Repair or replace: what actually determines the answer
Roofing quotations tend to arrive as a binary — patch it or replace it — and the honest answer depends on three things that have to be looked at rather than assumed. The first is the fixings. Natural slate on these houses was nailed, historically with iron or later steel nails, and those nails corrode long before the slate does. Once corrosion is general, slates begin to slip across the whole roof, and each repair is followed by another somewhere else within a season or two. That is the classic signal for a full strip and re-lay, and it is identified by looking for rust staining, by the pattern of slipped slates across multiple slopes, and by lifting a slate to see the fixing condition. The second is the substrate: the battens the slates are fixed to, and the underlay behind them. Battens decay where they have been persistently wet, particularly at valleys, around chimneys and at the eaves, and nails cannot hold in rotten timber whatever their own condition. Traditional bituminous underlay embrittles with age and tears, so wind-driven rain that gets past the covering — which is normal, since a slate roof is not a sealed layer — reaches the structure instead of being shed. Neither is visible without opening a small area, which is the single most useful thing a roofer can do before quoting. The third is the covering itself. Good natural slate lasts a very long time and is frequently in better condition than the roof it is on, which is why salvage and re-lay is a real option: the sound slates come off, go back on the most visible slopes with new fixings and new battens, and new material fills the shortfall on the least visible elevations. That approach costs more in labour and less in material than a full replacement, keeps the weathered appearance a designated street depends on, and is often the right answer where the slate is good and the fixings are not.