Folks your help on this one would be appreciated....

Got a call from an oldish chap asking for a quote to tile his kitchen, but also saying that he wanted to tile on existing tile......ive been asked about this for wall tiles before but never floor tiles....As a new person to the trade, I have concerns but you may tell me otherwise....he was quite insistent that he didnt want existing taken up !

Existing floor is ceramic and new tiles are also ceramic...any advice, including run a mile! would be gratefully received !!

It's not good practice and most people on here would tell you not to do it including me! The problem is you have no idea how well (or not) the existing tiles are stuck to the floor. It can be done no problem with getting the new tiles to stick to the old ones, but for me, I'd say no.

Forgot to ask, what is the substrate? Concrete or wood or other?!

Bri substrate is concrete

I'm with bri.. should really be a start from afresh..

Dave I did say this but the guy wasnt in the advice mood - I dont want to turn the work down as its a sizeable job, but at same time I dont want to have to handle any repercussions that present themselves afterwards, and these old geezers are like "dogs with bones" when something goes a**e up !

Originally Posted by MartinH

Dave I did say this but the guy wasnt in the advice mood - I dont want to turn the work down as its a sizeable job, but at same time I dont want to have to handle any repercussions that present themselves afterwards, and these old geezers are like "dogs with bones" when something goes a**e up !

If it's a decent size job can you fin a way of pricing the removal in? At the end of the day it's half a days work and a small skip to get rid of the old stuff so it might be worth doing it in your own time to get the job. It's your call mate!

Tile on tile,not a good idea.But if you need the work. Do a proper quote on paper and get customer to sign saying that you advise against it.

ask him to visit the forum , for a second opinion , or third or fourth

I hear everyone with admittedly more experience than me who suck their breath in and go "No, no, no" at the suggestion of tiling onto tiles. However, a little lateral thinking is necessary sometimes.

I personally would not tile over tiles on a wall because of the weight issues, but on a concrete screed floor, things can be different.

I recently had a customer who wanted an utility room and bathroom floor tiled. Both floors were already tiled, and the hallway they abutted onto was tiled with terracotta tiles that were between 10 and 15 mm higher than the other rooms floor! If I took the existing floor tiles off, then I would have been faced with building a concrete floor up to 18mm before tiling (to get the level floor area the customer wanted).

So I removed one floor tile in each room - 100% adhesive coverage. Then checked entire floor area for hollow spots. Cleaned both floors with Grimex, and tiled.

First off - is that really any different from tiling on a backer board?

Second - I will report back in 10 years as to whether the tiles are still OK.

i agree with bri,it can be done but i wouldnt do it for the reasons mentioned

if its concrete cant you put a price in and add a few pounds....go in and gun the lot up when hes down the shops?

Originally Posted by kilty55

i agree with bri,it can be done but i wouldnt do it for the reasons mentioned

if its concrete cant you put a price in and add a few pounds....go in and gun the lot up when hes down the shops?

Kilty you can bet your bottom dollar and in true aging gentleman style, he'd be watching my each and every movement for the duration of the job as it would make a change from him having to watch "Cash in the Attic" or water his tomato plants !!

did he give a reason why he didn't want them taking up?

hehe class,

Paul - he wouldnt give me a direct answer when I asked - he was just adamant he wanted to tile over tile ........maybe theres a body underneath ??? but i do find it strange even when i said it would raise his floor level by a centimetre he didnt seem concerned ....im sure theres a body underneath!!

my downstairs loo was tiled (badly) before we bought the house and we've just recently ripped up the laminate in the utility and loo floor tiles so that we could tile straight through. when we pulled the old tiles up in the loo, we found that the adhesive hadn't even stuck them to the floor. it was just the grout that was holding the tiles together.

maybe do as Andy says and see if he will allow you to pull up one of the tiles, just to check how well fixed it is. you never can tell you see. my downstairs loo floor looked fine, no cracks in the tiles or grout from movement or poor fixing.

Hi Martin Sme advice as Andy8578 as long as the substrate is sound no hollow points and he understands its not guaranteed, whats the problem its what he asked for. cant knock back work m8.

The problem is that if it fails and he does come back to him then what.. if he knows what he is doing isn't totally right then he is still in the wrong if this dodgy customer pursues it..

I am not saying it cannot be done or not feasible but the correct way is to remove old layers.. but it is good to get a few opinions on how others would do it.. me i prefer to know the job will last ... just my take on it..

this is always a would you wont you topic,in my opinion if the client wants it the client gets it,point in question i was working on a job last year doing communal areas in tenanted flats on the landings were vinyl tiles i insisted that they be taken up,the client did not want this and bypassed me and went to the supplier(a very well known spanish company)there rep said that the adhesive was suitable to go over the vinyl tiles as long as they were sound.


Dont now about you guys but i would rather go over ceramic tiles than vinyl tiles,by the way that practices has gone on now for well oover a year on 100s of these blocks i dread to think the consequences of the reps decision.

Too the original topic if the floor is sound tile over it ,BUT make sure your written quote states that you give no guarantee if the substrate fails.

a written disclaimer stating you have carried out work which may fail will not stand up in court if the customer pursues you i dont think

Originally Posted by kilty55

a written disclaimer stating you have carried out work which may fail will not stand up in court if the customer pursues you i dont think

I've read that on here before. If you (the tiler) knew there was a risk, then why did you go ahead anyway? (is what the judge would say before he sent you to the clink for a life sentance!)

Originally Posted by Bri

I've read that on here before. If you (the tiler) knew there was a risk, then why did you go ahead anyway? (is what the judge would say before he sent you to the clink for a life sentance!)

Now we are getting into a whole different field. However it may be worth seeking some authoritative guide here - you have not defined the words "knew" "risk" or "fail."

Courts nearly always give judgements on "risks" where there is a measurable chance that harm may be caused - how much harm is likely to be caused if a floor tile comes unstuck? Should it be judged on the same basis as deliberately using electric cable insufficient to cope with demand leaving a measurable risk of fire and death by electrocution?

When you look at whether a tradesman "knew" something would happen, you apply a test that something reasonable has happened in the experience of that tradesperson to give them that knowledge - good practice may suggest that tiling on tiles is not good practice - but does that mean the work will fail? What tests had the tradesperson conducted to confirm this belief? If you go ahead and pressurise a customer into funding a course of work that may not either be necessary or worse, force them to spend money on unnecessary measures?

The there is the question of failure. Over what period of time is a failure unreasonable? 1 week? 1 year? 10 years? 25 years? Is it necessary for us to produce tilling that last over a thousand years every time we do a job?

What I am saying here is that we are not lawyers, we are trades(wo)men. Every customer and every prospective job must be treated on its own independant merits. It may be entirely inappropriate to tile on a tiled surface in many cases, but is it right to say "never do it" - even the British (and European) Standards are "advisory" and if you have good reason not to comply with them - then do so - but document why, and be prepared to justify it.

Originally Posted by andy8758

Now we are getting into a whole different field. However it may be worth seeking some authoritative guide here - you have not defined the words "knew" "risk" or "fail."

Courts nearly always give judgements on "risks" where there is a measurable chance that harm may be caused - how much harm is likely to be caused if a floor tile comes unstuck? Should it be judged on the same basis as deliberately using electric cable insufficient to cope with demand leaving a measurable risk of fire and death by electrocution?

When you look at whether a tradesman "knew" something would happen, you apply a test that something reasonable has happened in the experience of that tradesperson to give them that knowledge - good practice may suggest that tiling on tiles is not good practice - but does that mean the work will fail? What tests had the tradesperson conducted to confirm this belief? If you go ahead and pressurise a customer into funding a course of work that may not either be necessary or worse, force them to spend money on unnecessary measures?

The there is the question of failure. Over what period of time is a failure unreasonable? 1 week? 1 year? 10 years? 25 years? Is it necessary for us to produce tilling that last over a thousand years every time we do a job?

What I am saying here is that we are not lawyers, we are trades(wo)men. Every customer and every prospective job must be treated on its own independant merits. It may be entirely inappropriate to tile on a tiled surface in many cases, but is it right to say "never do it" - even the British (and European) Standards are "advisory" and if you have good reason not to comply with them - then do so - but document why, and be prepared to justify it.

To make it clearer, when I posted I wasn't giving legal advice as I'm not qualified to do so. The point is that there would more than likely be no health or safety risks but if a floor fitted by a tradesperson fails and the client has to seek legal advice, chances are they will favour the client if the fitter went against his own advice and knowledge. I'm not disputing that tile on tile can't be done, just that the best way is to start from a clean sound substrate. I feel it is my duty to give the best solution to a problem, this is however not the only solution as is the case with most problems or queries. More than one way to skin a cat, if you like.

random question.. could you SLC over existing first if he doesnt want it up?

Originally Posted by dilz000

random question.. could you SLC over existing first if he doesnt want it up?

Yeah, but you still don't know whats underneath. Which is the whole issue with the old 'tile on tile' scenario.

indeed, could be even more tile lol

Originally Posted by Bri

To make it clearer, when I posted I wasn't giving legal advice as I'm not qualified to do so. The point is that there would more than likely be no health or safety risks but if a floor fitted by a tradesperson fails and the client has to seek legal advice, chances are they will favour the client if the fitter went against his own advice and knowledge. I'm not disputing that tile on tile can't be done, just that the best way is to start from a clean sound substrate. I feel it is my duty to give the best solution to a problem, this is however not the only solution as is the case with most problems or queries. More than one way to skin a cat, if you like.

Your final sentence hits the nail on the head - and the point I made from the start - there is more than one solution - dont close peoples minds off from examining the problem as a whole.

You may not have intended to give legal advice, but thats exactly how it read - hence I fired a shot across the bows of you (and Kilty) to suggest that imo we are wandering into territory that is outside our skillbase.

Originally Posted by andy8758

Your final sentence hits the nail on the head - and the point I made from the start - there is more than one solution - dont close peoples minds off from examining the problem as a whole.

You may not have intended to give legal advice, but thats exactly how it read - hence I fired a shot across the bows of you (and Kilty) to suggest that imo we are wandering into territory that is outside our skillbase.

My post about getting sent down by the judge was supposed to be tongue in cheek. Anyhow, if you read my first post on this thread (post #2) I stated there that tile on tile can be done, just that its not best practice and I stand by that statement.

Originally Posted by andy8758

Your final sentence hits the nail on the head - and the point I made from the start - there is more than one solution - dont close peoples minds off from examining the problem as a whole.

You may not have intended to give legal advice, but thats exactly how it read - hence I fired a shot across the bows of you (and Kilty) to suggest that imo we are wandering into territory that is outside our skillbase.

sorry but you have misread what i was saying here,i never said do not do it i said it can be done but it is not advisable imo that is not a closed mind and its not legal advice either

i also said that disclaimers will not stand up in court if your stating you will not guarantee any work.....any work you should be doing in the 1st place should be guaranteed otherwise you as the person fixing imo are not 100 percent confident it will work which is as good as claiming liability if it fails

that is not me pretending to be a lawyer its just advice and my opinion

my opinion is the same andy it can be done but i wouldnt advise it and i wouldnt do it either

on the subject of tile on tile....a customer asked me last week about some new tiles thay had seen in b and q...porcelain 4mm thick they are so nice she said and the man in the shop said we could do tile on tile with them because they are lighter than normal porcelain tiles which are 10mm thick

urgh thanks b and q,has anyone used these thinner tiles yet and what are they like to work with