A homeowner in rainy British Columbia hoped to extend the life of an aging roof for roughly one-third of the cost of a replacement, according to their Reddit post. Instead, water entered the home during cleaning, leaving them wondering whether the restoration did more harm than good.
Here's what to know
They had hired an established, well-reviewed company to clean, repair, and treat a shake roof believed to be 20 to 25 years old, possibly older. The work described in the homeowner's Reddit post in r/Roofing came with an approximately eight-year warranty.
The worker reportedly brushed aside concerns about pressure washing by describing it as a medium-pressure process. The homeowner had asked whether the method was appropriate for the roof before work started.
"He's the pro, so I let him go ahead," the original poster wrote.
The post described wet ridge-cap areas above the bedrooms and garage, as well as water entering through an uncovered vent. The homeowner learned of the intrusion when their child spotted water coming into the garage.
The homeowner had not yet inspected the insulated attic. They said neither the worker nor the company owner treated the water intrusion as a cause for concern.
TCD Picks » Quince Spotlight
💡These best-sellers from Quince deliver affordable, sustainable luxury for all
More background
The homeowner had sought that care for the aging shakes after workers walked on the roof during siding work. The planned job was to clean the roof, complete repairs, and finish with a treatment. However, the company cleaned and treated the roof before repairing it. That departure from the plan added to the homeowner's concerns.
Commenters questioned the cleaning method, though no independent inspections were reported.
One commenter pointed to a soft wash with cleaning chemicals as the usual approach. "It strips wood fibers and moves shakes around," they wrote of pressure washing.
An upward spray could force water beneath the shakes, another commenter suggested, because shake roofing relies on water flowing down its slope rather than forming a waterproof barrier.
Water entering during pressure washing does not, on its own, establish whether the roof will leak during ordinary rainfall.
What can be done?
Most of the ridge caps had already been replaced. The company sent a worker to carry out that repair after the homeowner flagged caps that appeared to be deteriorating.
To make any recurring leaks easier to compare, one commenter suggested documenting where water had entered during washing. Several commenters recommended checks during and after rain, while another emphasized making sure the wet areas dried out.
The warranty could offer another way to address problems. However, the post did not include its terms or establish what damage it would cover. With no independent inspection or subsequent rain test reported, it remained unclear whether the cleaning had caused lasting damage.
Where can I learn more?
Other homeowners have raised similar concerns after paying for roof work.
• A Queensland homeowner said a roofer flooded the ceiling cavity, ruining insulation inside.
• A $7,400 roofing job in the U.K. reportedly left rain pouring inside like a waterfall.
• A Texas homeowner's $31,000 roof had flashing that wasn't replaced, according to inspectors.
• In New York, a roof leak worsened after a $1,600 repair.
• An Indiana homeowner reported shingles lifting a year after a $16,000 roofing job.
Get TCD's free newsletters for easy tips, smart advice, and a chance to earn $5,000 toward home upgrades. To see more stories like this one, change your Google preferences here.
