelts. This should always have been recognises as an Achilles heel by the BBA and KIWA in my opinion. The historic wide spread use of bitumen in the UK is another factor that has caught many international supplies on the back foot. The attempts to impress surveyors that this could be an acceptable application in a climate such as ours has been unimpressive and I have to say one which still seems unacceptable to many surveyors in the UK. Finally you may be surprised to hear that there has been no formal guidance from any surveying organisation or government to assist surveyors, hence the lack of knowledge. Any group that has tried has been issued legal letters which has not developed a free and safe space for surveyors to openly discuss the issues. I thank you for your observations. you too seem to have a very good grasp on what is happening. it would be great to discuss this further with you. This is my opinion only not the views of any professional institution I am a member of.
Thank you for your thorough response, Mr. Geoff. I wholeheartedly agree with your insights on sales strategies. However, it's unfortunate that the spray foam installation industry seems to be inundated with numerous franchises aggressively promoting their services and products. Personally, I don't endorse this approach to conducting business. It appears to be ingrained in the business culture, especially in Britain.Similar sales tactics are prevalent in the home improvement industry as well.Spray foam holds tremendous potential, especially when we examine the data on how homeowners are living. It's evident that air-permeable products alone aren't sufficient to meet new standards. While surveyors & Government may suggest that 300mm of fiberglass insulation on ceiling levels is adequate, homeowners increasingly prefer more effective insulation systems for better performance. There's no need to resort to high-pressure sales tactics; the product should speak for itself.
Regarding BBA BS 13788, it's crucial to acknowledge the limited vapor permeability of bitumen felts. Through thermal modeling calculations, we've seeing that some water vapour can escape from the overlapping of the felt. Dynamic calculations have shown this phenomenon occurring in certain regions of the UK, primarily in the south. You're correct in pointing out the potential manipulation of static condensation risk assessments. Various factors can be adjusted to favor certain outcomes, such as altering water vapor permeability or changing the center of the rafters or the thickness of the bitumen felt.
It's important to clarify that spray foam holds certifications for application into HR roofing underlays. In contrast, rigid boards, for example, do not support this application. Therefore, there is no certification supporting the application of Rigid boards into retrofit homes where HR roofing underlay has been fitted. Hence your comment reflecting the truth.
Please allow me to correct the understanding regarding BBA's recommendations Regarding HR certification and BS13788. While it's true that the BBA recommends following BS13788 standards, it's essential to note that merely adhering to static calculations is insufficient. BBA explicitly states the necessity of providing a dynamic condensation risk analysis, also known as hygrothermal analysis. This sets it apart, as other assessments, like BuildDesk, have their limitations, such as the inability to assess product airtightness.
Dynamic assessments can be conducted using tools like WUFI for thermal modeling calculations. BBA certification is closely tied to documents like these. BBA employs external independent companies to conduct assessments, which span 5-20 years and comprehensively manage moisture within the roof structure. These assessments also evaluate risks such as rotting rafters within a long period of time.
I believe you have been in touch with Richard Yeo regarding this type of Calcs, he is the right person to discuss the assessments. BBA's stance is clear: while dynamic calculations demonstrate the suitability of spray foam applications on bitumen felts, a vapor control layer (VCL) must be integrated to maintain the dew water threshold at 0 kg/m³ across all UK regions. This requirement is clearly outlined in their certification.( The answer to this in my previous comment)
I understand your concern regarding the importance of clear communication within our industry. Experienced installers should be able to discern discussions about our field. From my perspective, there seems to be a dual issue at play. It's not just about uneducated installers improperly applying spray foam, but also professional surveyors recommending its removal without adequate knowledge. This results in homeowners wasting significant sums of money and enduring unnecessary stress due to misguided advice or decisions. This cycle needs to be halted.
The notion of a blanket ban on spray foam is not entirely realistic. For instance, we've consistently been able to assist customers in selling their properties despite challenges. Some lenders, like Halifax, have proven difficult to work with due to their reluctance to listen and learn. However, by presenting sufficient evidence of compliance, we've been able to sway their stance. It's essential to address these issues and foster better understanding and cooperation among all parties involved.
It will be my pleasure to keep in touch with you. please find my email adrian@sprayfoamtech.uk
Regards
Adrian
Geoff, an excellent and philosphical comment, and that the issues behind spray foam are not just about the product, but go much deeper to the ingrained attitudes of the property industry.
I have come to recognise that by not understanding the true nature of the supply chain when products are directly sold to the public the government makes a recurring critical error in delivery of what should be a worthy initiative.