I have a 1950s terraced house with asymmetrical roof trusses and am in the process of removing a wall that runs in the same direction as the trusses. Three independent people have looked at the wall and said it should not be load-bearing, but it is walls running in the other direction and crossing the roof beams that are load-bearing. Now half the wall is gone and I'm a bit unsure when I see that there is no wooden floor under the wall. I've heard at some point that if the wall is not load-bearing, the floor usually goes under it. Is there anyone out there who can clarify this about load-bearing walls before I remove the small part that remains?
If the wall had been load-bearing, it would most likely have stood across the roof trusses and in the middle of the house. Having no floor under the wall is perfectly normal. This is how they used to build in the past, when done properly, to make it harder for sound to propagate to adjacent rooms. Just placing a wall on the floor between two rooms is disastrous. If you are going to sleep in one room and someone drags a chair across the floor in the next room, you think they are right next to your bed. It can be heard clearly.
Thanks for the reply. I now feel at ease to continue tearing down the wall. When you own an old house, you constantly learn new things.
Click here to reply