Leaky buildings. Thinking of buying a post '95 home? Own one?

[Swoop]

If you are thinking about buying a house that has been built after 1995 OR if you own one, this documentary is well worth worth watching.

http://tvnz.co.nz/a-rotten-shame/s1-e1-video-4288887

There has not been any form of resolution to this issue and homeowners face even more uncertainty to protect their largest asset.


Also. If you are having repair work done DO NOT touch "Linea" weatherboards from James Hardie. This is another product that will be in the news...:facepalm:
If you want weatherboards on your house, use real timber.

[Maha]

...Linea weatherboards will warp in certain temps right?
Its happening to a few houses at Omaha beach.

Same with Bamboo flooring...our humidity here is just to tough for it, even the importers of the product will tell you that.

[Swoop]

...Linea weatherboards will warp in certain temps right?
Warping? Not the major part of the problem, but certainly not helping the issue.

[mashman]

Also. If you are having repair work done DO NOT touch "Linea" weatherboards from James Hardie. This is another product that will be in the news...:facepalm:
If you want weatherboards on your house, use real timber.

Do tell more? As far as I've been told that's mainly due to the colour and quality of the paint (we are having issues with plain ole weatherboard sapping, warping, shrinking and may have to replace the cladding on a 1 year old house :yes:)

Saw the tail end of that las night. Fuckin pathetic!... both builders and
govt

[merv]

Warping? Not the major part of the problem, but certainly not helping the issue.

So tell us what is the problem with Linea?

[oneofsix]

So tell us what is the problem with Linea?

from Jamies Hardie web page;

http://www.jameshardie.co.nz/product/Linea-Weatherboard?i=4][/url]
Resistant to fire and damage from moisture and rotting when installed and maintained correctly - wasn't that the issue with most of the James Hardie stuff around leaky homes, it is virtually impossible to install and maintain it correctly.

[Latte]

Do tell more? As far as I've been told that's mainly due to the colour and quality of the paint (we are having issues with plain ole weatherboard sapping, warping, shrinking and may have to replace the cladding on a 1 year old house :yes:)

Saw the tail end of that las night. Fuckin pathetic!... both builders and
govt

Got a 60's/70's weatherboard house and have been told to stay away from Dark Colour paints as the heat will warp the timber (bigger change from hot to cold etc). is this what you are having problems with?

[Swoop]

As far as I've been told that's mainly due to the colour and quality of the paint (we are having issues with plain ole weatherboard sapping, warping, shrinking and may have to replace the cladding on a 1 year old house

The Linea stuff has "issues". Delamination being the primary one. This has been kept very quiet. Ingress of moisture is a bastard as the composition of the product allows this.
Some installers are disregarding the back of the product, yet coating this area is vital, also the joins have to be done exactly perfect. Anything less = :shit:
The manufacturer of the main product involved with monolithic claddings (& leaky homes) has created these weatherboards as a solution to their first fuck-up.


Timber weatherboards and timber framing.
The industry needs to address this issue at source. The pine grown here has been genetically modified to grow much faster than normal. The simple reason is $$$'s.
What we are being sold is extremely soft and weak compared to normal. Just look at the growth rings and ask yourself why they grow so fast.

[jaffaonajappa]

If you are thinking about buying a house that has been built after 1995 OR if you own one, this documentary is well worth worth watching.

http://tvnz.co.nz/a-rotten-shame/s1-e1-video-4288887



That was a very interesting Doco, thank you.
Im assuming it was made before the Sep EQ, and even then Bob Parker comes across as one very cool customer.

Can you see this country going broke quite soon?

[JimO]

what you want in a house is a wide soffit, no parapets especially parapets with no cap flashings, the Mediterranean look might be fine in spain where ist 35 degrees all the time and if it rains it pisses down for a hour and is dry in 10 minutes plus most of those houses will be concrete not timber framed with a 20mm coating on them

[Ocean1]

What we are being sold is extremely soft and weak compared to normal. Just look at the growth rings and ask yourself why they grow so fast.

If "normal" is north American pine then yes, ours is less dense, and yes that's related to the fact that it grows in half the time. I'm not sure that's anything to do with "genetic modification", I assumed it was the same reason many other things grow much faster here than in their colder, darker homelands.

When we first started selling pine to the Japanese they had to review their building standards as related to that material. Simple really, it might be lighter but if you use larger sections it's as good as it's northern counterpart or better.

The James Hardy thing I agree with. They once introduced what amounted to MDF, (customwood) planks as a cladding material. Guess what...


Gwarne, guess.

[JimO]

The James Hardy thing I agree with. They once introduced what amounted to MDF, (customwood) planks as a cladding material. Guess what...


Gwarne, guess.

that was produced by Forrest Products, dont think Hardies had anything to do with that

[Ocean1]

that was produced by Forrest Products, dont think Hardies had anything to do with that

I stand... (sit) corrected.

Be difficult to over-blame James Hardie though.

[YellowDog]

I'm no expert at this, but my house is a 1970s concrete bock base with the upper floor being hardie plank boards. They are very good indeed. No warping at all.

The house has an oversized overhangind eves all around, which may help protect the boards.

I thought it was the HardieTex plaster stuff that was the problem. It doesn't let any air through and it cracks, leaking water through and rotting the wood supporting the structure.

I have a friend whoose son has just built one of those egg box type plaster houses :no:

[porky]

If "normal" is north American pine then yes, ours is less dense, and yes that's related to the fact that it grows in half the time. I'm not sure that's anything to do with "genetic modification", I assumed it was the same reason many other things grow much faster here than in their colder, darker homelands.

When we first started selling pine to the Japanese they had to review their building standards as related to that material. Simple really, it might be lighter but if you use larger sections it's as good as it's northern counterpart or better.

The James Hardy thing I agree with. They once introduced what amounted to MDF, (customwood) planks as a cladding material. Guess what...

Gwarne, guess.


Selective breeding, choose the fastest straightest trees and axe the rest. (GF number)
All species vary in density and by location. Pine (radiata) varies considerably from Invagiggle to the Far north. Gissy has some of the better MOE. Its the MOE that the industry uses as the main benchmark.
Japan was set up for hardwoods and the concept that softwoods could have the density and durability for JAS accreditation was out left field. Water under the bridge now. Biggest prob is humidity and machining to NZ EMC only for it to grow on the boat
I think the product you are refering to was Weatherside, it in fact was a oil tempered hardboard .... same shit as seratone.. used in bath rooms and just like at the base of the shower, the stuff falls apart. The new crap is called silver seal. Oh the power of marketing. And unlike JH these guys paid out for houses to be reclad.

[Ocean1]

Selective breeding, choose the fastest straightest trees and axe the rest. (GF number)
All species vary in density and by location. Pine (radiata) varies considerably from Invagiggle to the Far north. Gissy has some of the better MOE. Its the MOE that the industry uses as the main benchmark.
Japan was set up for hardwoods and the concept that softwoods could have the density and durability for JAS accreditation was out left field. Water under the bridge now. Biggest prob is humidity and machining to NZ EMC only for it to grow on the boat.

Sounds right. Got a fucking great slab of genuine pencil-grained Oregon in the gargre. Geneticaly near identical to the Douglas fir we grow here I think, but quite different structurally. It's for a mast, if I had to use NZ timber it'd probably be Mac, and maybe 30% thicker. Like I said, if you use appropriate sections most materials have a viable end use.


I think the product you are refering to was Weatherside, it in fact was a oil tempered hardboard .... same shit as seratone.. used in bath rooms and just like at the base of the shower, the stuff falls apart. The new crap is called silver seal. Oh the power of marketing. And unlike JH these guys paid out for houses to be reclad.

I only saw half a dozen instances, but it was definitely not hardboard-like. Looked for all the world like the MDF you'd get at Bunnings. Briefly. Later it looked like weetbix.

[merv]

If you are talking about Weatherside it definitely was the brown oil tempered hardboard stuff as porky says and it came painted with pink primer. I replaced it on two houses - lasted a few years and Forest products paid full replacement up to 7 years old I think it was and beyond 7 years old they provided the materials (Hardiplank as replacement) and you had to pay labour yourself.

Ocean1 if you def have a thought on MDF type stuff then that wasn't Weatherside would've been something else which I can't say I remember.

[Laava]

I always think it is ironic that after thousands of years of building homes, we haven't sorted out the leak issue! Pandanus leaves anyone?

[jaffaonajappa]

I always think it is ironic that after thousands of years of building homes, we haven't sorted out the leak issue! Pandanus leaves anyone?

Ahh, but we did sort the leak issues.
But then we tried to do it on the cheap....while making it appear more expensive.
Like the Doco pointed out - traditional flashings are great even after 100 years....silicones not so 'flash'.

[Brett]

I have reasonable experience evaluating/investigating houses, particularly of late houses built between 1990 and 2011 (yes...leaky houses STILL BEING BUILT!!) that have tended to have cladding systems that put them at high risk of leaking. It is amazing, you can walk into a house that looks all fine and dandy on the inside still (ie no mushrooms or mould growing anywhere) and yet thermal imaging and moisture testing show very wet timber behind the GIB.

If anyone would like, PM me & I will give you my number. I am happy to answer questions you may have. Hate to see people get stuck with a lemon property!

[ellipsis]

...the whole of this issue lies at the feet of the providers of this composite shit that the inane populace of the country has bought, lock, stock and barrel, mainly because its being endorsed by some nondescript fucks called BRANZ and some other fucks called the experts and lobby groups that hang around Wgtn, wining and dining and dishonestly representing the truth...

...linea is just the name of a failed product, glued up dust...failed in the Tasman district within months of its unveiling...these cunts only survive in being in bizzo because , fuckwits buy into it..

[BMWST?]

there is nothing wrong with the timber framing and timber weatherboards we use on our houses.There are many many many houses that are pushing 100 years ,and there will be many many houses with radiata pine framing that will be over 50 years old,and many many houses with "modern" pine framing will be pushing 20 years old.
The leaky homes thing is not just about claddings,windows were installed without flashings,flat roofs with internal gutters is just a leak waiting to happen,houses with small overhangs(or no overhangs) are much much more risky than conventional house forms.Some of the so called "building" and "designs" were severely lacking.

[ellipsis]

...i was not only decrying the composite shit called linea, but the whole product driven industry, driven by money hungry nz corporates, carter holt harvey for one, probing fingers with cash ,straight up the receptive passages of the law makers and the rule breakers..cunts like Parker and his ilk are pure puppets of a small bunch of small minded,short sighted, introverted, money making arseholes, who have the balls of our miniscule state in their greasy little mits...and we are fucking paying for their lifestyles...i hope the cunts die in misery...

[Quasievil]

...Linea weatherboards will warp in certain temps right?


No, Linear wont Warp, this product can be painted dark colors, the LRV light reflective value can be high without issue


it is virtually impossible to install and maintain it correctly.

Bollocks, the installation method is based on and is virtually identical to the timber weatherboard process, the only real difference is the addition of significant weather tightness systems, around windows etc.


The Linea stuff has "issues". Delamination being the primary one. This has been kept very quiet. Ingress of moisture is a bastard as the composition of the product allows this.

Really I havent heard this at all, how exactly do you keep this quiet in this modern age, sounds like bullshit to me


Some installers are disregarding the back of the product, yet coating this area is vital, also the joins have to be done exactly perfect. Anything less = :shit:

The Back comes preprimed as far as Im aware, at least it was.


The manufacturer of the main product involved with monolithic claddings (& leaky homes) has created these weatherboards as a solution to their first fuck-up.

Bullshit, the main contributor to leaky homes was the builders, end of story.





The James Hardy thing I agree with. They once introduced what amounted to MDF, (customwood) planks as a cladding material. Guess what...


Sheeesh ........... really did they, they faked the moon landing to did you know that?


...the whole of this issue lies at the feet of the providers of this composite shit that the inane populace of the country has bought, lock, stock and barrel, mainly because its being endorsed by some nondescript fucks called BRANZ and some other fucks called the experts and lobby groups that hang around Wgtn, wining and dining and dishonestly representing the truth...

...linea is just the name of a failed product, glued up dust...failed in the Tasman district within months of its unveiling...these cunts only survive in being in bizzo because , fuckwits buy into it..

See this is so untrue, and I will reveal now that I was territory manager for James Hardie for a number of years, I was caught up right smack in the middle of when this weather tightness issue blew up. As Part of my role I inspected JH systems that had "apparently failed" and I had to write reports on the issues and submit them to councils etc.
NOT ONCE did I see an issue where the material was to blame 100% of the cases where completely absolutely SOLEY down to the muppets installing the product.
Typical issues where, no control or expansion joints, no interfloor control joints, no cover around windows (not the aluminium joinery suppliers minimised the reduced the outside flange which gave 5 mm cover at best on windows) no sealant around windows, using product on top of ballastrades (hardie tex and the like is not a roof material) poor fastenings, no building paper..............the list goes on and on
All due to poor installation, never due to product.

A classic example was a significant commercial project in Hamilton where the Titan system was being used, I went to site over a week and gave 3 x 1 hour training sessions to the builders about how to install titan, I went away and came back 2 weeks later to find, not only had they installed it incorrectly they completely disregarded the method for horizontial joints,(my return was to approve the installation for the council) I told them I wont approve it and they had to take it all down and do it properly..............well the Big Bosses where on site in about 5 minutes demanding I approve it to the point where they threatened me also, one of them noted to me "I been building for 40 years and a young prick like you aint going to teach me anything"
That was typical, they HAD to remove it all and start again at significant cost to them (I gave zero financal support) I later went to another 3 odd jobs built a few years prior using the same Titan system where each building was leaking, all of them was built by that same builder.................he is out of business now.

I can repeat that same story many times with the same outcome

Im firmly planted on this, I have seen and been involved in it extensively and as I say I know who was/is to blame for it.

Actually I will throw in the architects also, specifying the wrong products for the wrong application...........i.e Harditex as a roof.

Would I buy a Harditex house built in the 90's Nope as I could guarantee that it wouldnt have been built correctly...........like 95% of houses.

[Swoop]

Selective breeding, choose the fastest straightest trees and axe the rest.
"Selective breeding" is a term that could be applied to it, but there has been extensive modification of the genetic structure of the pinus radiata species over the years.

How many of you know that if you want to plant pine trees commercially, then there is a choice of approcimately 12 "types" of the species that are modified to suit specific requirements.
Want to plant a forest = "type a"
Want to have shelter belt trees = "type b"
Want trees that will have greater spacing and have cattle around them = "type c"
etc,
etc.

Our timber is soft and getting softer.

If "normal" is north American pine then yes, ours is less dense, and yes that's related to the fact that it grows in half the time.





Really I havent heard this at all, how exactly do you keep this quiet in this modern age, sounds like bullshit to me.
Well, you could do some talking to the people who use this shit. Another ticking timebomb waiting to go off.

Actually I will throw in the architects also, specifying the wrong products for the wrong application.
:facepalm:
It is a triangle of problems. Builders, architects AND inspectors. As you saw on the programme I linked to, unqualified "tradespeople" are a serious danger. That is being addressed by gubbinment (supposedly), but it is being watered down and will end up being another complete joke that creates paperwork, increases prices to the consumer and solves nothing.


Really it is four when we add in crappy materials.


Nope, five. I forgot inept / incompetent / shady developers.

[Quasievil]

[I]

Really it is four when we add in crappy materials.




ALL materials are crappy if not constructed correctly.:yes:

[Winston001]

I always think it is ironic that after thousands of years of building homes, we haven't sorted out the leak issue! Pandanus leaves anyone?

10 points for that man. Agreed.

Although we did sort out weatherproof homes more than 5000 years ago. Not totally watertight in extreme conditions but that was allowed for.

It beggars belief in a world where we land spacecraft on the moon and can talk over tiny copper wires (or no wires at all) that our newest houses rot and fall to pieces.

The leaky home syndrome showed up in Vancouver in the late 1990s - did nobody in NZ notice??

[mashman]

Got a 60's/70's weatherboard house and have been told to stay away from Dark Colour paints as the heat will warp the timber (bigger change from hot to cold etc). is this what you are having problems with?

That's part of it, according to the "experts"... although it's not our only issue with the stuff... How it was put together has been questioned too.

[dangerous]

If you are thinking about buying a house that has been built after 1995 OR if you own one, this documentary is well worth worth watching.

http://tvnz.co.nz/a-rotten-shame/s1-e1-video-4288887

There has not been any form of resolution to this issue and homeowners face even more uncertainty to protect their largest asset.


Also. If you are having repair work done DO NOT touch "Linea" weatherboards from James Hardie. This is another product that will be in the news...:facepalm:
If you want weatherboards on your house, use real timber.

Half of that was correct... half was bullshit...

Dangerous: Builder, spesalising in leaking home repair and rebuilds

That said so as the shit dont come my way at full speed... that house being flatened, what crap it had a pitched roof so leaking would have been on the out side walls only. No need to do that, I re clad and replace any damaged timbers, pollystyrene is bad bad shit soaks water like a rag and contains it against the timbers.
hardies products are shit I have see it flalke and turn to dust, much like it was before being a cladding, I expect to see in time Linia doing the same.
I have removed framing after 10yrs that has also turned to dust, mostley it just gets mouldie.

To say the problem is so extensive is crap, I dont doubt it is worse in Auckland than down here tho.


The Linea stuff has "issues". Delamination being the primary one. This has been kept very quiet. Ingress of moisture is a bastard as the composition of the product allows this.



Really I havent heard this at all, how exactly do you keep this quiet in this modern age, sounds like bullshit to me
Well you have now, what Swoop says is 100% correct


Bullshit, the main contributor to leaky homes was the builders, end of story. Hindsight is a grand thing, eg: last year I did a 200k reclad on a house... the building pratice was just how I did it 13yrs ago, yes in hindsite not so good, however no one knew any digfferent.
The same house had roofing, flashing, plumbing, cladding, plastering issues all failing... add bad inspections, bad designs all add up to a farking mess... but ABOVE all the owners got what they wanted, after all the client is allways RIGHT ie: ya do what they want.
questions please? (for Quasie's sake, building related)

[Quasievil]

questions please?

is it possible for Birds (the winged variety) to be gay ?

and ummm

Is it true youre actually a ginga ?

:msn-wink:

[dangerous]

is it possible for Birds (the winged variety) to be gay ?

and ummm

Is it true youre actually a ginga ?

:msn-wink:
yes and ummmm... fuk ya yes, no need to raise this again LOL

[Winston001]

....but ABOVE all the owners got what they wanted, after all the client is allways RIGHT ie: ya do what they want.


Interesting post Dangerous. Just picking up on the above, you know the client/customer is not always right. If you insisted a mechanic issue a WOF even though your brakes were stuffed, he would be a fool to agree. If an owner insisted a house be built flat on the ground with no membrane or drainage, you wouldn't expect to do that would you?

[Winston001]

Just to carry on with Dangerous point about the client's (unreasonable) demands, I understand middleaged old-school builders were often squeezed out in the 1990s and since. They would be asked to quote for a house, factor in the proper work needed to make it weathertight and find they were $50k higher than other builders.

The work often went to guys who were willing to cut corners and build exactly what was on the plan with nothing added. Developers put the pressure on too, nickel and dimeing the builders margin down to nothing with promises of the "next" job.

Its also interesting to note that leaky homes is mainly an Auckland problem. Some in Christchurch but sod all elsewhere in the South Island. Why should that be?

[dangerous]

Interesting post Dangerous. Just picking up on the above, you know the client/customer is not always right. If you insisted a mechanic issue a WOF even though your brakes were stuffed, he would be a fool to agree. If an owner insisted a house be built flat on the ground with no membrane or drainage, you wouldn't expect to do that would you?well that would just be silly... what I mean is if they want falt roofs, parapits and no over hang... whos to say other wise.


Just to carry on with Dangerous point about the client's (unreasonable) demands, I understand middleaged old-school builders were often squeezed out in the 1990s and since. They would be asked to quote for a house, factor in the proper work needed to make it weathertight and find they were $50k higher than other builders.

The work often went to guys who were willing to cut corners and build exactly what was on the plan with nothing added. Developers put the pressure on too, nickel and dimeing the builders margin down to nothing with promises of the "next" job.

Its also interesting to note that leaky homes is mainly an Auckland problem. Some in Christchurch but sod all elsewhere in the South Island. Why should that be?1st.. they aint 'unreasonble demands' as above.
2nd... cutting corners still goes on, corect other wise build cost would be to high and another builder gets the job.
3rd... its a lot worse in chch than one would think, IMO the humiderty in the north advancing the rotting slash moulds

A big problem in NZ with builders, unlike plumbers, sparkys etc... there is no licencing hence any one can claim to be a builder and construct a house in compertition with real builders, not only do you get a crap job it means if the real guy wants the job he has to cut corners.

[JimO]

Its also interesting to note that leaky homes is mainly an Auckland problem. Some in Christchurch but sod all elsewhere in the South Island. Why should that be?

i have been a solid plasterer in the building industry since 1975 and have seen some things come and go, i dont know of many leakers in dunedin, one has been in the paper lately the owners paid 515k moved in and immediately discovered that it leaked and they are currently trying to get the DCC to give them their money back because they issued a COC even though there were issues with the house during the build. they have been quoted 500k to fix it, another is the first rockote house done here around 10 years old and discovered to be leaking during a renovation, resulting in a major rebuild, luckily the owner can afford to pay for it, I have seen many architects plans showing parapets with plaster or similar finish up the face over the top and down the back to the roof or deck on a timber framed wall and no cover flashing on the top, last one i did i used butynol under the plaster on the top of the wall with no fixings through it. I have to say im a old school plasterer and dont have any time for anything over polystyrene or any of the miracle finnish plaster systems

[dangerous]

well Jim... ya right the 1-2mm rockcote type of plastering is shit house.. in all cases I find cracking very fine but the polly or hardies under it sucks and keeps on sucking the water in. Those parapits with no cover flashings start leaking from day one, as do the older type of window flashings.

For others infomation, that knob on the video in the 1st post tahe reckons its still going on is lacking info.
heres a list of what I have to be sure is done that is EXTRA to the way it was on parapits alone.
breather type building wrap (up over and down)
20mm cavity (sides)
sadle flashings (at each end of and junctions)
parapit flashing tape (over top and 20mm down each side)
cap flashing (over top and down each side 70mm with drip edge)
For as long as we build we will have issues, nothing is perfect

[JimO]

exactly as said in a earlier post you cant beat a wide soffit (eave) if the water cant get in the top it wont get in half way down the wall

[Quasievil]

in all cases I find cracking very fine but the polly or hardies under it sucks and keeps on sucking the water in.

how does the moisture get there in the first place?
buried it in the ground, no specified control joints plater to thin ?

[Winston001]

Farg guys, its scary reading what you say - but good too. I had a house built 14 years ago and had a hard time trying to understand Rockcote, polystyrene blocks, sheets etc. So many decisions to make and other places were being built using these technologies - BRANZ approved, so I thought they must be ok.

In the end I went for a McRaeway cottage with eaves, hardie-backer, and a solid plaster finish. Fortunately I had a good builder too who didn't cut corners.

[dangerous]

how does the moisture get there in the first place?
buried it in the ground, no specified control joints plater to thin ?many ways, depending on the situation eg: windows, plaster to thin fine cracking porly fitted flashings and the water is in.
Parapits, if flashed through joins, rivits, the wind blows it under, water has a ability to drag its self in and up... or if no cap flashings again the plaster is to thin it cracks, paint fails plaster itself is porus and will soak it in.
A good example is a 2 story with a single story garage attached, a apron flasing sits behind the cladding the roofing under that, at the base of the apron it needs to be folded out onto the roof, big failings here we thought 13yrs ago this is fine... but no we now know we CANT trust sealents and metal contracts in heat loosening and cutting its way in, ponding is also presant in thes places and again water sucks its way in like a condor down the amazon.

new systems in these situations includes one piece plastic diverters and scuppers, again if not installed correct...

Id like to add in a lot of cases to leaking homes are not helped by lazy owners, gutters need regular cleaning (pooling causes rust and over flow inside) My pet hate plants and bushes growing against walls, cause moss mould to grow it dosent take much for the worn paint (caused by wind rubbing plants on the wall) to then allow the sucking in procedure to happen, again the warmth of the inner house and the cold out side helps all this.

Like ya leathers Quas, water gets in at the weakest point (stiching) if not corectly maintained the area quickly deterates getting worse each ride. Morel of the story... paint ya farking houses and traet ya bloody leathers.

[JimO]

i patched a house a while ago where a car had hit a house and found the bottom plate was black and mouldy, this house had gardens built up all around the house in some places 300 mm above the inside floor level, i showed the owner and told them they needed to remove the dirt away from the house, 2 years later still no change

[dangerous]

i patched a house a while ago where a car had hit a house and found the bottom plate was black and mouldy, this house had gardens built up all around the house in some places 300 mm above the inside floor level, i showed the owner and told them they needed to remove the dirt away from the house, 2 years later still no change

That black sooty shit.. highley hazardous, affects the lungs in a big way, we have to remove timber 1m out from any of this shit.

In chch a big issue is houses are built to low, no reason for it but the councile allows it, crazy as by the time gardens are built up and drive ways... trouble begins.

[BMWST?]

That black sooty shit.. highley hazardous, affects the lungs in a big way, we have to remove timber 1m out from any of this shit.

In chch a big issue is houses are built to low, no reason for it but the councile allows it, crazy as by the time gardens are built up and drive ways... trouble begins.

too low?as long as joists 300 mm of the ground is ok( i think),conc slab should be at least 225 from ground,150 if paved.Thats nzs3604 not something the council should have to check

[Brett]

The Linea stuff has "issues". Delamination being the primary one. This has been kept very quiet. Ingress of moisture is a bastard as the composition of the product allows this.
Some installers are disregarding the back of the product, yet coating this area is vital, also the joins have to be done exactly perfect. Anything less = :shit:
The manufacturer of the main product involved with monolithic claddings (& leaky homes) has created these weatherboards as a solution to their first fuck-up.


Timber weatherboards and timber framing.
The industry needs to address this issue at source. The pine grown here has been genetically modified to grow much faster than normal. The simple reason is $$$'s.
What we are being sold is extremely soft and weak compared to normal. Just look at the growth rings and ask yourself why they grow so fast.

I am skeptical of Linea's durability as it is unproven, HOWEVER, if the boards are installed correctly on cavity battens, then no, there should be no moisture ingress. It is believed that Linea *could* suffer from delineation, however I have not heard of a single case yet. (However, watch this space with interest).
It is manufactured very differently from the fibre cement sheet panels that have caused a large amount of the leaking issues, namely it is manufactured as a composite under pressure whereas fibre cement sheets were manufactured via layering of a cement/wood fibre blend.

On the timber front, I don't buy into this at all. There is nothing wrong with our pinus radiata trees. Installing kiln dried, chemical free timber however was a very stupid move. All structural timber installed now is stress gauged and required to be minimum H1.2 treated. It is now normal for all windows, lintels, top and bottom plates to be H3 treated.
The growth rate of timber is because we grow timber in a region that is generally warmer than other timber producing regions of the world such as the Northern USA and Canada. Our buildings are engineered around the stress gauged strength of our timber.
Nothing wrong with our weatherboards either. Timber exposed to the elements needs maintenance no matter where in the world it comes from. Timber has always suffered from rot and insects in particular, the only way to counter this is with property maintenance. Many older houses used hard woods both native and exotic for framing, fascia boards, weather boards etc. and they too suffer from rot, maybe at different rates, but the issue is still there.
I have spent a reasonable amount of time in different parts of the world and have looked at building methods wherever I have been, simply out of interest as it is my profession and I love architecture, design and construction. I can say with my hand on my heart that our building standards (leaky building issues excluded) are some of the very best in the world. Our level of finishes particularly is quite high compared to regions of Europe, Africa, Asia and even Aussie.

If you don't like timber (and some don't) then build out of masonry. Personally I think we don't building enough residential property out of concrete and steel. It doesn't have to be minimalist and cold in design either!

[Ocean1]

In the end I went for a McRaeway cottage

Which is what I built, about 18 years ago. With Douglas fir framing, wasn't too sure about that at the time but I believe it's still seen as an OK option.

Just sold the place, in fact.


Wonder if that bridge up t'road is vacant...

[Swoop]

water has a ability to drag its self in and up...
:yes:

Term of the day: Capillary action (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capillary_action).

[ellipsis]

I am skeptical of Linea's durability as it is unproven, HOWEVER, if the boards are installed correctly on cavity battens, then no, there should be no moisture ingress. It is believed that Linea *could* suffer from delineation, however I have not heard of a single case yet. (However, watch this space with interest).
It is manufactured very differently from the fibre cement sheet panels that have caused a large amount of the leaking issues, namely it is manufactured as a composite under pressure whereas fibre cement sheets were manufactured via layering of a cement/wood fibre blend.

On the timber front, I don't buy into this at all. There is nothing wrong with our pinus radiata trees. Installing kiln dried, chemical free timber however was a very stupid move. All structural timber installed now is stress gauged and required to be minimum H1.2 treated. It is now normal for all windows, lintels, top and bottom plates to be H3 treated.
The growth rate of timber is because we grow timber in a region that is generally warmer than other timber producing regions of the world such as the Northern USA and Canada. Our buildings are engineered around the stress gauged strength of our timber.
Nothing wrong with our weatherboards either. Timber exposed to the elements needs maintenance no matter where in the world it comes from. Timber has always suffered from rot and insects in particular, the only way to counter this is with property maintenance. Many older houses used hard woods both native and exotic for framing, fascia boards, weather boards etc. and they too suffer from rot, maybe at different rates, but the issue is still there.
I have spent a reasonable amount of time in different parts of the world and have looked at building methods wherever I have been, simply out of interest as it is my profession and I love architecture, design and construction. I can say with my hand on my heart that our building standards (leaky building issues excluded) are some of the very best in the world. Our level of finishes particularly is quite high compared to regions of Europe, Africa, Asia and even Aussie.

If you don't like timber (and some don't) then build out of masonry. Personally I think we don't building enough residential property out of concrete and steel. It doesn't have to be minimalist and cold in design either!

....like you, i am nearly 40 years in the trade...love it and it is without doubt , the only thing i can comment on, with some kind of knowledge... with a lifetime of learning from mistakes and watching the modern technologies come, and often go...
...like all trades, the rules of engagement dont change...preparation, adhering to the rules and doing it 'right', pay dividends in the long run...in the case of the new products, a 'she'll be right' , attitude is the quickest way to the products failure...in saying that...the product driven mentalities of the manufacturers and suppliers and a bunch of rule makers who are easily swayed by backhanders from big business, to give the green light to fairly suspect and relatively untried products, dont help....

....and yes, there is always the problem of the trade being so easy to get into these days....just 'cos you own a hammer, shouldn't give you the right to be able to swing it, and call yourself a carpenter...

[Laava]

I am skeptical of Linea's durability as it is unproven, HOWEVER, if the boards are installed correctly on cavity battens, then no, there should be no moisture ingress.
!

Recently went on a junket to James Hardie and when we got to the subject of Linea delaminating they were quite forthcoming about it. What you don't get is how many and how likely etc. The cavity battens will have no effect on the water proofing, they are there primarily to allow a breathable space between linings and framing. They also have a weakness, mainly that they will end up being loose IMO. Having built quite a few of these myself it is interesting to see how loose they get after they have been in place for about a month. Normally they would be covered in by this time tho. So the upshot of that is more movement. Now you always get movement and limiting the movement as much as possible, by having well nailed corners and around windows etc is essential. I believe this is the downside to cavity battens. Not necessarily a problem tho, but more likely to let water in. The old school window facings and scribers were very good in this regard as they did not rely on sealant.
Now you are also required to put in an airseal around the windows and doors to limit airborne moisture and water ingress. IMO one of the most positive changes to come about in recent years.
Which brings us back to sealants. Brilliant stuff, but very limited and essentially only good as a gasket. Avoid at all cost have a sealant join in the sun and/or weather.

[BMWST?]

Recently went on a junket to James Hardie and when we got to the subject of Linea delaminating they were quite forthcoming about it. What you don't get is how many and how likely etc. The cavity battens will have no effect on the water proofing, they are there primarily to allow a breathable space between linings and framing. They also have a weakness, mainly that they will end up being loose IMO. Having built quite a few of these myself it is interesting to see how loose they get after they have been in place for about a month. Normally they would be covered in by this time tho. So the upshot of that is more movement. Now you always get movement and limiting the movement as much as possible, by having well nailed corners and around windows etc is essential. I believe this is the downside to cavity battens. Not necessarily a problem tho, but more likely to let water in. The old school window facings and scribers were very good in this regard as they did not rely on sealant.
Now you are also required to put in an airseal around the windows and doors to limit airborne moisture and water ingress. IMO one of the most positive changes to come about in recent years.
Which brings us back to sealants. Brilliant stuff, but very limited and essentially only good as a gasket. Avoid at all cost have a sealant join in the sun and/or weather.

the cavity is there to provide some ventilation behind the cladding,and to let the water drop straight out if it gets past the cladding.The battens should be installed over the studs so i cant see how they can be loose.Lots of timber around openings.to fix to.

[BMWST?]

All structural timber installed now is stress gauged and required to be minimum H1.2 treated. It is now normal for all windows, lintels, top and bottom plates to be H3 treated.

Nope,there are still very low risk applications where CF is accepted.H3.1 lintels and bottom plates are normal but are not actually required.(unless you want NOT to install dpc but why would ya?)
H3 lintels are common cos prenail plants will keep wides in H3.1 rather than have stocks of CF H1.2 and H3.1,and engineered lintels are quite often h3.1 or h3.2 only.Dont see h3.1 openings much round here,sometimes its asked for

[Ocean1]

Slightly off topic, but the old dear up the road asked me the other day: "How do you fix swollen windowsills?"

If anyone knows who's bright idea mdf window trim was I'd like a brief chat.

[Woodman]

Ok then what basic things can a layman like me look for to check whether my house may be leaky or not. Are some areas in NZ worse than others?

Which type of house is most at risk? Ours is 15 years old , 2 storey has big eaves, high angle roof and old skool wooden windows, no concrete floor and is on a hill. To me it seems pretty well built, but this thread has got me thinking.

What should i be looking out for externally/internally. All this talk about flashings etc goes way over my head.

So many questions.

[merv]

Slightly off topic, but the old dear up the road asked me the other day: "How do you fix swollen windowsills?"

If anyone knows who's bright idea mdf window trim was I'd like a brief chat.

You're right on there. Even having the stuff in kitchen and laundry cabinets is ridiculous because one day the dishwasher or the washing machine leaks, the cabinets soak up the water and instant swelling at a better rate than I imagine viagra can achieve.

[dangerous]

You're right on there. Even having the stuff in kitchen and laundry cabinets is ridiculous because one day the dishwasher or the washing machine leaks, the cabinets soak up the water and instant swelling at a better rate than I imagine viagra can achieve.
MDF is a head fuk... not alowed to day in windows and I dont reconmend it in any wet areas.



Ok then what basic things can a layman like me look for to check whether my house may be leaky or not. Are some areas in NZ worse than others?

Which type of house is most at risk? Ours is 15 years old , 2 storey has big eaves, high angle roof and old skool wooden windows, no concrete floor and is on a hill. To me it seems pretty well built, but this thread has got me thinking.It be fine.

hey look the give aways come to late... by the time it shows inside the house is fucked, outside look for rot, swelling, bubbles etc.



Nope,there are still very low risk applications where CF is accepted.H3.1 lintels and bottom plates are normal but are not actually required.(unless you want NOT to install dpc but why would ya?)
H3 lintels are common cos prenail plants will keep wides in H3.1 rather than have stocks of CF H1.2 and H3.1,and engineered lintels are quite often h3.1 or h3.2 only.Dont see h3.1 openings much round here,sometimes its asked for

again, treatment is CRAP... only there to cover the councils arse again why? cos we build leaking buildings, stop the leaks and no need for treatment... like the old days.


The cavity battens will have no effect on the water proofing, they are there primarily to allow a breathable space between linings and framing.
Now you are also required to put in an airseal around the windows and doors to limit airborne moisture and water ingress. IMO one of the most positive changes to come about in recent years.cavity battens are ther so as any water gets in it will track down and out... we only do it to cover the councils arse.

air seal... a positive change, crap thats what the idea is... explain why 100yr old house still stand as do 40yr old houses, no air seal at all.. no leaks either... again bulshit from the council and an extra cost to the home builder. No need for em if we didnt build leaking buildings.


Which is what I built, about 18 years ago. With Douglas fir framing, wasn't too sure about that at the time but I believe it's still seen as an OK option.
that be Oragon... in NZ and IMO the best timber you can use to build and UNTREATED



too low?as long as joists 300 mm of the ground is ok( i think),conc slab should be at least 225 from ground,150 if paved.Thats nzs3604 not something the council should have to check

there is many different figgers, council dont use 3604 they have far larger instructions in this case G4. It isent so much the floor height that is the issue but the clearance of the cladding.
However YES it is just what they are ment to check... BUT remember we are talking about up to 15yr old buildings.

[Winston001]

Id like to add in a lot of cases to leaking homes are not helped by lazy owners, gutters need regular cleaning (pooling causes rust and over flow inside) My pet hate plants and bushes growing against walls, cause moss mould to grow it dosent take much for the worn paint (caused by wind rubbing plants on the wall) to then allow the sucking in procedure to happen...
.

Excellent point. But only because annual gutter cleaning is standard procedure for me. Again, not heaping up soil against the foundation is common sense except most home owners have never thought about it.

[BMWST?]

Ok then what basic things can a layman like me look for to check whether my house may be leaky or not. Are some areas in NZ worse than others?

Which type of house is most at risk? Ours is 15 years old , 2 storey has big eaves, high angle roof and old skool wooden windows, no concrete floor and is on a hill. To me it seems pretty well built, but this thread has got me thinking.

What should i be looking out for externally/internally. All this talk about flashings etc goes way over my head.

So many questions.

what is the cladding,sounds like an unlikely candidate tho

[sidecar bob]

Has there been any bad words about Titan Panel with regards to leaky homes?
I have an aprox 5 year old house clad virtually entirely in it, block basement, Titan upper.
Anything I should look out for?

[Laava]

the cavity is there to provide some ventilation behind the cladding,and to let the water drop straight out if it gets past the cladding.The battens should be installed over the studs so i cant see how they can be loose.Lots of timber around openings.to fix to.

That is the joy of timber for you!~ It does it's own thing and shrinks expands as it needs making itself loose on the nails holding it. One of the downsides of timber ceiling battens too.

[dangerous]

Has there been any bad words about Titan Panel with regards to leaky homes?
I have an aprox 5 year old house clad virtually entirely in it, block basement, Titan upper.
Anything I should look out for?

keep it well painted, if you have decent over hangs no worries for a while yet.

[Laava]

air seal... a positive change, crap thats what the idea is... explain why 100yr old house still stand as do 40yr old houses, no air seal at all.. no leaks either... again bulshit from the council and an extra cost to the home builder. No need for em if we didnt build leaking buildings..

Ah but the old houses did leak too, but as they were generally draughty they tended to dry up before they rotted. Also they had better timber for framig like rimu or even kauri. I am working on a historical bach at Oakura at the mo and it has been leaking for years and guess what? It has lots of rot and waterstains.
When you build new, the difference the air seal makes around the windows is very noticeable. It stops noise as well as air movement, but the air movement is the aim. I have gone back to putting facing boards around the windows and so far, touch wood, have had no issues. One in particular is very exposed and gets hammered by rain

[Woodman]

what is the cladding,sounds like an unlikely candidate tho

Plaster. Just realised reading this that I know fcuk all about how houses are constructed.

[Laava]

keep it well painted, if you have decent over hangs no worries for a while yet.

+1 and also keep the ground levels away from the cladding as per someones earlier post

[Laava]

Plaster. Just realised reading this that I know fcuk all about how houses are constructed.

Plaster on what tho? Brick, polystyrene or horrortex.

[Latte]

Plaster on what tho? Brick, polystyrene or horrortex.


Is that trademarked? Google finds nothing :killingme

[Quasievil]

Has there been any bad words about Titan Panel with regards to leaky homes?
I have an aprox 5 year old house clad virtually entirely in it, block basement, Titan upper.
Anything I should look out for?

Want me to come and look at it sometime when im in TGA ?
I will tell you if its correct or not.

[Woodman]

Plaster on what tho? Brick, polystyrene or horrortex.

Um no idea:facepalm: But def not polystyrene, that I particularly remember asking when we got the engineers report thing done cos if it was polystyrene I would not have bought it, cos I,d heard too much bad shit about it.

Going to find out somehow.

[sidecar bob]

Want me to come and look at it sometime when im in TGA ?
I will tell you if its correct or not.

That would be fantastic, you can visit your Ezy Up too!!.
There is an area on the deck that puddles & the panel edge sits in water occasionaly, I suspect that small section wont end well eventually.

[BMWST?]

Um no idea:facepalm: But def not polystyrene, that I particularly remember asking when we got the engineers report thing done cos if it was polystyrene I would not have bought it, cos I,d heard too much bad shit about it.

Going to find out somehow.

the council should have a set of plans which will show what was supposed to go on it

[Spearfish]

I'm a bit confused how a water barrier full of nails will keep water out.
How does the building wrap keep water out if its punctured by all the nails/screws that hold the battens on especially punctures in the sticky tape stuff around the windows were your more likely to put more battens and of course nail holes. If the battens get wet from a cladding leak the water will travel around the batten surly?
Is there a rubber tape behind the cavity battens or does the nail hole self seal?

Or should the house be built out of heavily treated timber "just in case"

[dangerous]

I'm a bit confused how a water barrier full of nails will keep water out.
How does the building wrap keep water out of it punctured by all the nails/screws that hold the battens on especially punctures in the sticky tape stuff around the windows were your more likely to put more battens and of course nail holes. If the battens get wet from a cladding leak the water will travel around the batten surly?
Is there a rubber tape behind the cavity battens or does the nail hole self seal?

Or should the house be built out of heavily treated timber "just in case"

best you ask the half wits down at the council... they need to justifi their jobs LOL

[BMWST?]

I'm a bit confused how a water barrier full of nails will keep water out.
How does the building wrap keep water out if its punctured by all the nails/screws that hold the battens on especially punctures in the sticky tape stuff around the windows were your more likely to put more battens and of course nail holes. If the battens get wet from a cladding leak the water will travel around the batten surly?
Is there a rubber tape behind the cavity battens or does the nail hole self seal?

Or should the house be built out of heavily treated timber "just in case"

there shouldnt be huge ammounts of water getting into the cavity,and there is nothing holding it in there and also air movement to dry it out again

[JimO]

you have to wonder with solid plaster over wire netting, every nail is a potential water track

[Laava]

Um no idea:facepalm: But def not polystyrene, that I particularly remember asking when we got the engineers report thing done cos if it was polystyrene I would not have bought it, cos I,d heard too much bad shit about it.

Going to find out somehow.

Actually, Harditex is probably the worst offender. My brother in law demolishes claddings from LHS all the time and does the whole house sometimes. He told me most of the cladding failures are Harditex as well. That was him and his digger on "A Rotten Shame"
There are ways of mitigating it tho so it is not all doom

[warewolf]

Leaky buildings. Thinking of buying a post '95 home? Own one?Yes, our house is built a few years after 1895 :laugh: Rimu framed. Re-roofed & stuccoed in '66.

Doesn't leak.

[ellipsis]

....someone encapsulated our woes many years ago...


<iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/SADPuUYF_4I" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[flyingcrocodile46]

I have reasonable experience evaluating/investigating houses, particularly of late houses built between 1990 and 2011 (yes...leaky houses STILL BEING BUILT!!) that have tended to have cladding systems that put them at high risk of leaking. It is amazing, you can walk into a house that looks all fine and dandy on the inside still (ie no mushrooms or mould growing anywhere) and yet thermal imaging and moisture testing show very wet timber behind the GIB.

If anyone would like, PM me & I will give you my number. I am happy to answer questions you may have. Hate to see people get stuck with a lemon property!

I am very skeptical of claims revolving around thermal imaging. Do you mind if I ask what qualifications you have?




Really I havent heard this at all, how exactly do you keep this quiet in this modern age, sounds like bullshit to me


Then you are out of touch.



Bullshit, the main contributor to leaky homes was the builders, end of story.


Now that is really is bullshit, and serves to demonstrate an incredibly superficial understanding of the industry and its governance.



NOT ONCE did I see an issue where the material was to blame 100% of the cases where completely absolutely SOLEY down to the muppets installing the product.


Then your eyes have either been disconnected or you are in denial ( I rather think the latter given your previous role). Fibre cement is a crap product for wall cladding. It should only be used for soffits.



Typical issues where, no control or expansion joints, no interfloor control joints, no cover around windows (not the aluminium joinery suppliers minimised the reduced the outside flange which gave 5 mm cover at best on windows) no sealant around windows, using product on top of ballastrades (hardie tex and the like is not a roof material) poor fastenings, no building paper..............the list goes on and on
All due to poor installation, never due to product.


All perfectly fine up to the last sentence. The product does fail regularly. I know this for a fact as I have investigated multiple WHRS claims and seen it with my own eyes.
JH isn't paying out millions of dollars each year in confidential settlements out of the goodness of their hearts (they have none)


I'm a bit confused how a water barrier full of nails will keep water out.
How does the building wrap keep water out if its punctured by all the nails/screws that hold the battens on especially punctures in the sticky tape stuff around the windows were your more likely to put more battens and of course nail holes. If the battens get wet from a cladding leak the water will travel around the batten surly?
Is there a rubber tape behind the cavity battens or does the nail hole self seal?

Or should the house be built out of heavily treated timber "just in case"

Yes use H3.2 treated timber to be sure it will last, as contrary to popular misconception we never have nor never will build homes that don't leak.

Yes nail and staple holes do allow moisture ingress which can result in decay if in sufficient quantities and/or timber is untreated. The flashing tape will seal around the fixing (in most instances) but not so the wrap. The cladding on a cavity system is a rain screen (sheds the water) and some moisture will penetrate through it at junctions. However, If the cavity system is installed correctly there are few bridging points that allow the water to transfer across the cavity, so the risk of moisture entering at fixings is greatly reduced (from direct fixed) Cavities are a good thing.


Ah but the old houses did leak too, but as they were generally draughty they tended to dry up before they rotted. Also they had better timber for framig like rimu or even kauri. I am working on a historical bach at Oakura at the mo and it has been leaking for years and guess what? It has lots of rot and waterstains.
When you build new, the difference the air seal makes around the windows is very noticeable. It stops noise as well as air movement, but the air movement is the aim. I have gone back to putting facing boards around the windows and so far, touch wood, have had no issues. One in particular is very exposed and gets hammered by rain

Gold there. Mandatory introduction of building wraps then insulation started the change, then allowing allowing the use of untreated framing:no:. Fuckwits.


again, treatment is CRAP... only there to cover the councils arse again why? cos we build leaking buildings, stop the leaks and no need for treatment... like the old days.

No! That is the 'Crap'. Houses always have leaked and always will. The timber used, while untreated was more durable (as most was native). Also as stated earlier by a wiser head, the walls could dry out very quickly because they were draughty as all get out. BTW You can't use chem free anywhere now.



cavity battens are ther so as any water gets in it will track down and out... we only do it to cover the councils arse.


Not so. They are there to cover the owners arse. The builders arse is rarely covered as it is usually long gone or too boney to be worth covering. Cavities are highly recommended as they are the most effective method of preventing water from entering the wall framing (given that wall cladding is not effectively and consistently waterproof) and they allow air circulation to dry out water that does enter into the cavity.



air seal... a positive change, crap thats what the idea is... explain why 100yr old house still stand as do 40yr old houses, no air seal at all.. no leaks either... again bulshit from the council and an extra cost to the home builder. No need for em if we didnt build leaking buildings.


You only say that because you don't understand what it is there for. With the advent of wraps, insulation and sealed cladding systems the air pressure difference between inside and outside of buildings becomes more pronounced. Surface water passing over risk junctions like window edges is readily sucked in at the these junctions (lacking air seals) as the pressure differential is balanced by air moving through those unsealed junctions. The idea is to stop the airflow that is sucking the water in. The flashing tapes and wrap should extend all the way back into and past the inside face of the trimmers and be stapled in place there (rather than within the trimmed opening where water might penetrate through fixings. The air seal (formed at the inside face of the wall framing) prevents the moisture from entering past that point.



there is many different figgers, council dont use 3604 they have far larger instructions in this case G4. It isent so much the floor height that is the issue but the clearance of the cladding.
However YES it is just what they are ment to check... BUT remember we are talking about up to 15yr old buildings.

G4 is interior ventilation and has nothing to do with concrete floors. E1 is the clause governing floor levels. Those given in NZBC E1/AS1 and NZS3604 are the same (as are those in E2/AS1) and most other relevant publications. Whilst they are recommended, they are not mandatory. But your comment re cladding clearance is not incorrect (in most situations)



For others infomation, that knob on the video in the 1st post tahe reckons its still going on is lacking info.

Unfortunately that is incorrect. I have shut down several jobs over the last few years due to grossly defective workmanship. Many/most builders still don't understand the basic mechanics of water entry into buildings and create defects in areas where plan details are lacking. Even more designers fit into the same category.

The removal of timber treatment was and is the single biggest factor determining the cost and extent of remediation work that is required. Untreated framing is what is driving the complete removal of wall cladding and replacement with new cladding on cavity systems. I estimate that between 60 to 70% of cost relates back to this single failure.

If framing treatment had been retained we would not have a leaky building disaster to deal with as leaks could have been fixed as targeted repairs (like in the good old days)




As for the OP...
I was rather unexcited by the expose on matters that I have been well aware of and have been discouraged from discussing dating right back to 2002 when I first expressed my views on the parties and other causative factors responsible (very few new discoveries since).

Conspicuous in their absence were discussion re;

Cladding manufacturers (Oh where to start?).

BRANZ..... They got off very lightly.

Sealant manufacturers (and the like) who supply cartridges of sealant by the hundreds of thousands without out any evidence of corresponding volumes of product primers which are applicable in approx 80 to 90% of the sealant applications.

Contributory negligence in cases of significant owner failures to carry out advised preventative maintenance (particularly by Ostrich like body corps)

Negligence of buyers who either didn't get a qualified building surveyor to do a PROPER pre purchase inspection of their most expensive purchase.

The fact that (IMO) the lions share of builders negligence lies at the feet of the owner builders who had no clue as to the hidden costs in all the details that weren't shown on their $1000 set of plans and who, though pushing the envelope of their finances right at the start, decided (in their infinite wisdom) that they would save tens of thousand$ by using unqualified labour only contractors and cheap (uncontrolled) subbies who had priced poorly scoped (by the ignorant) contracts which frequently resulted in under lapping responsibilities and countless un-budgeted requirements. As I recall, these people couldn't afford to finish their builds and would knowingly cut corners. In my experience I estimate more than half of the houses built between the mid eighties and beyond 2000 were built by owner builders. Where are they now?

The market were provided the level of competence that they demanded of the industry. Every house buyer shares in that responsibility.

If Councils and Certifiers failed in their performance requirements with respect to the Building Act, what of the failure of the BIA in respect to its auditing responsibilities.

There really is a whole lot more to it than has been revealed to the public so far.

Frankly, it's all a sham propelled and steered by politics and it ain't ever going to get fixed even half properly.


I am a qualified WHRS assessor, building surveyor, expert witness (ex builder and construction manager) and have assessed and reported on multiple weathertightness claims. I also process building consent applications for a number of councils and provide overflow inspection services to ACC when I'm not engaged by insurance companies to investigate/report/give evidence on construction related claims (not all leakers)

[dangerous]

you have taken my posts out of context, I agree with you maybe you missed my 1st post, I dont explain myself to well at times and try to keep it basic for those wanting to learn here.
Yes houses have leaked BUT never as bad as they do today... WHY is that, I know you know but its still allowd.
E1 G4 what ever ya want, I used that as an example, its not what I deal with so apart from the leaking home section and I sure as hell dont want to explain that here, avarage Jo dont need to know.
I often get jamed in an akward situation with court battles between lawers, owners, the builder, all subs involved, devloper and architec, I have to watch what I say which often means not telling the full truth.

[Quasievil]

I am a qualified WHRS assessor, building surveyor, expert witness (ex builder and construction manager)

So everyones fault except Builders lol...........your dillusional

at the end of the day the BUILDER is the contractor responsible for everything, and if he isnt, then he isnt a builder rather a monkey with a nail gun, which is the case in 90% of NZ builders hence our problems

oooooo oooooo eeeeeee eeeeee arrr arrrr arrrr

[Woodman]

Is it a case of the builders (even qualified ones) knowingly doing shoddy work because they knew it would get signed off by the inspectors/council, therefore passing any responsibility to someone else.

The lack of personal responsibility is a big issue in all walks of life but thats another whole topic.

[dangerous]

at the end of the day the BUILDER is the contractor responsible for everything, and if he isnt, then he isnt a builder rather a monkey with a nail gun, which is the case in 90% of NZ builders hence our problems
And I might add again... if the builder does not do what is asked he wont get paid, there are those out ther that think they know beter... if the builder dont get paid he cant feed the family, now see my post below...



Is it a case of the builders (even qualified ones) knowingly doing shoddy work because they knew it would get signed off by the inspectors/council, therefore passing any responsibility to someone else.

The lack of personal responsibility is a big issue in all walks of life but thats another whole topic.Ahhh, but that is changing with the introduction of the LBH (licenced Building Practitioner) it is availble now and will be inforced in 2014.

I however disagree with it, eg: the only guy in the company I work for that has it is a farking usless twat with no idea what so ever you wouldnt believe the stories I could tell you.
Also its a money making gig... pay ya 350 get a licence, repay next year... weres the money go, fuck knows.
What this now allows is an indervidual carpenter on wages open to go to court cos he did as he was orded by his boss, boss gets money employ gets a new arse hole ripped.

[Laava]

So everyones fault except Builders lol...........your dillusional

at the end of the day the BUILDER is the contractor responsible for everything, and if he isnt, then he isnt a builder rather a monkey with a nail gun, which is the case in 90% of NZ builders hence our problems

oooooo oooooo eeeeeee eeeeee arrr arrrr arrrr
No he's not saying that, rather that the builder is not the only one to blame as per your previous posts.

[JimO]

Is it a case of the builders (even qualified ones) knowingly doing shoddy work because they knew it would get signed off by the inspectors/council, therefore passing any responsibility to someone else.

The lack of personal responsibility is a big issue in all walks of life but thats another whole topic.

if its on the council approved plan thats how its done, i know a plumber who installed a overflow on a internal deck in case the drain blocked and he got a bollocking from the architect, because he thought it spoiled his "vision" of how the house should look, turned into ww3 between builder,architect, owner and plumber the end result was the plumber saying if you want me to warranty my work this is how its being done so fuck you

[flyingcrocodile46]

you have taken my posts out of context, I agree with you maybe you missed my 1st post, I dont explain myself to well at times and try to keep it basic for those wanting to learn here.

I did wonder if you had watered things down a mite. I have seen a number of your posts in the past which indicate that you are an experienced builder and helpful. I often stay away from discussion about it with Joe public because it is so complex that it can't be simply told in a short period. So subsequently tell only a portion of it (which is misleading). It's a shit because then people go off half cocked and that bugs the shit out of me. Hence why I posted about it and why I don't like to.

Sorry if I came down on some of your comments, as most were on the mark and usually are.

[Spearfish]

There are also developers like Double Happy Lucky with your money Long Time Construction Co who employ "trades on a piece meal basis for instance

Footing and floor team
Builder stands the frames and trusses and is gone
Larry Windows fixes the openings
Wang Chung Cladding Shaggers wrap, flash and plaster the building leaving off the important clear, hard to inspect to see if its actually been done, sealer.
Hong Kong Phooeys painting service rolls a thin pigment "sealing" the plaster
40 kids with hammers file out of a van and hit plasterboard until they run out of places to throw it.
Rice is Nice Plasterers get the poorly fixed gib ready for Hong Kong Phooeys painting services.
Jacky Chans tiling services with the motto "If your regular tiler says "you need a water proofing membrane", your paying to much" walk in and arse up a box or of tiles over some semi flat porous surfaces.

Payless homes sell the house and the first winter it leaks, owners contact the council, council go "shyt" look up the house file and find the one regestration number on the plans, so who is that then? The builder who stood the timber and left. Council phone builder with hysterical cries of foul play and lawyers etc, builder takes a breath and says "I didnt build the house just stood the frames" council says "yeah that's original prove it in court". builder refers the liability process back to the developer with the name often using the the letters Xiu who strangely enough has skipped the country..

This strange story sadly isn't a work of fiction, a development a few houses away had this story to the birth of a defective but "modern" cave.

[flyingcrocodile46]

So everyones fault except Builders lol...........your dillusional

I never said that at all and nor did I infer it.

I see you are one of those people who, when it is pointed out that the words in your mouth are shit, you fall back (like a lamer) to putting words into the mouths of others.

Yeah! You did work for hardies didn't you.



at the end of the day the BUILDER is the contractor responsible for everything, and if he isnt, then he isnt a builder rather a monkey with a nail gun, which is the case in 90% of NZ builders hence our problems

oooooo oooooo eeeeeee eeeeee arrr arrrr arrrr

You don't read too good huh! I estimate that the builders who built over half of these problem houses, was the owner (who knowingly accepted the cheapest labour only prices off unqualified hammer hands and organized all the other trades ). In this instance the hammer hand is not the builder.

Go back and re read my post. then try to keep your allegations based in some facts eh!. If that is too much of a challenge, just shut up.

[flyingcrocodile46]

There are also developers like Double Happy Lucky with your money Long Time Construction Co who employ "trades on a piece meal basis for instance

Footing and floor team
Builder stands the frames and trusses and is gone
Larry Windows fixes the openings
Wang Chung Cladding Shaggers wrap, flash and plaster the building leaving off the important clear, hard to inspect to see if its actually been done, sealer.
Hong Kong Phooeys painting service rolls a thin pigment "sealing" the plaster
40 kids with hammers file out of a van and hit plasterboard until they run out of places to throw it.
Rice is Nice Plasterers get the poorly fixed gib ready for Hong Kong Phooeys painting services.
Jacky Chans tiling services with the motto "If your regular tiler says "you need a water proofing membrane", your paying to much" walk in and arse up a box or of tiles over some semi flat porous surfaces.

Payless homes sell the house and the first winter it leaks, owners contact the council, council go "shyt" look up the house file and find the one regestration number on the plans, so who is that then? The builder who stood the timber and left. Council phone builder with hysterical cries of foul play and lawyers etc, builder takes a breath and says "I didnt build the house just stood the frames" council says "yeah that's original prove it in court". builder refers the liability process back to the developer with the name often using the the letters Xiu who strangely enough has skipped the country..

This strange story sadly isn't a work of fiction, a development a few houses away had this story to the birth of a defective but "modern" cave.

Lol. So true.

Though I might point out that some Asian builders actually try harder to get up to speed with compliance documents and technical instructions than their kiwi counterparts. Some are pretty good builders. There are worse but I am reluctant to start a race war. The worst liar I have come across was a Dutchman who point blank lied about the length of his holding down bolts. (said they were 120 when they were all only 60mm).

[007]

How are commerical buildings,appartments,schools and a lot of residential homes cleaned? And we wonder why houses leak now more than ever.

[Spearfish]

Lol. So true.

Though I might point out that some Asian builders actually try harder to get up to speed with compliance documents and technical instructions than their kiwi counterparts. Some are pretty good builders. There are worse but I am reluctant to start a race war. The worst liar I have come across was a Dutchman who point blank lied about the length of his holding down bolts. (said they were 120 when they were all only 60mm).

But the rub comes from the repair bill that seems to exceed the original cost of the entire house project with council and central govt picking up half and the owner the rest.
I can understand some of it after seeing a 2 story house compost bin being repaired with the floor joists rotten almost 3 feet in from the ends on one side....but some seem like there is a bit of gouging going on. Either that or the insurance component is extreme.

[BMWST?]

timber treatment (h1.2 or H3.1) would only have postponed the problems,the timber would eventually have rotted and the same remedial action would be required,perhaps more work would be required as the water may have progressed even further in to the house
.Proper treated timber (h3.2) is the ultimate solution but that stuff is dangerous too(arsenic copper etc).Untreated timber was dumb,but as stated above it is not the only reason for all the remedial work required.What we really need to do is to use a naturally durable timber that doesnt reqire any treatment

[Spearfish]

timber treatment (h1.2 or H3.1) would only have postponed the problems,the timber would eventually have rotted and the same remedial action would be required,perhaps more work would be required as the water may have progressed even further in to the house
.Proper treated timber (h3.2) is the ultimate solution but that stuff is dangerous too(arsenic copper etc).Untreated timber was dumb,but as stated above it is not the only reason for all the remedial work required.What we really need to do is to use a naturally durable timber that doesnt reqire any treatment

Concrete or stone?

[merv]

Concrete or stone?


Go the earthquake instead of the leaks!

[Ocean1]

What we really need to do is to use a naturally durable timber that doesnt reqire any treatment

What's that then?

I know Oregon contains natural bugacides, but is it enough to mean you don't have to treat it further?

Mac is the same, different natural in-built protection and it grows well here but is it OK untreated as a framing timber?

I'm guessing an occasional leak is prety much unavoidable, yeah? like when the wind's from a particular quarter and at a certain speed you get a dribble blown over/around a flashing. So unless we're going to insist that all cavities are perfectly watertight the materials have to be able to tolerate an occasional damp spell, yes?

Ignoring the green politics what do we use for framing?

[jaffaonajappa]

This week Ive been house hunting in Wellington - well...starting to house hunt. Figuring the school zones and community 'types' has been the first priority.
Have found trademe to be fairly usefull figuring out house prices.....but do keep seeing some that scream "Leaky".

This one seems too cheap to be true. Has short eaves. Made during the 90's I guess, and has a note "needs some deferred maintenance".
http://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/Listing.aspx?id=385703790
Leaky, or worth checking further?

And this ones a pure Leaky Building.
http://www.trademe.co.nz/property/residential-property-for-sale/auction-307168733.htm
'has weather tightness issues" LOL! At 200k under RV its still a money pit.

[Ocean1]

Go the earthquake instead of the leaks!

It may well be easier and cheaper to engineer solutions to that issue than those of merely semi-permenant materials.

I see a lot of legal definitions in council documents using a description of permissable buildings based on "50 year life".
What's that about? I'd expect any house I paid for to last a fucking sight longer than that, is it some sort of belated statement of limited liability for non-existant inspection regimes and badly informed zoning regulations?

[Spearfish]

What's that then?

I know Oregon contains natural bugacides, but is it enough to mean you don't have to treat it further?

Mac is the same, different natural in-built protection and it grows well here but is it OK untreated as a framing timber?

I'm guessing an occasional leak is prety much unavoidable, yeah? like when the wind's from a particular quarter and at a certain speed you get a dribble blown over/around a flashing. So unless we're going to insist that all cavities are perfectly watertight the materials have to be able to tolerate an occasional damp spell, yes?

Ignoring the green politics what do we use for framing?

What happened to the metal framed houses?

As far as heavy treatment goes its pre trement machined now rather than post treatment (probably why its different sizes) and the stuff is between wall linings, its not like your going to go around licking the studs of your home....or have I been missing out on something?:laugh:

[Ocean1]

What happened to the metal framed houses?

Seem to be gaining popularity, still. I looked at an early example a couple of months ago, could see up under the cladding in places so got a good look at the bottom plate and lower studs. There was hints of surface rust at the ends but not enough to rule it out as a material for me.

I was also in a factory making steel framed housing recently, and I noticed it's lighter now than that early one I saw.

I'm aware of some new developments in concrete tilt-slab construction for housing too. If I was building now I'd be looking hard at that as an option.

[Spearfish]

I'm aware of some new developments in concrete tilt-slab construction for housing too. If I was building now I'd be looking hard at that as an option.

I've heard that recommended as an option before.
Tilt slab buildings certainty look spectacular when being stood up.

[Laava]

But the rub comes from the repair bill that seems to exceed the original cost of the entire house project with council and central govt picking up half and the owner the rest.
I can understand some of it after seeing a 2 story house compost bin being repaired with the floor joists rotten almost 3 feet in from the ends on one side....but some seem like there is a bit of gouging going on. Either that or the insurance component is extreme.

Correct. It is more expensive and that is why it doesn't take too much damage to write it off. Just like vehicles but in this case most of that cost would go in labour not parts[as in cars]
A new house will cost you in the region of $1200-1500 per m2. A full renovation or extension type work typically is more than that. Often you are opening a can of worms.

[Kickaha]

I'm aware of some new developments in concrete tilt-slab construction for housing too. If I was building now I'd be looking hard at that as an option.


I've often wondered why hasn't that been looked at for housing before?

I was talking to a guy about three years back and they were doing some in "lightweight concrete"

[ellipsis]

,,it has just struck me that, innuit, eskimo types are prime contenders for a big leaky homes problem , if global warming increases and they stick to their traditional housing methods...

[flyingcrocodile46]

But the rub comes from the repair bill that seems to exceed the original cost of the entire house project with council and central govt picking up half and the owner the rest.
I can understand some of it after seeing a 2 story house compost bin being repaired with the floor joists rotten almost 3 feet in from the ends on one side....but some seem like there is a bit of gouging going on. Either that or the insurance component is extreme.

The repair bill is exasperated by the need to remove all the cladding to insitu treat the framing (not particularly satisfactory as an alternative but viewed as better than discarding the framing) and to create a cavity for drainage and air drying. That and fear of future litigation. The industry is now risk averse (particularly and understandably the BCA's/councils who are footing the bill for a lot of the costs when failure does occur).


What's that then?

I know Oregon contains natural bugacides, but is it enough to mean you don't have to treat it further?

Mac is the same, different natural in-built protection and it grows well here but is it OK untreated as a framing timber?

I'm guessing an occasional leak is prety much unavoidable, yeah? like when the wind's from a particular quarter and at a certain speed you get a dribble blown over/around a flashing. So unless we're going to insist that all cavities are perfectly watertight the materials have to be able to tolerate an occasional damp spell, yes?

Ignoring the green politics what do we use for framing?

Steel is probably the most cost effective safe option.


I see a lot of legal definitions in council documents using a description of permissable buildings based on "50 year life".
What's that about? I'd expect any house I paid for to last a fucking sight longer than that,

Since 1992 the NZBC has set minimum requirements/performance objectives and to varying degrees has provided 'Acceptable Solutions'/AS 1etc (non mandatory guidline's - for use, but mandatory for acceptance by BCA's/Councils), 'Verification Methods'/VM1etc (calculations/tests - also mandatory for acceptance by BCA's/Councils) and a loose framework for guidance in assessing 'Alternative Solutions' (a convincing story based around related/similar products/methods, historic performance and appraisals from eminently trustworthy and thorough bodies such as BRANZ:shifty:). Alternative Solutions may be accepted by BCA's/Councils at their discretion and they may demand additional mitigation as a condition of acceptance.

The minimum NZBC B2 performance objectives for the life span of various components in a building are as follows;

PERFORMANCE
B2.3.1 Building elements must, with only normal maintenance, continue to satisfy the performance requirements of this code for the lesser of the specified intended life
of the building, if stated, or:

This is the requirement for structure/framing
(a) The life of the building, being not less than 50 years, if:
(i) Those building elements (including floors, walls, and fixings) provide structural stability to the building, or
(ii) Those building elements are difficult to access or replace, or
(iii) Failure of those building elements to comply with the building code would go undetected during both normal use and maintenance of the building.

This is the requirement for wall and roof cladding and windows/doors
(b) 15 years if:
(i) Those building elements (including the building envelope, exposed plumbing in the subfloor space, and in-built chimneys and flues) are moderately difficult to access or replace, or
(ii) Failure of those building elements to comply with the building code would go undetected during normal use of the building, but would be easily detected during normal maintenance.

This is the requirement for wall and roof coatings, floor coverings etc
(c) 5 years if:
(i) The building elements (including services, linings, renewable protective coatings, and fixtures) are easy to access and replace,
and
(ii) Failure of those building elements to comply with the building code would be easily detected during normal use of the building.

As a home owner, if your cladding paint wears out (becomes permeable) after 5 years and you don't replace it and the cladding (which is reliant on the paint coating as a system component) allows moisture entry which results in damage (as a result of permeable paint), then you have committed an act of negligence which has contributed to the defects and resultant damage (contributory negligence) and can't (but do) blame the developer, council, builder etc for your own ignorance.



What happened to the metal framed houses?

As far as heavy treatment goes its pre trement machined now rather than post treatment (probably why its different sizes) and the stuff is between wall linings, its not like your going to go around licking the studs of your home....or have I been missing out on something?:laugh:

Very true. Much fuss by the ignorant do gooder Greenies over sweet FA. Those morons (the party) are partially responsible for the introduction of chem free framing as an acceptable solution. A trade off for their support in forming a majority government.




I was talking to a guy about three years back and they were doing some in "lightweight concrete"


Light weight concrete is ok but is also reliant on cavities and in most instances is incapable of supporting itself (needs structural support... usually by timber or steel framing). It is also very permeable (unlike concrete).

[dangerous]

Some one mentioned about who pays for a reclad... well the owner employs a company that gathers all involved and takes em to court.
Using the 200k reclad I have already mentioned as an example
roofer closed shop
butanoler classed shop
builder closed shop
architect
devloper
1st owner
council
the 200 was divided up... as soon as court was mentioned as you see a few closed shop (untouchable) the others coffed up the council being the bigest looser.
out of 200k the new owners got 40k the rest was on them.





I've often wondered why hasn't that been looked at for housing before?

I was talking to a guy about three years back and they were doing some in "lightweight concrete"

Tilt panel is quite common done a few myself including a thermo panel.

By "lightweight concrete" do you mean Celcret, Loxo, Hebel, flexcret?
In all the reclads I hve done one of the for mentioned has been used. the material itself is ok but the way in which it is used leaves a lot to be desired eg:
No base suport
4-6 scews holding up each panel by 20mm
masife weight hanging of a building that was built with polly in mind.
I also find the clowns that fit the stuff dont give a shit and their work leaves a lot to be desired (partly cos theres no money in it)
The panel then has 3 thin coats of plaster and 2 very thin coats of paint... wont take much for it to fail in a few years IMO.

My most recent job is around the corner from your work on Whitleigh, 4 units... you might have noticed the procedure.

[Quasievil]

I never said that at all and nor did I infer it.

I see you are one of those people who, when it is pointed out that the words in your mouth are shit, you fall back (like a lamer) to putting words into the mouths of others.

Yeah! You did work for hardies didn't you.



You don't read too good huh! I estimate that the builders who built over half of these problem houses, was the owner (who knowingly accepted the cheapest labour only prices off unqualified hammer hands and organized all the other trades ). In this instance the hammer hand is not the builder.

Go back and re read my post. then try to keep your allegations based in some facts eh!. If that is too much of a challenge, just shut up.

No need to be insulting here, my allegations towards the situation are based on 6 years with Hardies and Carter Holt

I have my opinion on the matter and im sticking to it, builders and developers did the work they owned the contracts and they built the leaky homes and were the "professional" in charge of the site works.
To blame the materials used is weak, especially when they where NOT used correctly and according to manufactures specification and recommendations and as I say I have been to many many sites that enforces my opinion concretely.

How Many significant Auckland apartment complexes leak, I know of about 5 ALL of them where erected incorrectly, I have a Photo somewhere of some roof flashings that didnt fit right (made wrong) they used it anyway and it had a hole in it the size of an orange that was filled (poorly) with silicone...........yeah that was Selleys fault right ?
I went to one job (titan) where there was no timber behind ANY of the vertical joints the Neoprene vertical seal started to fall into the cavity leaving a 10 mm gap on the joints........that was Hardies fault right ?

Another one and very common situation that I was seeing 3-4 times a month was cracks on the joints, usually on long walls I remember one house 14 metre long wall not one control joint not one expansion joint as specified by hardies, its in the manual...........hardies Fault ?? nope, the builders ..............again.
All the brochures and installation instructions are readily available at all outlets.

The builder was responsible for this period as he did it, not Mum and Dad, not the Architect, not the council, not the suppliers THE BUILDER did it, he is the professional and he cant blame the sub trades either as its his contract.

In the case of a Developer employing the cheap unqualified labour then the developer is then the Builder.

And I stand by the fact I haven't seen a leak due to faulty product it has ALL been due to installation and sub standard work being carried out.

[Laava]

My neighbours house is harditex with a plaster finish and in the mornings sometimes you can see every single join as a wet line which is a very small crack. But it is on every join. They had them all hucked out and filled with what I presume is MS silicon or similar but still it is exactly the same.
My opinion is that there is no way you should use this type of cladding on a timber frame. Their rates of thermal expansion are too dissimilar and cracks will always be the result. I wouldn't buy or build one. I have built houses in the past with Harditex feature walls and have not been back to check the end result.
This type of cladding with no or little in the way of eaves, and parapets, is a disaster waiting to happen IMO.
Monolithic finishes should be confined to brick/plaster or conc, conc/plaster.
Just me 2c

[dangerous]

hearing ya Quasie... and myself I dont doubt that sort of shit happens one little bit... That said I have not seen anything that bad down here, mostely things were done right for 13yrs ago.

What I'd like to ask you hving worked for Hardie's... have you seen what happens to some of there products after 10yrs in all weathers? I asume so ofcourse... just that what I have found and not so much with the high density boards but more 4.5-6mm were its been used on the inside of parapits and the tops.
The board goes like weetbix, were its constently wet and drys its powder... What I see is the wrong boards being used for the wrong situations, again short cutting by a builder or owner in order to do the job cheaper... the kiwi way.


My opinion is that there is no way you should use this type of cladding on a timber frame. Their rates of thermal expansion are too dissimilar and cracks will always be the result.
Its not the monotec thats the problem, but the thin arse plaster, use a old school 20mm thick plastering system and no worries at all.



Monolithic finishes should be confined to brick/plaster or conc, conc/plaster. YIP

[Quasievil]

What I'd like to ask you hving worked for Hardie's... have you seen what happens to some of there products after 10yrs in all weathers? I asume so ofcourse... just that what I have found and not so much with the high density boards but more 4.5-6mm were its been used on the inside of parapits and the tops.


From memory the angle had to be 35 deg or more to use this as a top, I think even them you needed a barrier like a neoprene over top, cant remember its been 8 years odd.
But if not done right you will have all sorts of problems as you will be solely relying on the plaster finish for waterproofing, which 9/10 is a very thin plaster as well

[flyingcrocodile46]

No need to be insulting here, my allegations towards the situation are based on 6 years with Hardies and Carter Holt

I have my opinion on the matter and im sticking to it, builders and developers did the work they owned the contracts and they built the leaky homes and were the "professional" in charge of the site works.
To blame the materials used is weak, especially when they where NOT used correctly and according to manufactures specification and recommendations and as I say I have been to many many sites that enforces my opinion concretely.

How Many significant Auckland apartment complexes leak, I know of about 5 ALL of them where erected incorrectly, I have a Photo somewhere of some roof flashings that didnt fit right (made wrong) they used it anyway and it had a hole in it the size of an orange that was filled (poorly) with silicone...........yeah that was Selleys fault right ?
I went to one job (titan) where there was no timber behind ANY of the vertical joints the Neoprene vertical seal started to fall into the cavity leaving a 10 mm gap on the joints........that was Hardies fault right ?

Another one and very common situation that I was seeing 3-4 times a month was cracks on the joints, usually on long walls I remember one house 14 metre long wall not one control joint not one expansion joint as specified by hardies, its in the manual...........hardies Fault ?? nope, the builders ..............again.
All the brochures and installation instructions are readily available at all outlets.

The builder was responsible for this period as he did it, not Mum and Dad, not the Architect, not the council, not the suppliers THE BUILDER did it, he is the professional and he cant blame the sub trades either as its his contract.

In the case of a Developer employing the cheap unqualified labour then the developer is then the Builder.

And I stand by the fact I haven't seen a leak due to faulty product it has ALL been due to installation and sub standard work being carried out.

The materials are no more to blame than the buyers, specifiers or installers. The manufacturers however should share the lions share of blame in some instances where they have represented their products as significantly more or better than they are (especially when they know otherwise).

Just how critical is it to comply with manufacturer's installation instructions? If the manufacturer thought it was critical maybe they should have withdrawn superseded installation instructions from suppliers brochure ranges a little quicker than the (up to 3 year time frame I and others have witnessed). Particularly given that they couldn't get the instructions right in the first instance when they introduced the product or (as in the case of JH Harditex) again in July 87, or again in July 91, or again in Dec 92, or again in June 93, or again in August 94, or again in July 95, or again in Feb 96, or again in June 98. If builders are incompetent for not following the instructions properly, what of JH for not getting them right in the first instance?

The unsuitability of the product to perform and meet NZBC requirements is demonstrated by the withdrawal of the product from the market by the manufacturer. Not the first of their products to be withdrawn because of systemic product failure. (see Hardishake/shingle roofing) and wont be the last. I have had to return whole pellets of Monoteck and Harditex because of delamination. Just as well I did quaity control because clearly JH did not. The suppliers rep confirmed that other jobs where the same batch run of cladding was installed were not subject to a recall by JH. Yeah they are real stand up people.

Of course all the ducking, diving and rule changes around this product had nothing to do with the fact that JH were well aware that Fibre cement cladding was failing in the US and Canada (at the same time that JH were undertaking massive advertising campaigns to dupe people into buying crap product by claiming Harditex to be a superior low maintenance cladding)
No of course not.:laugh::laugh::laugh: That would have meant that they mislead the public and conveniently made it near impossible for those incompetent installers to comply with installation instructions (thereby rendering JH free and clear of any blame). You can squirt on about how innocent manufacturer's were in front of people who don't know the truth. But deep down you and I know the truth don't we?

I am not going to dispute that there are many instances where installers (including JH trained and accredited) did some really dumb things. (I never made the the claim otherwise) However, you based on your limited (and biased) observations are factually incorrect and insultingly so. To suggest that it's all the fault of the builders (particularly when you are lumping bonafide builders in with owner builders and are refusing to concede any of the other major contributing factors.) That is plain ignorance and shouldn't be left to uninformed readers to mistake as factual. Narrow minded viewpoints prevent observation of the truths.

[dangerous]

From memory the angle had to be 35 deg or more to use this as a top, I think even them you needed a barrier like a neoprene over top, cant remember its been 8 years odd.
But if not done right you will have all sorts of problems as you will be solely relying on the plaster finish for waterproofing, which 9/10 is a very thin plaster as well
thats right so why dont Hardies stick bloody big warning stickers on their indervidual products as to their uses... ohh cos they just want a sale.

[flyingcrocodile46]

hearing ya Quasie... and myself I dont doubt that sort of shit happens one little bit... That said I have not seen anything that bad down here, mostely things were done right for 13yrs ago.

What I'd like to ask you hving worked for Hardie's... have you seen what happens to some of there products after 10yrs in all weathers? I asume so ofcourse... just that what I have found and not so much with the high density boards but more 4.5-6mm were its been used on the inside of parapits and the tops.
The board goes like weetbix, were its constently wet and drys its powder... What I see is the wrong boards being used for the wrong situations, again short cutting by a builder or owner in order to do the job cheaper... the kiwi way.


Its not the monotec thats the problem, but the thin arse plaster, use a old school 20mm thick plastering system and no worries at all.


YIP

That sort of fibre cement breakdown occurs because of wetting of the boards (which shouldn't occur in over 90 % of instances if installed and maintained properly). Fibre cement was reinforced by Asbestos fibres in the bad old days. When asbestos fibres were replaced it was with wood fibers. The wood fibres decay if they are saturated for any significant period of time and the board then turns back to the dust from whence it came.

Thermally driven water vapor (nothing to do with leaks) can be present on the rear face of cladding and can on occasion result in this level of degradation. In that instance it would be a failure of the product rather than installation.

[JimO]

There are also developers like Double Happy Lucky with your money Long Time Construction Co who employ "trades on a piece meal basis for instance

Footing and floor team
Builder stands the frames and trusses and is gone
Larry Windows fixes the openings
Wang Chung Cladding Shaggers wrap, flash and plaster the building leaving off the important clear, hard to inspect to see if its actually been done, sealer.
Hong Kong Phooeys painting service rolls a thin pigment "sealing" the plaster
40 kids with hammers file out of a van and hit plasterboard until they run out of places to throw it.
Rice is Nice Plasterers get the poorly fixed gib ready for Hong Kong Phooeys painting services.
Jacky Chans tiling services with the motto "If your regular tiler says "you need a water proofing membrane", your paying to much" walk in and arse up a box or of tiles over some semi flat porous surfaces.

Payless homes sell the house and the first winter it leaks, owners contact the council, council go "shyt" look up the house file and find the one regestration number on the plans, so who is that then? The builder who stood the timber and left. Council phone builder with hysterical cries of foul play and lawyers etc, builder takes a breath and says "I didnt build the house just stood the frames" council says "yeah that's original prove it in court". builder refers the liability process back to the developer with the name often using the the letters Xiu who strangely enough has skipped the country..

This strange story sadly isn't a work of fiction, a development a few houses away had this story to the birth of a defective but "modern" cave.

this system is used by group housing companies as well, you know the ones they are either in receivership, about to go into receivership or a new owner is resurrecting the francise from receivership, i dont work for those cunts either there have probably been dozens in the otago regin in the last 20 years some going down some more than once leaving unfinished houses, unpaid subbies and owners out of money. You get what you pay for and that applys to building houses, i hear one group housing company advertising a 10k cashback on signing up to one of their houses chances are high that 10k has been shaved off the various subtrades, you hear it all the time in the building industrie, look after is on this job and you can do all our work!! at a reduced rate of course

[ellipsis]

....much like i've said in a previous post...if you want to build your castle with shit that has as much substance to it as a breakfast cereal, one should not be surprised that it is starting to fail by lunchtime the day after fixing...marketing by insincere people to a dumb populace that believes anything said on an ad endorsed by well paid pricks that could'nt give a toss....

[Quasievil]

thats right so why dont Hardies stick bloody big warning stickers on their indervidual products as to their uses... ohh cos they just want a sale.

They provided information in all of the distributors sites that guided the installer on correct use and installation, Hardies assumed they where dealing with professionals............Oh they werent they where dealing with Monkies making a quick buck at the expense of honest families

:bleh:

[Quasievil]

The materials are no more to blame than the buyers, specifiers or installers. The manufacturers however should share the lions share of blame in some instances where they have represented their products as significantly more or better than they are (especially when they know otherwise).

Just how critical is it to comply with manufacturer's installation instructions? If the manufacturer thought it was critical maybe they should have withdrawn superseded installation instructions from suppliers brochure ranges a little quicker than the (up to 3 year time frame I and others have witnessed). Particularly given that they couldn't get the instructions right in the first instance when they introduced the product or (as in the case of JH Harditex) again in July 87, or again in July 91, or again in Dec 92, or again in June 93, or again in August 94, or again in July 95, or again in Feb 96, or again in June 98. If builders are incompetent for not following the instructions properly, what of JH for not getting them right in the first instance?

The unsuitability of the product to perform and meet NZBC requirements is demonstrated by the withdrawal of the product from the market by the manufacturer. Not the first of their products to be withdrawn because of systemic product failure. (see Hardishake/shingle roofing) and wont be the last. I have had to return whole pellets of Monoteck and Harditex because of delamination. Just as well I did quaity control because clearly JH did not. The suppliers rep confirmed that other jobs where the same batch run of cladding was installed were not subject to a recall by JH. Yeah they are real stand up people.

Of course all the ducking, diving and rule changes around this product had nothing to do with the fact that JH were well aware that Fibre cement cladding was failing in the US and Canada (at the same time that JH were undertaking massive advertising campaigns to dupe people into buying crap product by claiming Harditex to be a superior low maintenance cladding)
No of course not.:laugh::laugh::laugh: That would have meant that they mislead the public and conveniently made it near impossible for those incompetent installers to comply with installation instructions (thereby rendering JH free and clear of any blame). You can squirt on about how innocent manufacturer's were in front of people who don't know the truth. But deep down you and I know the truth don't we?

I am not going to dispute that there are many instances where installers (including JH trained and accredited) did some really dumb things. (I never made the the claim otherwise) However, you based on your limited (and biased) observations are factually incorrect and insultingly so. To suggest that it's all the fault of the builders (particularly when you are lumping bonafide builders in with owner builders and are refusing to concede any of the other major contributing factors.) That is plain ignorance and shouldn't be left to uninformed readers to mistake as factual. Narrow minded viewpoints prevent observation of the truths.

Ok so Builders used willingly inferior products , now if you think that hardies is inferior that's fine no point arguing it with you is there, it still however leaves the builder installing it with clearly limited skill and or motivation in doing a good job...............the apparent professional builder failed in his elementary task of building a water tight home.
By your argument I can start a company producing chocolate fudge cake wall cladding and the builder that uses it wont be responsible.

just to level it out, I respect your depth of knowledge here and I understand youre more deeply involved in the industry than I ever was, I am merely speaking from my personal experience in the field as a remotely based rep.

[Grasshopperus]

Hi guys,

I just want to say a big thanks to all the contributors to this thread;
Camsec, crocodile, quasi, dangerous, jimo, and others. This is an extremely eye-opening thread. I've no building know-how (been looking up the various terms like palistrades, eaves, flashings etc so learning heaps) and reading your comments just freaks the hell out of me.

I've got a 60's bungalow with weatherboards, huge frickin' eaves and a tin roof. I gather that as long as I maintain it it'll keep well which is the name of the game eh.

Anyway, how is a non-builder/expert supposed to buy a house nowadays??

When I was looking for my first place a couple of years ago I figured that if a house was 30+ years old and still looked like it was in good nick then it was probably likely to stay that way with normal maintenance. Sounds like if you're looking at something from 1990 onwards you'd need an inspector to take a real good look at it. But that could be another can of worms, how do you ensure that the guy who inspects your place knows about his stuff? And if you do end up seriously looking at a place and do get inspections, well... you might end up paying for 10 inspections before actually buying a place. You'd have to get the inspection done yourself because you wouldn't easily trust an inspection by someone you didn't commission either. These are all further barriers to entry in my opinion.

Also, some other real basic questions
1) Brick and tile is just another cladding option right? A house is still framed the same no matter what the outside is like? Are B&T places immune to this leaky home BS?
2) The steel framing you see advertised looks like a good option but there are different grades of stainless steel as well eh?

Really appreciate all the knowledge you guys are imparting, even when you're disagreeing :)

[Ocean1]

2) The steel framing you see advertised looks like a good option but there are different grades of stainless steel as well eh?


Steel framing isn't stainless steel, it's roll-formed galvanised mild steel.

And done well it probably is a good option, but remember that it's relatively new, and a lack of experience right through the various trades represents a risk. EG: electricians need to understand how to manage wiring running over razor sharp service holes.

[Grasshopperus]

Steel framing isn't stainless steel, it's roll-formed galvanised mild steel.

And done well it probably is a good option, but remember that it's relatively new, and a lack of experience right through the various trades represents a risk. EG: electricians need to understand how to manage wiring running over razor sharp service holes.

Ah right. Why wouldn't they make it out of stainless steel? That sounds like a marketing bonus "It'll never rot/rust!"

[Quasievil]

Ah right. Why wouldn't they make it out of stainless steel? That sounds like a marketing bonus "It'll never rot/rust!"

Cost mate, that would be real expensive

[Ocean1]

Ah right. Why wouldn't they make it out of stainless steel? That sounds like a marketing bonus "It'll never rot/rust!"

Cost to some degree, but any grade of stainless will still be susceptable to some corrosion influences. Guess it's a cost / benefit thing, there's nothing wrong with galvanised steel if it's assembled and fitted out right.

[Spearfish]

Cost to some degree, but any grade of stainless will still be susceptable to some corrosion influences. Guess it's a cost / benefit thing, there's nothing wrong with galvanised steel if it's assembled and fitted out right.

Isn't that how this whole thing started?

[JimO]

[QUOTE=Grasshopperus;1130105435]




1) Brick and tile is just another cladding option right? A house is still framed the same no matter what the outside is like? Are B&T places immune to this leaky home BS?


water pisses through brick, bricks are as waterproof as your socks, the water runs down the inside of the cavity and in a old house down on the foundation , in a house with a slab hopefully along the rebate and out the weep holes, some people block these weep holes to stop draughts, bad move

[dangerous]

They provided information in all of the distributors sites that guided the installer on correct use and installation, Hardies assumed they where dealing with professionals............Oh they werent they where dealing with Monkies making a quick buck at the expense of honest families

:bleh:
Will you stop calling me a MONKEY :facepalm:
Sure that info is there, butr ya have to look for it and any Jo builder or not as a kiwi knows beter so wont look at it, what I ment was obvious as hell on the sheet... then again same applies aye, it would be ignored and used incorectly any way.


Cost to some degree, but any grade of stainless will still be susceptable to some corrosion influences. Guess it's a cost / benefit thing, there's nothing wrong with galvanised steel if it's assembled and fitted out right.
same goes for untreated timber...

I think we have covered many a issue here guys from attude, material, applacation, design, inspection... put it in a big melting pot and its all at fault.

[Quasievil]

Will you stop calling me a MONKEY :facepalm:
Sure that info is there, butr ya have to look for it and any Jo builder or not as a kiwi knows beter so wont look at it, what I ment was obvious as hell on the sheet... then again same applies aye, it would be ignored and used incorectly any way.


Sorry words just used to demonstarte the lesser talented, not you dude, I think all KB knows your fine upstanding reputation in the building industry bro:yes:

[Swoop]

1) Brick and tile is just another cladding option right? A house is still framed the same no matter what the outside is like? Are B&T places immune to this leaky home BS?
Simple answer = No. The timber framing could be untreated, leaks could still occur, etc, etc.

2) The steel framing you see advertised looks like a good option but there are different grades of stainless steel as well eh?
As previously posted, they use galv mild steel.

Also, stainless steel is still just that - stainless. It will still rust... eventually.

[SPman]

If you want a crash course on what not to do and just how bad some buildings and builders are, go out with a decent Building Inspector for a few days - espec. in Auckland, or , probably, any of the major cities.

Just when you think you've seen it all...........:facepalm:


Its not the monotec thats the problem, but the thin arse plaster, use a old school 20mm thick plastering system and no worries at all...like the '30's Stucco addition to a Villa in Herne bay we inspected......the front 3 ft of the house was basically rotting away.......ah...they don't build them like they used too..............:blink:

Steel framing is used a lot in the country around where I now live.(W.A.) (the city still uses traditional double brick) I like the idea of steel roof trusses, but the framing always seems insubstantial and the bracing isn't really up to much. It's OK in areas where we only have 300mm of rain a year and the idea is good, but, I've seen examples of severe corrosion caused by leaks - and you've got to fix everything with screws.
The main reason for using steel, though is termite resistance, not weathering. West Australian builders wouldn't know how to weatherproof a concrete shithouse.
The first week over here, walking around Subiaco (a poshish suburb) I would have failed most of the new buildings, just looking at them from the street, based on a NZ perspective.
Mac is the same, different natural in-built protection and it grows well here but is it OK untreated as a framing timber? It was, last time I looked. There are a lot of timbers that can be used, but most are rare, imported or just plain expensive - and are a bastard to use as framing!

[dangerous]

Sorry words just used to demonstarte the lesser talented, not you dude, I think all KB knows your fine upstanding reputation in the building industry bro:yes:
Fuck, thought you were going to say "in the motor cycling world" :shutup:

[ellipsis]

....macro carpa is one of the finest timbers that, if sourced in clears form, has been likened to rival some of the best boat building,timber materials in the world...alas, a lot of it is destined to end up as firewood and a lot of it is just old and too weather beaten, stressed, to be of much use other than being used as a general purpose timber....i am lucky to have a couple of local millers who give me a call when they drop a tree and it turns out to be good timber, inside...it was brought into disrepute a few years back, by a TV 'expose', and much villified...truth is, again someone used it where it shouldn't be used, it gets bad press, and its classed as an unsuitable timber in exterior applications in some council jurisdictions....yet it is one of the most durable, weather resistant, hassle free....green:facepalm:... cladding that is avaiable.....no money in it for the boys in being sensible though ...not half enough 'PRODUCT' being used...eh....

[SPman]

....macro carpa is one of the finest timbers that, if sourced in clears form, has been likened to rival some of the best boat building,timber materials in the world. Monterey Cypress - far superior to Monterey Pine (radiata). Good straight Mac is lovely to work with, as well.

[Ocean1]

Monterey Cypress - far superior to Monterey Pine (radiata). Good straight Mac is lovely to work with, as well.

I've used it in boatbuilding, is a good material. Just a pity a lot of it is shit from some cockies shelter belt, gives it a bad name.

Haven't used it for spars, bit rubbery.

[Spearfish]

Fresh Rimu is nice...totara...matai......Is that even allowed as a thought?:innocent:

[Laava]

It will still rot put in the same situation as will H3.1 radiata. Which is why the industry std has gone back to H1.2 now from H3.1 for framework.
The trick is to not have those LHS mistakes in your building! So there is a whole raft of do's and don'ts, most of which have been covered ad nauseunm by the building act, some which are common sense and some which are preference.
When you are using many products together, all of which have their own expansion/contraction rate, the problems are waterproofing them relative to each other. Some can be done mechanically and some should be avoided. If you have to use silicon as your main seal, then maybe you need to re-think that option.
Not totally against silicon but I believe it is only good as a gasket, not a bead type seal.
Just my opinion.

[flyingcrocodile46]

It will still rot put in the same situation as will H3.1 radiata. Which is why the industry std has gone back to H1.2 now from H3.1 for framework.
The trick is to not have those LHS mistakes in your building! So there is a whole raft of do's and don'ts, most of which have been covered ad nauseunm by the building act, some which are common sense and some which are preference.
When you are using many products together, all of which have their own expansion/contraction rate, the problems are waterproofing them relative to each other. Some can be done mechanically and some should be avoided. If you have to use silicon as your main seal, then maybe you need to re-think that option.
Not totally against silicon but I believe it is only good as a gasket, not a bead type seal.
Just my opinion.

Notice now that sufficient time has passed since the advent of the LHS, our Govt (DBH) has decided they can safely remove the last remaining bastions of untreated framing (interior wall framing, roof framing and external wall framing behind SIMPLE single story brick homes). The BIA couldn't do it when the LHS first reared its head as that might have been interpreted as an admission that they shouldn't have allowed Chem free framing (Note: it's not untreated as Kiln drying is considered as a form of treatment) in the first place, and that might have made people look a bit harder at the Govt's intent when they dissolved the BIA and indemnified both them and BRANZ under The Cunt Act 2004 whilst proclaiming that homeowners did not have a direct line of reliance on them.:facepalm: That has got to the most dishonorable act that I have seen the NZ govt serve up on its people. :sick:

Fortunately the Govt had the wisdom to create the DBH (to replace the BIA) and employ all those poor retrenched BIA experts and employees who were at the helm when the industry forged its way toward the stinking mess we are in now :rolleyes:Particularly as people were needed to clean up the mess left behind by ..........:yes:

Good weathertightness detailing revolves around the 4D's (Deflection, Drainage, Drying & Durability). Any junction needs and should have two lines of defense. The outer face (or rain screen in the case of cavities) should preferably be sheltered by way of face cover/head flashing/scriber etc (Deflection), but may (though not ideally) rely on a silicone seal at the outer face of the junction. The second line of defense should ideally comprise a water management system (mechanical flashing) that is positioned so as to capture any water that enters past the first line of defense and redirect it either to the exterior or the base of the wall plane (Drainage). Not always easy to do, but it is always do-able.

I have found the biggest sector of the market that resists the above philosophy are designers. Boy how they seethe and squirm when you insist that they detail their wondrous wet dreams to properly demonstrate how their fantasies will meet the NZBC requirements. Many of them are clueless when it comes to the practicalities of building (shockingly so in some cases) and can't see past their pretentious atheistic considerations TODAY. They don't seem to care what it looks like later on when the mushrooms start growing out of it. This sector of the industry is the most irresponsible IMO. Did you know that until very recently that architectural students in NZ have never been required to learn about or demonstrate any knowledge about the NZBC, any design or construction standards, Good practice guides or products? It was not mandatory for them to know anything about construction:shit:. Many of them learned that lesson most thoroughly. :yes:

[flyingcrocodile46]

Leaky homes Financial Assistance Package passed by Parliament
Owners of leaky homes can get their homes fixed faster following the third reading of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services (Financial Assistance Package) Bill in Parliament today, Building and Construction Minister Maurice Williamson says.
Under the $1 billion package, qualifying home owners will receive a 25 per cent contribution from the Government and may receive 25 per cent from their local council. The contributions will be based on actual repair costs.
“Help has been a long time coming but this Government has stepped up to deliver home owners this financial assistance package,” Mr Williamson says.
“I believe this is a fair solution that will assist many leaky home owners to get their homes fixed so they can move on with their lives.”
The package is voluntary and offers an additional option to the current Weathertight Homes Resolution Service. Home owners who discover they have a leaky home must lodge a claim within 10 years of the completion of building work to access the financial assistance package.
“I would urge home owners close to the 10-year limit to ‘stop the clock' by lodging a claim with the Department of Building and Housing now.”
For more information on the financial assistance package visit www.dbh.govt.nz (http://www.dbh.govt.nz/)
Media contact: Anna Rushworth (04) 817 9783 or 021 831 599



25% from the Govt is pretty generous really.:rolleyes:

Especially when they get 60% of that back in the GST take

That makes a net 10% contribution (if you don't count the personal and company income tax which adds up to approximately the same as the remaining 40% of the 25%).

Now that is what I call stepping up to the plate and taking ownership for the 75% extra cost of the disaster that (in the real world) relates to addressing the lack of timber treatment that the Govt allowed in the first instance. FAP is such an appropriate acronym for the scheme too. You gotta admire politicians eh! :niceone:

[jaffaonajappa]

25% huh...

So four FAP's would be 100% satisfaction?

[Laava]

I have found the biggest sector of the market that resists the above philosophy are designers. Boy how they seethe and squirm when you insist that they detail their wondrous wet dreams to properly demonstrate how their fantasies will meet the NZBC requirements. Many of them are clueless when it comes to the practicalities of building (shockingly so in some cases) and can't see past their pretentious atheistic considerations TODAY. They don't seem to care what it looks like later on when the mushrooms start growing out of it. This sector of the industry is the most irresponsible IMO. Did you know that until very recently that architectural students in NZ have never been required to learn about or demonstrate any knowledge about the NZBC, any design or construction standards, Good practice guides or products? It was not mandatory for them to know anything about construction:shit:. Many of them learned that lesson most thoroughly. :yes:

I have come up with this situation exactly with architects. Isn't that your job they say when being asked about details. Some of them genuinely do not know, they are selling a concept and it is up to draughtsmen, designers and engineers to be responsible for the finished product. They are more than happy to be responsible for the profit however.
My son finishes his architectural degree this year and doesn't dream of being an architect. After 5 years, go figure! He also qualified and worked as a draughtsman for a few years before that, so is experienced in what goes on.
Many people have different ideas of what is acceptable and ultimately the responsibility often falls back onto the person who is found to have either installed faulty product/workmanship or the person supervised it.

[Winston001]

25% from the Govt is pretty generous really.:rolleyes:

Especially when they get 60% of that back in the GST take

That makes a net 10% contribution (if you don't count the personal and company income tax which adds up to approximately the same as the remaining 40% of the 25%).




??? Lets say the repair total is $100,000. The Government contributes $25,000.

GST component is $13,000.

That's 13% of the total repair, a helluva long way from 60%. Ok, its about 50% of the goverment's own contribution but that comes from all taxpayers so we should be happy.

The next portion comes from ratepayers which seems a bit rough but thats life.

That leaves 50% from the original builder (probably long gone) etc so really its the house owner.

You assume the builders etc who do the work make a profit on every job and pay 30% tax but in real life it doesn't always work out that way. I know a builder who always went the extra mile and ultimately he'd have been better off working for wages. Sod all profit any year.

[JimO]

I know a builder who always went the extra mile and ultimately he'd have been better off working for wages. Sod all profit any year.

that more common than you would think

[Spearfish]

I have come up with this situation exactly with architects. Isn't that your job they say when being asked about details. Some of them genuinely do not know, they are selling a concept and it is up to draughtsmen, designers and engineers to be responsible for the finished product. They are more than happy to be responsible for the profit however.
My son finishes his architectural degree this year and doesn't dream of being an architect. After 5 years, go figure! He also qualified and worked as a draughtsman for a few years before that, so is experienced in what goes on.
Many people have different ideas of what is acceptable and ultimately the responsibility often falls back onto the person who is found to have either installed faulty product/workmanship or the person supervised it.

Its probably impossible to get a first floor window to comply with any acceptable solution if it has to be left loose because the Rancidtech drew a stairwell to small or full of turns for any type of furniture.
Dont they do any time in the field?

[SPman]

If you have to use silicon as your main seal, then maybe you need to re-think that option.
Not totally against silicon but I believe it is only good as a gasket, not a bead type seal.
Just my opinion.
Not just your opinion. If you have to rely on silicon, or a similar substance for waterproofing, you've lost the plot!
It's amazing how many experienced builders, only had a rudimentary grasp of flashing details and how persistent water entry can be.....

I have come up with this situation exactly with architects. Isn't that your job they say when being asked about details.Architects...aaaaargh! Run ins with Architects would be one of our major hassles, in my inspectors life. The "I'm the Architect, I'm right and you're just a useless fucking Inspector" routine, was common amongst a small group of fairly prominent people. Didn't wash with some of us and near fisticuff "discussions" about detailing were often played out ....
By their (rotting) works shall ye know them.....

[Paul in NZ]

I suspect architects are a bit like ad agencies. They design their products to win industry awards rather than to meet the clients specific needs....

The both times we used their services we both thought they were total nut jobs and obviously speaking a strange foreign language that seemed like english except all the words had different meanings...

Usually - once you got speaking to the draughstman you were OK.

Still - my uncle the builder gave us the best advice when we were being pressured into a monolithic clad lego box. "FFS - its a house, a house where it rains a lot is a fucking square box with a pitched roof and big eaves and anything else is a reciepe for disaster....'

[Swoop]

I suspect architects are a bit like ad agencies. They design their products to win industry awards rather than to meet the clients specific needs.
Correct. Most of them appear to treat a job as a way to make another monument to themself. An award is just the cherry on top.






Your uncle is a wise man...

[Spearfish]

Perhaps when budding architects were building sand castles on a beach their parents were to busy with the "he will be an architect one day" and forgot to explain to the kid why the castle went away....



But then you have to ask if the founders of Christchurch were explained that little detail as well:shutup:

[Paul in NZ]

But then you have to ask if the founders of Christchurch were explained that little detail as well:shutup:

It was mostly later generations that built in the red zone.

CBD was a different story. ChCh has hung onto old buildings for yonks and a lot of the stuff that fell down was marginal use / small business stuff and getting very scruffy. The bigger / newer buildings - well - I dunno....

Pretty well could happen anyplace in NZ....

[dangerous]

But then you have to ask if the founders of Christchurch were explained that little detail as well:shutup:

It was mostly later generations that built in the red zone.

CBD was a different story. ChCh has hung onto old buildings for yonks and a lot of the stuff that fell down was marginal use / small business stuff and getting very scruffy. The bigger / newer buildings - well - I dunno....

Pretty well could happen anyplace in NZ....
Also take a river map of CHCH from the 50's and over lay it on todays map... ahhh so changing the courses of the river ways to make the city "pretter" wasnt the brightest idea, IIRC under the CTV building was 5 rivers crossing paths... :facepalm:

[BMWST?]

[B]Light weight concrete is ok but is also reliant on cavities and in most instances is incapable of supporting itself (needs structural support... usually by timber or steel framing). It is also very permeable (unlike concrete).

not alwyays,for instance the Wellington Stadium was an excercise in lightweight concrete
The problem with tilt slab is that it is heavy making foundations and bracing more extensive.They use a fair bit of concrete in parts of spain

[flyingcrocodile46]

not alwyays,for instance the Wellington Stadium was an excercise in lightweight concrete
The problem with tilt slab is that it is heavy making foundations and bracing more extensive.They use a fair bit of concrete in parts of spain


Yes you are quite right. It is often used as part of suspended floor systems with point loads and heavier ULD's performed by steel of insitu reinforced concrete. It is also used as wall panels, both with and without cavities but (ASFAI) again requires a support frame of some description. I actually quite like the Hebal products when proper thought is put into the application and detailing for weathertightness.

[BMWST?]

its not just architects...as a prenailer i often have "discussions" with architects and draughtsmen about the real world application of trigonometry.Why oh why they draw such complex roof shapes with a hip and a valley within 200 mm of each other.

[flyingcrocodile46]

its not just architects...as a prenailer i often have "discussions" with architects and draughtsmen about the real world application of trigonometry.Why oh why they draw such complex roof shapes with a hip and a valley within 200 mm of each other.

Heh! Or show doors into Attic bedrooms under valleys at junctions to exterior walls that are only a metre high. Lol.

I had my own truss and prenail plant for a couple of years. Started off hand ramming my trusses and had to do all my first multi plane truss detailing job manually as proof to Gangnail that I was worthy of a Mitek license. The web cut detailing and truncated trusses made my head hurt:yes:. Though have since done some more challenging detailing the hard way.

[BMWST?]

Heh! Or show doors into Attic bedrooms at the valleys Lol.

I had my own truss and prenail plant for a couple of years. Started off hand ramming my trusses and had to do all my first multi plane truss detailing job manually as proof to Gangnail that I was worthy of a Mitek license. The web cut detailing and truncated trusses made my head hurt:yes:. Though have since done some more challenging detailing the hard way.

i been detailing for a LOONG time now and i still get jobs that make my head hurt

[Winston001]

I admire you guys for doing the hard practical work. :2thumbsup:

Must say I was startled years ago when I learned architects genuinely believed their job was purely to envisage a unique structure. The rest of it was for the builder to figure out. :facepalm:

[dangerous]

I admire you guys for doing the hard practical work. :2thumbsup:

Must say I was startled years ago when I learned architects genuinely believed their job was purely to envisage a unique structure. The rest of it was for the builder to figure out. :facepalm:
thats a bout it in a nut shell... umm spent a bit of time in the office today so off loaded a few pics of damage caused by, buildings I have repaired... if ya's are interested I can resize and post up, you will be amazed the extent of internal damage before it shows through inside or out side.

[flyingcrocodile46]

thats a bout it in a nut shell... umm spent a bit of time in the office today so off loaded a few pics of damage caused by, buildings I have repaired... if ya's are interested I can resize and post up, you will be amazed the extent of internal damage before it shows through inside or out side.

This top plate on a deck balustrade disintegrated when I exhaled on it (no visible sign of damage other than a hairline crack between the capping and the wall)
243250


This shows the difference between untreated timber and treated timber when it gets wet. Yup! that's a cantilevered deck sitting on that rotting mush. Again, no visible indication of damage prior to removing the cladding to check it out.

243251

[JimO]

thats harditex yea?? where did the water get in, around the joists??

[Spearfish]

thats a bout it in a nut shell... umm spent a bit of time in the office today so off loaded a few pics of damage caused by, buildings I have repaired... if ya's are interested I can resize and post up, you will be amazed the extent of internal damage before it shows through inside or out side.

Go for it the flying crock has got the ball rolling

[flyingcrocodile46]

thats harditex yea?? where did the water get in, around the joists??


Yes, mostly at the un-flashed joist penetrations and also a little moisture entry through defects in the horizontal band and the h flashing/jointer behind it (which is in line with the bottom of the joists). Also a little contribution from an un-flashed door sill above the deck.

[dangerous]

Yes, mostly at the un-flashed joist penetrations and also a little moisture entry through defects in the horizontal band and the h flashing/jointer behind it (which is in line with the bottom of the joists). Also a little contribution from an un-flashed door sill above the deck.
and I find through hairline cracks common at the edges of plastic mouldings/flashings as the plaster is so thin, its amazing how so much water can get through a crack so fine.

[JimO]

funny how water will piss through a fine crack but a leaf will block a drain hole

[flyingcrocodile46]

funny how water will piss through a fine crack but a leaf will block a drain hole

Yes. Part of that "funny" is about air pressure equalisation between the interior and exterior. Surface water pasing over small gaps in an otherwise sealed cladding system (monolitic) will get sucked in through those small gaps by air as it passes through those same gaps while pressure is equalising. This can occur in hundreds of cycles during any given day (as wind pressure fluctualtes while it is raining). Which is why air seals were introduced at high risk junctions (like window & door joinery) where the junction spans between exterior and interior wall linings.

[Quasievil]

Clearly the fault of the Harditex lol.................not

[flyingcrocodile46]

Clearly the fault of the Harditex lol.................not

The expansion and contraction rates of HT exceeds the capacity of the jointing system and sealant details (mandated by JH) to absorbe the movement without cracking. No doubt (in your biased opinion) that is the fault of the builder who installs it as well :facepalm: .

Clearly NZ builders should have known exactly what sort of a shit product JH were inflicting on the NZ market under the guise of New generation low maintenance cladding systems.

Of course the fact that JH pulled it off the market (would no doubt in your biased opinion) be soley as a result of the inability of builders to correctly install such a (cough) fine product, rather than any failure of the product.

Quite obviously the manufacturer shouldn't be expected to be accountable for knowing just how shit their product was untill it failed so badly that everyone stopped buying it and they had to remove it from the market. It must have been the builders fault.

That'd be why JH write all those big cheques at confidential settlements. That and so that the increasingly rare dickheads who defend the product can stand tall and talk crap with impunity.

[Quasievil]

The expansion and contraction rates of HT exceeds the capacity of the jointing system and sealant details (mandated by JH) to absorbe the movement without cracking. No doubt (in your biased opinion) that is the fault of the builder who installs it as well :facepalm: .

Clearly NZ builders should have known exactly what sort of a shit product JH were inflicting on the NZ market under the guise of New generation low maintenance cladding systems.

Of course the fact that JH pulled it off the market (would no doubt in your biased opinion) be soley as a result of the inability of builders to correctly install such a (cough) fine product, rather than any failure of the product.

Quite obviously the manufacturer shouldn't be expected to be accountable for knowing just how shit their product was untill it failed so badly that everyone stopped buying it and they had to remove it from the market. It must have been the builders fault.

That'd be why JH write all those big cheques at confidential settlements. That and so that the increasingly rare dickheads who defend the product can stand tall and talk crap with impunity.

lol so the builder didnt put in the rtequired control and expansion joints then ?

case closed, it was the stupid builder..................again

Product works fine until you get monkies using it.

Why did the builder use untreated timber? cant have been a very good builder it would be 101 building knowledge that untreated pine would rot

why where the flashings etc so poor ? builder Im picking didnt do it properly or manage his contract properly, or is the fault of the flashing supplier ?

Builders are to blame period, they are "the professional" and should have the knowledge and skills to construct a building using good quality products correctly, if he cant do either then he is solely to blame.

[Quasievil]

Of course the fact that JH pulled it off the market

They didnt, they replaced it with Monotek which is a system as builders where to stupid to build anything with intelligence i.e with flashings (as per instructions), so a simple system had to be developed for the morons.

[flyingcrocodile46]

lol so the builder didnt put in the rtequired control and expansion joints then ?

case closed, it was the stupid builder..................again

You really are full of it today aren't you.

No control/expansion joints were required in relation to these defects.

Case closed, stupid product sales rep thought he had a clue.:laugh:



Product works fine until you get monkies using it.

Why did the builder use untreated timber? cant have been a very good builder it would be 101 building knowledge that untreated pine would rot

:facepalm: Do you know anything at all about building , The Building Act, Building regulations, NZBC B2, NZS3602. No! Quite obviously not....

The mandatory requirement for chemical timber treatment was removed in favour of kiln drying by the Govt of the time at the insistence of the Green movement (& Party) and after considerable lobbying by Carters, Pinex, Winstones & even James Hardies in support of non chemical treated kiln dried framing. Tight fisted and environmentally friendly owner builders, developers, designers and home buyers drove the actual decisions to use it.

Though James Hardies took that freedom of choice away for the fools who elected to use their crappy Harditex cladding, as it was a mandatory system requirement for use of KD (kiln dried) framing for boundary joists and chemical treated KD was generally only run to order so wasn't readily available) Of course as a technical rep for Hardies you wouldn't have a fucking clue about minor technical details such as that or you wouldn't have planted your feet so firmly in your mouth by asking such a dumb arse question while berating others for their lack of technical knowledge eh! :yes:



why where the flashings etc so poor ? builder Im picking didnt do it properly or manage his contract properly, or is the fault of the flashing supplier ?

Builders are to blame period, they are "the professional" and should have the knowledge and skills to construct a building using good quality products correctly, if he cant do either then he is solely to blame.

What flashings? The James Hardies monolithic cladding SYSTEM technical instructions and data sheets didn't show any such requirements for the balustrade junctions (along with many other junctions) and the standards of the day weren't intended to convey or cater for the requirements for Alternative solution monolithic cladding SYSTEMS introduced by the likes of Hardies. It was over to the manufacturer/distributor to take responsibility (by way of detailing) for the theoretical compliance of the products with the requirements of the NZBC. JH failed to provide technical details showing how compliance could be achieved by their specialised product in over half of the out of the ordinary applications that they advertised the product as being able to do. So they are even less blameless than the monkeys who did follow their instructions, (as in the failed SYSTEM PVC 'h' flashing pictured at the base of the joists) which failed to prevent moisture ingress in other areas which were isolated from other contributing junctions:yes:


They didnt, they replaced it with Monotek which is a system as builders where to stupid to build anything with intelligence i.e with flashings (as per instructions), so a simple system had to be developed for the morons.

They replaced it with a more stable product (which is still prone to delamination) as they came to realise that their crappy harditex product was expanding and contracting at rates which exceeded the capacity of the jointing system and sealant details (mandated by JH) to absorb the movement without cracking and therefore failing to meet the 15 year minimum life expectancy for a cladding system.

I.e product failure. Much like your postings in this thread.:yes:

You aren't going to waste any more of my time as you have clearly demonstrated a proclivity to spout off complete bullshit in support of a factually baseless bias toward attributing blame for a systemic failure on only one of many of the responsible industry sectors while in complete denial of patently obvious truths. So you may as well STFU

[dangerous]

lol so the builder didnt put in the rtequired control and expansion joints then ? only required after a certain length of wall has been reached. Maybe JH should re look at their requirments?


case closed, it was the stupid builder..................again hey...



Product works fine until you get monkies using it.
HEY... dident we have words over this generlising :facepalm:



Why did the builder use untreated timber? cant have been a very good builder it would be 101 building knowledge that untreated pine would rotWHY... should he? untreated is perficly adiquit, ever a poor builder knows that.


why where the flashings etc so poor ? builder Im picking didnt do it properly or manage his contract properly, or is the fault of the flashing supplier ?depending on the situation, HOWEVER the builder just does as the CONCENTED plan tells him to.


Builders are to blame period,
they are "the professional" and should have the knowledge and skills to construct a building using good quality products correctly, if he cant do either then he is solely to blame.NOW... ya getting my farking goat up man... honestly ya full of shit on this one aye, why? easy If the builder has built to the concenting plan as have his subbies then he has done his job well, we CAN NOT ulter the plan to suit ourselves, we do as we are told, right or wrong, simple as that.

Just to add however, yes a builder like any of his subbies should they do a sub standard job YES they are to blame and it does happen, but only a small part of the problem.
Now fark off and sell some leathers...

[dangerous]

Go for it the flying crock has got the ball rolling... OK

The following photos are from a 10 year old block of 4 units in Whitleigh ave just down from tower jnt.
The extent of the timbers damage was bearly noticable inside and out side, you have to know what to look out for.

NOTE: THE BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED CORRECT AND TO REGULATIONS OF THE COUNCIL AND SUPLYERS OF MATERIALS USED (including James Hardie's fixing methods)

243297 243296 243299 243300 243301 243298

[dangerous]

These photos show new building methods now used like PEF rod, expanding foam, cavity, breathing type building wrap, saddle flashings and cill tape.



243302 243303 243304

[Quasievil]

You really are full of it today aren't you.

No control/expansion joints were required in relation to these defects.

Case closed, stupid product sales rep thought he had a clue.:laugh:

How would we know, I dont know the measurement of said wall. I would put money on the fact that there would be know expansion or control joints however.
And the timber wouldnt have moved whilst soaking up all this water eh?
did the Balustrade top have a 30 deg angle on it as specd? no ? really !!
Was there a waterproof membrane ? no? really !!
Stoopid leaky homes inspector didnt know that was in the manual did he ?



& even James Hardies in support of non chemical treated kiln dried framing. Tight fisted and environmentally friendly owner builders, developers, designers and home buyers drove the actual decisions to use it.

I dont recall JH as advocating that at all, but you would know as being such an expert.
I believe tho that the builders developers, designers drove to use it as a cost cutting measure to strive for competitiveness which aligns completely with my arguement. Mum and Dad did want a cheaper house but they didnt advocate for KD framing did they (what a stoopid thing to suggest)


Though James Hardies took that freedom of choice away for the fools who elected to use their crappy Harditex cladding, as it was a mandatory system requirement for use of KD (kiln dried) framing for boundary joists and chemical treated KD was generally only run to order so wasn't readily available) Of course as a technical rep for Hardies you wouldn't have a fucking clue about minor technical details such as that or you wouldn't have planted your feet so firmly in your mouth by asking such a dumb arse question while berating others for their lack of technical knowledge eh! :yes:

ah ha, who used it ? who used the "crappy timber" and the alleged "crappy harditex"
are you going to say the builder ?
(builder being the developer also.)




What flashings? The James Hardies monolithic cladding SYSTEM technical instructions and data sheets didn't show any such requirements for the balustrade junctions (along with many other junctions) and the standards of the day weren't intended to convey or cater for the requirements for Alternative solution monolithic cladding SYSTEMS introduced by the likes of Hardies. It was over to the manufacturer/distributor to take responsibility (by way of detailing) for the theoretical compliance of the products with the requirements of the NZBC. JH failed to provide technical details showing how compliance could be achieved by their specialised product in over half of the out of the ordinary applications that they advertised the product as being able to do. So they are even less blameless than the monkeys who did follow their instructions, (as in the failed SYSTEM PVC 'h' flashing pictured at the base of the joists) which failed to prevent moisture ingress in other areas which were isolated from other contributing junctions:yes:

You are very incorrect there actually, there where many many drawings supporting the various junctions including balustrades junctions so Im not sure what youre on about on this point, the harditex manual accomodated most of them.
the failure of skill lead to the "out of ordinary" junctions etc to be constructed suitably, as did the stupid Architects demanding unrealistic requirements from products (all products)
it was readily available in the technical data information, those books that the builders refused to read.
And besides a builder doesnt know how to do a junction ? really, whos fault is that JH ............HA laughable !!




They replaced it with a more stable product (which is still prone to delamination) as they came to realise that their crappy harditex product was expanding and contracting at rates which exceeded the capacity of the jointing system and sealant details (mandated by JH) to absorb the movement without cracking and therefore failing to meet the 15 year minimum life expectancy for a cladding system.

God what bollocks, if installed correctly there is no issue, there a freckin thousands of homes working fine with HT product as the cladding.



I.e product failure. Much like your postings in this thread.:yes:

If you think that fine im ok with it.


You aren't going to waste any more of my time as you have clearly demonstrated a proclivity to spout off complete bullshit in support of a factually baseless bias toward attributing blame for a systemic failure on only one of many of the responsible industry sectors while in complete denial of patently obvious truths. So you may as well STFU

Actually no, I think youre in denial completely, youre basically saying that the individual or organisation responsible for erecting these leaky homes are blameless and its all the material manufacturers fault and the fault of those that legislated in non treated timber.
My argument is completely that the builders and or the organisations responsible for erecting these leaky buildings are 100 % responsible for failing to construct a weather tight building, the choice of materials WAS the choice of the builder it WAS his name on the job, It WAS his professional responsibility to use materials to ensure that performed.

I'm pleased you arent going to waste your time further as youre 100% dillusional about WHO is responsible for building a house.
I bet you expect your Doctor to be responsible for your medical issues ?
But I guess that's a different level of professionalism.

As a settling comment, Im well aware of some fantastic builders out there, they didnt get involved in cost cutting and corner cutting which lead to this issue, many of them where my customers and they have some excellent homes built out of JH products without issue, Im sure Dangerous bastard is one of them:yes:.

[BMWST?]

so the harditex parapet capping with no actual metal cover flashing was an approved harditex detail?
Surely the joist penetration of the cladding had a proper flashing detail?

[Woodman]

Cool thread, but what signs do you look out for if you have a home in this date range?

[Quasievil]

NOW... ya getting my farking goat up man... honestly ya full of shit on this one aye, why? easy If the builder has built to the concenting plan as have his subbies then he has done his job well, we CAN NOT ulter the plan to suit ourselves, we do as we are told, right or wrong, simple as that.

Just to add however, yes a builder like any of his subbies should they do a sub standard job YES they are to blame and it does happen, but only a small part of the problem.
Now fark off and sell some leathers...

I understand that Dangerous, my point to that would be if the builder in this situation HAD to do what was on the plan then the Plan "owner" (developer, architect) is then "the builder"

[Quasievil]

so the harditex parapet capping with no actual metal cover flashing was an approved harditex detail?
Surely the joist penetration of the cladding had a proper flashing detail?

Flyingcroc will be the expert of course here, but I recall clearly a waterproof membrane was required it had to cover the top (top with a peak and a 15 deg drop each side) and 200mm each side it could be fibreglass or from memory a rubber type product (cant think of the name of it)
No one ever did that tho, it was usually flat topped, no membrane and a thin coating over top.

Yes there most definately was a flashing detail Harditex technical information detail drawing #68 parapet detail

[Spearfish]

Cool thread, but what signs do you look out for if you have a home in this date range?

DESPERATE OWNERS WANTING A QUICK SALE!!
or some are doing a quick repaint just before putting it on the market...read into that what you will.

If you need a bank loan they often insist as part of the loan conditions that a servey for water tightness is conducted and passed especially if its a monolithic cladding. A bank lending manager wasn't keen at all on the polystyrene cladding if the mortgage was high.

[Spearfish]

... OK

The following photos are from a 10 year old block of 4 units in Whitleigh ave just down from tower jnt.
The extent of the timbers damage was bearly noticable inside and out side, you have to know what to look out for.

NOTE: THE BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED CORRECT AND TO REGULATIONS OF THE COUNCIL AND SUPLYERS OF MATERIALS USED (including James Hardie's fixing methods)



What a fucken depressing sight, let alone the work of pulling that shit apart far enough to get a sound base to build up from.

How the hell do you price a job like that.

[dangerous]

I recall clearly a waterproof membrane was required it had to cover the top (top with a peak and a 15 deg drop each side) and 200mm each side it could be fibreglass or from memory a rubber type product (cant think of the name of it)
No one ever did that tho, it was usually flat topped, no membrane and a thin coating over top.

Yes there most definately was a flashing detail Harditex technical information detail drawing #68 parapet detail
sorry not meaning to be a smart arse n all... but, 1st I have heard of it, can you please back this up with the documents of THAT era and post em here?

BECAUSE... if this is the case then the council is to blame NOT the farking monkey, I mean builder.


so the harditex parapet capping with no actual metal cover flashing was an approved harditex detail?
Surely the joist penetration of the cladding had a proper flashing detail?

Yes and yes.. you can see that detail in my photo's it is a plastic mould typical of a external corner 'under' the plaster.

[ellipsis]

...a pushing shit uphill thread for both parties really...if you are going to combine a less than up to standard product...which is a whole fucking lot of them, greed from all angles and a brainwashed consumer...there is going to be shit...a lot of brainlessness all round...I walked away from the last ticky tacky, product driven, under engineered, council inspector driven job, knowing I had done it to the highest spec I could....feeling sad that this is what our world has become...no thought for the future and a materialistic, money grabbing bunch of small minded twats steering the ship...and they are all buddies....

[Quasievil]

sorry not meaning to be a smart arse n all... but, 1st I have heard of it, can you please back this up with the documents of THAT era and post em here?

BECAUSE... if this is the case then the council is to blame NOT the farking monkey, I mean builder.



Yes and yes.. you can see that detail in my photo's it is a plastic mould typical of a external corner 'under' the plaster.

I would love to, I dont have any of these booklets anymore, I left like 8 years ago dude.
I know they existed though, I used them on more than one occasion.

[Spearfish]

...a pushing shit uphill thread for both parties really...if you are going to combine a less than up to standard product...which is a whole fucking lot of them, greed from all angles and a brainwashed consumer...there is going to be shit...a lot of brainlessness all round...I walked away from the last ticky tacky, product driven, under engineered, council inspector driven job, knowing I had done it to the highest spec I could....feeling sad that this is what our world has become...no thought for the future and a materialistic, money grabbing bunch of small minded twats steering the ship...and they are all buddies....

Bloody Nora! lol

Does it still leak?

[JimO]

How the hell do you price a job like that.

think of a number and double it and you will probably still be under

[ellipsis]

Bloody Nora! lol

Does it still leak?

...perversely ..it has come through the earthquakes pretty much unscathed , the owners think it is just the bee's knees and with a big eave it seems well protected from the worst of our weather...time will tell...I wont be building any more of them though...

[flyingcrocodile46]

How the hell do you price a job like that.

Price it as if it's a new building on an empty site then add 25% to 75% for removing the cladding and replacing anywhere between 5 to 50% of the framing.

That'll fix the building but you need to double that amount again it if you want to get an idea of how much it costs in total (when you include personal damages for trauma, accommodation and the money spent on legal costs & experts fees for all the parties involved in litigation):yes:

The litigation side of it is such a waste of good money after bad. It really is a crying shame some way can't be found to get people to come to the party without protracted mediation and/or determinations as it would likely halve the cost to the country as a whole. But the sums involved don't readily fly out of wallets.

[Dodgy_Matt]

I would love to, I dont have any of these booklets anymore, I left like 8 years ago dude.
I know they existed though, I used them on more than one occasion.

Yes existed, but The manuals are removed from the councils library’s by JH when they update any manual, and then there is no record of the said older manual.
If you asked for a product manual from JH for when your house was built they just say no, sorry they have been updated and send you a new version.

The reason JH does not pay-out in claims is that there is no record or manual for the time your house was built and its hard to dispute in court in front of a Judge if you can’t prove that you installed the JH product to the at the time specifications.

And on a side note, Council only are able to enforce the CODE which is produced/governed/implemented by the Government. The Council does not have any real input into the make up the of the Building Code or the Building Act, they are only there to enforce it.

If you have issues with any part of the code.. no point arguing with the Council... take it up with the DBH (Department of building and Housing) or the Housing Minister..

[flyingcrocodile46]

Yes existed, but The manuals are removed from the councils library’s by JH when they update any manual, and then there is no record of the said older manual.
If you asked for a product manual from JH for when your house was built they just say no, sorry they have been updated and send you a new version.

The reason JH does not pay-out in claims is that there is no record or manual for the time your house was built and its hard to dispute in court in front of a Judge if you can’t prove that you installed the JH product to the at the time specifications.

And on a side note, Council only are able to enforce the CODE which is produced/governed/implemented by the Government. The Council does not have any real input into the make up the of the Building Code or the Building Act, they are only there to enforce it.

If you have issues with any part of the code.. no point arguing with the Council... take it up with the DBH (Department of building and Housing) or the Housing Minister..

I (as have others) have copies of all of them along with those of other manufacturers and product types. Also have almost all the old BRANZ bulletins and some historical appraisals and a library of historic and current standards. There are sizable libraries are out there.

Your summation of the role of councils (and other BCA's to a degree) is correct, but they must fairly assess and (when appropriate) approve alternative solutions rather than simply mandate and 'enforce' acceptable solutions. If you know your onions you can force them to allow you to do it your way (as long as it is actually correct and not simply a misguided conviction that it is correct and appropriate.. as is most often the case)

If they don't and you have a substantive, sound and properly documented explanation of the basis on which you believe compliance can and will be achieved, then you can apply for a determination from the DBH. All parties must follow their directions. However the DBH will tell you that you have to follow the process of application through the BCA to its conclusion (BCA rejection of your application or application for amendment to consent) before they will proceed to a determination.

[SPman]

And on a side note, Council only are able to enforce the CODE which is produced/governed/implemented by the Government
We also enforced the Standards as applicable to the methods of construction being used.
It's a worry how often we had to tell a supposed qualified builder to correct basic building structure fuck ups as not complying with NZS3604 or whatever, let alone the code or approved plans.......

[Quasievil]

It's a worry how often we had to tell a supposed qualified builder to correct basic building structure fuck ups as not complying with NZS3604 or whatever, let alone the code or approved plans.......

Wow I actually can agree with you for once.
My point entirely.

[SPman]

Wow I actually can agree with you for once.
My point entirely.
Whoa, easy there Tonto......the most problems we did encounter involved hardietex somewhere in the equation......regardless of the ability of the builders......

[Quasievil]

Tell me guys what was the cheapest cladding option per square metre around at the time ?

[flyingcrocodile46]

Tell me guys what was the cheapest cladding option per square metre around at the time ?

Corrugated iron &/or ply, at a guess, and I can't be arsed digging up my dusty old price books (I once had a very small unsuccessful building supply, truss and prenail business)

Probably didn't get used as much because no one was continuously promoting them on TV and other media as the Bee's knees in superior technological innovation and low low (did I say 'low') maintenance. (at a guess)

[BMWST?]

Corrugated iron &/or ply.

Probably didn't get used as much because no one was continuously promoting them on TV and other media as the Bee's knees in superior technological innovation and low low (did I say 'low') maintenance. (at a guess)

good old hardiflex probably...but that had a proper jointing system which people didnt like the look of

[dangerous]

good old hardiflex probably...but that had a proper jointing system which people didnt like the look of
piss of it did... the shit breaks down reguardless of the jointer type.

[BMWST?]

piss of it did... the shit breaks down reguardless of the jointer type.

that wasnt the question...it was..what was the cheapest

[Quasievil]

Would it be reasonable to suggest that money was the biggest contributor to the situation we are currently in.
The cheapest possible method in doing and specifying everything to the point where we now have this issue.

[flyingcrocodile46]

that wasnt the question...it was..what was the cheapest

Yes but by what measure. Many measure cost on a whole of life time basis, in which case initial and ongoing painting (not required for ply or galv iron) along with other cladding specific maintenance costs have to be added in. I don't think fibre cement products would fare well in that comparison.

[flyingcrocodile46]

Would it be reasonable to suggest that money was the biggest contributor to the situation we are currently in.
The cheapest possible method in doing and specifying everything to the point where we now have this issue.

:yes: Post # 76 :yes:


The fact that (IMO) the lions share of builders negligence lies at the feet of the owner builders who had no clue as to the hidden costs in all the details that weren't shown on their $1000 set of plans and who, though pushing the envelope of their finances right at the start, decided (in their infinite wisdom) that they would save tens of thousand$ by using unqualified labour only contractors and cheap (uncontrolled) subbies who had priced poorly scoped (by the ignorant) contracts which frequently resulted in under lapping responsibilities and countless un-budgeted requirements. As I recall, these people couldn't afford to finish their builds and would knowingly cut corners. In my experience I estimate more than half of the houses built between the mid eighties and beyond 2000 were built by owner builders. Where are they now?

The market were provided the level of competence that they demanded of the industry. Every house buyer shares in that responsibility.

[Quasievil]

Well that resolves it then :yes:
a combination of poor workmanship, cheap materials, poor specification, based on financial pressures of many types resulted in the situation.
Certainly not one of any of the above is a single contributor even a cladding system but a combination of many things.

If I have contradicted a previous statement made by me that would be because I did some research about the latest scenarios that have come to light via the net, I read a few court summarizations which where very interesting.

Im going to let it lie there I think

[dangerous]

Well that resolves it then :yes:
a combination of poor workmanship, cheap materials, poor specification, based on financial pressures of many types resulted in the situation.
Certainly not one of any of the above is a single contributor even a cladding system but a combination of many things.
Hell yes, aint no one thing thats for farking real... mate a biger bitch than Hardies I have is polystirene



Would it be reasonable to suggest that money was the biggest contributor to the situation we are currently in.
The cheapest possible method in doing and specifying everything to the point where we now have this issue.Yes... ahhh the kiwi way aye, get what ya pay for.




that wasnt the question...it was..what was the cheapest I know, and agree that it was and is hardies.

[BMWST?]

Yes but by what measure. Many measure cost on a whole of life time basis, in which case initial and ongoing painting (not required for ply or galv iron) along with other cladding specific maintenance costs have to be added in. I don't think fibre cement products would fare well in that comparison.

no arguement here,but many many many budgets are pushed to the limit so the cheapest initaial outlay is the one that gets chosen

[Quasievil]

I know, and agree that it was and is hardies.

I can remember it was Hardies also, poly (from memory came in cheaper) so if we couple this with everything else it was inevitable.

[BMWST?]

I can remember it was Hardies also, poly (from memory came in cheaper) so if we couple this with everything else it was inevitable.

and add in chemical free framing :shit:

[dangerous]

and add in chemical free framing :shit:fark me... thats how it should be YOU CAN NOT BLAME THIS SHIT ON THE FRAMING wetness shouldent get in that far :facepalm:

[flyingcrocodile46]

no arguement here,but many many many budgets are pushed to the limit so the cheapest initaial outlay is the one that gets chosen

Indeed. Likely more than 90% of the time.


Well that resolves it then :yes:
a combination of poor workmanship, cheap materials, poor specification, based on financial pressures of many types resulted in the situation.
Certainly not one of any of the above is a single contributor even a cladding system but a combination of many things.

If I have contradicted a previous statement made by me that would be because I did some research about the latest scenarios that have come to light via the net, I read a few court summarizations which where very interesting.

Im going to let it lie there I think

I applaud your effort to research the facts of the issue :niceone: but I don't read it as a concession.

An idea as to just how crippling this problem is for the country
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/leaky-buildings/news/article.cfm?c_id=562&objectid=10634983

There is a growing consensus that the economic cost of the leaky homes crisis is in the vicinity of $11.3 billion and involves about 42,000 dwellings. It is a calamity of huge proportions, but because politicians and bureaucrats rather than God are to blame, no one wants to accept responsibility.
More likely double that amount but we don't want to devalue our credit rating too much so we'll call it 11 billion for 42000


A lot of relevant (and mostly factual) information was out there from 2002
Background doc produced for the Govt in late 2002
http://www.parliament.nz/NR/rdonlyres/464AB9F9-B197-4B53-BE9F-4F411CB67877/360/0210LeakyBuildings1.pdf

Mostly built on the very informative (and less politically corrected) Hunn report from Feb 2002
http://www.stepupgroup.co.nz/files/32682.pdf

[BMWST?]

fark me... thats how it should be YOU CAN NOT BLAME THIS SHIT ON THE FRAMING wetness shouldent get in that far :facepalm:

agree totally.even treated framing would result in the same scenario we in now.....eventually

[flyingcrocodile46]

fark me... thats how it should be YOU CAN NOT BLAME THIS SHIT ON THE FRAMING wetness shouldent get in that far :facepalm:

Except that there has never been a period in our history where that has been achieved. It was reckless to believe it could be and made no provision for the effects of thermal moisture.

[flyingcrocodile46]

agree totally.even treated framing would result in the same scenario we in now.....eventually

Maybe? if we completely ignored the warning signs and performed no maintenance on our house stock.... Oh!


With treated framing, targeted repairs would have been a practical and viable alternative. (like in the good old days)

Remediation costs would be more than halved.

[Dodgy_Matt]

Worst thing is ... buildings with cavity systems are leaking.
Just had a building intown re-clad with cavity system 3 years ago and its leaking worse than before...

[Spearfish]

that wasnt the question...it was..what was the cheapest

I thought the 310mm hardie planks were.

[Spearfish]

Worst thing is ... buildings with cavity systems are leaking.
Just had a building in town re-clad with cavity system 3 years ago and its leaking worse than before...

`
I know of one leaking more now than before.It seems the air gap in certain circumstances lets wind driven rain drive up under the cladding on the second story. The section of wall is above a lower roof and from all accounts the flashing was taped over the top edge and there is the plastic thing along the bottom. The latest guess is there is a tear in the plastic membrane or the water is working through the nail holes in the battens.
I think they are asking to much of any building paper though.

[porky]

Corrugated iron &/or ply, at a guess, and I can't be arsed digging up my dusty old price books (I once had a very small unsuccessful building supply, truss and prenail business)

Probably didn't get used as much because no one was continuously promoting them on TV and other media as the Bee's knees in superior technological innovation and low low (did I say 'low') maintenance. (at a guess)

How about Life Cycle Costs of Cladding Report No 75. No i arnt an anally attentive sole. Went hunting for something else today and this fell out. Its the 1997 edition and for the info you are pretty much bang on. Ply sheet is no 1 followed by block masonry, then the old hardiplank wb

[flyingcrocodile46]

Worst thing is ... buildings with cavity systems are leaking.
Just had a building intown re-clad with cavity system 3 years ago and its leaking worse than before...


Yeah! I do overflow inspections for ACC and the stuff you see :facepalm:

Until all the guys on the tools (and plenty of designers) understand the mechanics of surface water transport (even the simple ones like gravity) in relation to building shapes, cladding system limitations, material compatibilities etc, etc, we will keep seeing gaping wounds, bridge and funnel building.

Gone are the days when a builder only had to know and understand the simple rules around the use of three or four cladding systems in simple safe featureless (risk-less) designs. We now have literally hundreds of differing permutations of a hundred or more different types of cladding systems and ever more imaginative and risky design features to choose from.

Like all the differing types and applications for differing timber treatments (which has just been simplified by comprehensive culling because it was finally recognised as an unnecessary risk and proven to be a very potent ingredient for disaster). It is inherently risky to expect that a largely unregulated (technical education wise) industry work force can be relied upon to expand their technical competencies by a factor of approx 1000% in a period of less than a life time. Equally so for technical compliance experts such as building inspectors. (Without expecting to have to pay for it somewhere)

We really need to either concede that vastly more training and policing resources are required for alternative solution details (which includes an unimaginably large selection of perceived basics such as gib bracing, 95+% of tanking, membranes & a chunk of cladding systems etc, etc) including quadrupling consent fees to pay for more than an average of approx 8 to 10 hours of on site time of BCA inspectors (that is typically allowed/included for in current consent fees). Or we need to cull the selections of cladding systems and dodgy features about 70 to 80% so it is more manageable.

IMO :blink:

[porky]

We also enforced the Standards as applicable to the methods of construction being used.
It's a worry how often we had to tell a supposed qualified builder to correct basic building structure fuck ups as not complying with NZS3604 or whatever, let alone the code or approved plans.......

And what constitutes a qualified builder???? Or are you refering to a qualified carpenter who aspires to being a builder??? Building is the ...... awe fuck dont get me started. To be a qualified builder you need to be a trade technician ( 2 levels up from a tradesman in which you learn all the systems present in building and construction)... to do that you need to hold a NZCB or after 2002 the NDCM .... end of rant.

[Dodgy_Matt]

Yeah! I do overflow inspections for ACC and the stuff you see :facepalm:

Thats why I got out of being a Building Inspector :shutup:

But the way the Building Act amendment is going the Councils will no longer require building inspectors because it will all be up to the Builder and their insurance to fix anything that goes wrong :shit:

[flyingcrocodile46]

How about Life Cycle Costs of Cladding Report No 75. No i arnt an anally attentive sole. Went hunting for something else today and this fell out. Its the 1997 edition and for the info you are pretty much bang on. Ply sheet is no 1 followed by block masonry, then the old hardiplank wb

The number which what of the what what??

Sounds like something I might like to see if you have a link or sumink?

Cheers

[flyingcrocodile46]

Thats why I got out of being a Building Inspector :shutup:

But the way the Building Act amendment is going the Councils will no longer require building inspectors because it will all be up to the Builder and their insurance to fix anything that goes wrong :shit:

P'shaww.! :gob: How can you say such a thing :laugh:.

It's all about minimising Council liability as the deep pocket (last man standing) in litigation over failures. Cynical people associate it with a concession in respect of/for agreements in the FAP act (act of fapping :laugh:) Not really an Act though, it's a Bill and anyway they ain't acting. Weathertight Homes Resolution Services (Financial Assistance Package) Bill

[Dodgy_Matt]

P'shaww.! :gob: How can you say such a thing :laugh:.

It's all about minimising Council liability as the deep pocket (last man standing) in litigation over failures. Cynical people associate it with a trade of in respect to agreements in the FAP act (act of fapping :laugh:) Not really an Act though, it's a Bill and anyway they ain't acting. Weathertight Homes Resolution Services (Financial Assistance Package) Bill
The WCC had me lined up to take a big role in their FAP team... but I walked.

Like I could say to anyone, "oh I work on a FAP team!!!" :laugh:

[Quasievil]

Would it be reasonable to suggest that money was the biggest contributor to the situation we are currently in.
The cheapest possible method in doing and specifying everything to the point where we now have this issue.

Fuck that was my 7000 post on the god forsaken life sucking site, and thats all I said fuck me im loosing my touch

<a href="http://s262.photobucket.com/albums/ii104/Quasizxr/?action=view&amp;current=1268974014910.gif" target="_blank"><img src="http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii104/Quasizxr/1268974014910.gif" border="0" alt="boobs"></a>

[Dodgy_Matt]

P'shaww.! :gob: How can you say such a thing :laugh:.

It's all about minimising Council liability as the deep pocket (last man standing) in litigation over failures. Cynical people associate it with a concession in respect of/for agreements in the FAP act (act of fapping :laugh:) Not really an Act though, it's a Bill and anyway they ain't acting. Weathertight Homes Resolution Services (Financial Assistance Package) Bill

FAP only realy covers existing homes.. in the future it will be solely on the builder and insurer.

[dangerous]

And what constitutes a qualified builder???? Or are you refering to a qualified carpenter who aspires to being a builder??? Building is the ...... awe fuck dont get me started. To be a qualified builder you need to be a trade technician ( 2 levels up from a tradesman in which you learn all the systems present in building and construction)... to do that you need to hold a NZCB or after 2002 the NDCM .... end of rant.

WHAT SORTA A SHIT ARE YOU ON? fuck man... to be qualified you just need trade cert and 4yrs under ya belt.

Differance between a builder an d a carpenter... the carpenter works for a builder.

[flyingcrocodile46]

I may be proven wrong about this, but it has allways been my understanding that there is no such thing as a 'qualified' Builder because there is no such qualification or course specifically structured for that purpose (unlike for a carpentry qualification). I haven't checked but I doubt NZQA will list it.

The introduction of the Licensing of Building Practitioners (LPB) is a license not a qualification. It is only recently that an actual qualification (like trade cert) has been accepted as substantive demonstration of your worthiness to hold a license. You don't need any qualification at all to become an LBP.:yes:

[dangerous]

I may be proven wrong about this, but it has allways been my understanding that there is no such thing as a 'qualified' Builder because there is no such qualification or course specifically structured for that purpose (unlike for a carpentry qualification). I haven't checked but I doubt NZQA will list it.

The introduction of the Licensing of Building Practitioners (LPB) is a license not a qualification. It is only recently that an actual qualification (like trade cert) has been accepted as substantive demonstration of your worthiness to hold a license. You don't need any qualification at all to become an LBP.:yes:

You are quite correct, most people say 'builder' instead of carpeneter even tho thats what they mean... same thing at the end of the day.

LBP licence is the bigest crock a shit since I dont know when... eg the EQC work I do needs ticking of by a LBP, theres only one in our company and hes a right dill, has no idea... but he paid his fee and is licenced.

[SPman]

Thats why I got out of being a Building Inspector :shutup:

But the way the Building Act amendment is going the Councils will no longer require building inspectors because it will all be up to the Builder and their insurance to fix anything that goes wrong :shit:
Just like here in Oz.........land of some appalling building standards....but...never mind...the builder is liable...if he's still around.

I may be proven wrong about this, but it has allways been my understanding that there is no such thing as a 'qualified' Builder Sorry, by 'qualified' Builder I meant trade certificated, long term carpenters.as per mr D's comment.

piss of it did... the shit breaks down reguardless of the jointer type. We've got one Hardies product on our house that doesn't break down in all weathers!
Mind you, it has massive historical problems of it's own.............

[flyingcrocodile46]

You are quite correct, most people say 'builder' instead of carpeneter even tho thats what they mean... same thing at the end of the day.

LBP licence is the bigest crock a shit since I dont know when... eg the EQC work I do needs ticking of by a LBP, theres only one in our company and hes a right dill, has no idea... but he paid his fee and is licenced.

I struggle with the fact that it is infinitely harder, (though easier since it was revised) to wade through the application and process to understand what info they want and how/where they want it presented, than it is to satisfy any meaningful minimum criteria for actual qualifications, experience, references and low demand testing of an understanding of the Building Act, Regulations, roles of key player (such as BCA's), NZBC clause objectives functional/performance requirements and how to go about satisfying them along with any testing of actual trade related basic knowledge.

If you can read and understand what they want and have the ability to fluff it up with purty word bows and some pretty average references/testimonials then you're in.
:sick:

[porky]

WHAT SORTA A SHIT ARE YOU ON? fuck man... to be qualified you just need trade cert and 4yrs under ya belt.

Differance between a builder an d a carpenter... the carpenter works for a builder.

I hope this is a funny. If you build as well as you spell... well i rest my case. :shit:

The NZCB qual has been around since Noah knocked up the ark. Its just that most in the building/ construction fraternity seem to think an apprenticeship in carpentry.... monkey see monkey do .... is all you need to learn. Dont believe me.... well look at all the fucked up buildings built by morons who completed an apprenticeship in carpentry and were too proud or thought they knew everything, to the point they commanded enough respect in the industry to pass on all their bullshit short cuts with out having the skills or ability to evaluate their actions.
Building is a discipline requiring multiple components. What we see now is a drive by MB and CB to have a bigger role, pushing the carpentry barrow with extras and unfortunately not acknowledging the higher levels of learning for the trade.This has meant that that fewer people are advancing and improving their skill base.... to the point that we have a wanked out system (CPD) where you can score brownie points by rocking along to your local ITM /Carters/ Benchmark etc, participate in some trade promotion, hosted by someone like Hardies, who will bash on about their products and fill your head full of their sales bollocks, and fuck all building science.

And for the record NZCB = NZ Certificate in Building and the NZQA website clearly states that the Nat Dip in Construction Management is a replacement Qual for the NZCB ....applied theory...end of quote.

So from this stoned out fucker who holds both a trade cert (monkey see... monkey do..) and a NDCM (learn to think for yourself fucker and make sound decisions based on the best information industry has available) i do see a distinct difference in the two.
End of rant part 2.

[flyingcrocodile46]

I hope this is a funny. If you build as well as you spell... well i rest my case. :shit:

The NZCB qual has been around since Noah knocked up the ark. Its just that most in the building/ construction fraternity seem to think an apprenticeship in carpentry.... monkey see monkey do .... is all you need to learn. Dont believe me.... well look at all the fucked up buildings built by morons who completed an apprenticeship in carpentry and were too proud or thought they knew everything, to the point they commanded enough respect in the industry to pass on all their bullshit short cuts with out having the skills or ability to evaluate their actions.
Building is a discipline requiring multiple components. What we see now is a drive by MB and CB to have a bigger role, pushing the carpentry barrow with extras and unfortunately not acknowledging the higher levels of learning for the trade.This has meant that that fewer people are advancing and improving their skill base.... to the point that we have a wanked out system (CPD) where you can score brownie points by rocking along to your local ITM /Carters/ Benchmark etc, participate in some trade promotion, hosted by someone like Hardies, who will bash on about their products and fill your head full of their sales bollocks, and fuck all building science.

And for the record NZCB = NZ Certificate in Building and the NZQA website clearly states that the Nat Dip in Construction Management is a replacement Qual for the NZCB ....applied theory...end of quote.

So from this stoned out fucker who holds both a trade cert (monkey see... monkey do..) and a NDCM (learn to think for yourself fucker and make sound decisions based on the best information industry has available) i do see a distinct difference in the two.
End of rant part 2.

Good to see the well informed saying it as it is. Harsh as it is, none of it is untrue, but isn't necessarily relevant when qualifications haven't ever been required... ever since 'Noah knocked up the ark':facepalm:. So any joe blo has been able to become a Wharehouse fresh... dare I say, 'Qualified Builder' and has comprised over half the nations stock of builders.

Though am still unclear as to what qualification makes for a "qualified Builder" in particular where it is stated within that qualification framework that the holder is a "qualified Builder".

I know that there are other qualifications that are arguably more worthy than that of Carpentry trade cert, but they are limited to Diplomas, Bachelor , Certificates in building, construction, related science and dozens of other permutations of segments of building including construction management, developments, NZBC etc, which (and again.. I could be proven wrong) don't appear to confer the status of 'qualified builder'.

I am not sure that it ever existed

[dangerous]

learn to think for yourself fuckerwell... such personal abuse does not do much for your cred :facepalm:
The cualfactions you mention were either not around when I did my time and or were not reconisble, and appretiship was it as it was for all trades.

As for the rest of your post while a very small part of it may hold some truth... and I'm thinking for myself here, most of it is crap.

If anyone is interested in what I am capable of there is a thread titled "another dangerous creation" a fer years old now and since then my builds make them look like the family batch.


NB: I offer no opoligys for my spelling nor am I sorry if it bothers anyone, sad life when it is all one has to pick on.

[flyingcrocodile46]

Southerners have always been slow ;)

http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news/5340963/Rise-in-number-of-leaky-homes

Rise in number of leaky homes

[flyingcrocodile46]

If anyone is interested in what I am capable of there is a thread titled "another dangerous creation" a fer years old now and since then my builds make them look like the family batch.


NB: I offer no opoligys for my spelling nor am I sorry if it bothers anyone, sad life when it is all one has to pick on.

Nor should you. You communicate what you need/want to be said quite clearly.

I have seen your build thread and I was impressed with the work you have undertaken and from what I gather, your past clients stand by your workmanship, which ultimately is and should be the highest endorsement of competency.

[Swoop]

We've got one Hardies product on our house that doesn't break down in all weathers!
Mind you, it has massive historical problems of it's own.............
At least their products lasted well when that was added.
Once removed, they all went downhill.

[dangerous]

I have seen your build thread and I was impressed with the work you have undertaken and from what I gather, your past clients stand by your workmanship, which ultimately is and should be the highest endorsement of competency.
:o:o:o


Hey... had a shiter of a day aye, a leaking home rebuild I recently finished a block of 4 has a leak... a serious leak had the boys strip an area out and man is there some water in there, someone said houses will still leak and well fark me, this prick of a thing sure as hell is.

Knowing the building inside out its got me buggered, we will wait till the next pour to try and find the issue, I have pin pointed it to 2 possable issues, one we delt with one we did not... kinda tarnishs my "endorsement of competency" LOL :facepalm:

[Quasievil]

I find incredibly interesting that when you all want to point to a company its always hardies, you are either baiting me or are just plain stupid, there are many more companies and organisations that could be brought into this and based on what im reading in the preceeding few pages many notations about the failure of builders carpentors or what ever the fuck you choose to call the professional responsible for the erection of the particular leaking buildings.
Builders and parties responsible for the erection of a leaking homes failed on at least these common faults DIRECTLY

1/ Flashings, and weather proofing around windows, penetrations, parapets, waterproofing of decks etc
2/ Utilisation for timbers that where untreated, yes some didn't use it, I know of two local real builders that imported there own treated timber
3/ Over use and Poor use of silicon as a primary defence against water ingress
4/ Poor installation of "add ons" aerials, vents, sky lights, flues etc

THOSE things alone have everything to do with the builder

Add other influences BRANZ, the Councils, The architects, Mum and Dad wanting a cheap house, POLYSTYRENE (NOT A HARDIES PRODUCT) Narrower window flanges
Crap building paper and the list can go on for a bit yet.

In saying all that if I was to label one party responsible as you all seem to be doing, and after recent research of my own I cannot go past the single individual "the professional" who was expected to have the knowledge and ability to utilise suitable materials and knowledge based skills to prevent a "leaky home"
And that party is the Builder or developer.

He did not have to use hardies, or poly or cheap arse windows, or non treated timber, or as much slicone, he could have used his abilities to prevent poor installation of add ons, he could have over seen a project better in respects of the sub trades, he could have used the Hardies within specification (they never did fuck we even provided a service that wasnt used as they didnt like the cost of it done correctly)

So like I expect my doctor or dentist to be competent (professionals) as I do the organisations that represent them (hello where are the MB and CB in all this) I expect the builder to be able to hand the keys over to the CUSTOMER a water tight safe home, the DODGY builder didnt!!

so I have already conceded that there are more issues to it than just the builders and that opinion remains however I have concluded if there was a single party at fault then the DODGY (no not every builder the Dodgy ones) builder was ultimately responsible, BUT no chance of getting any money out of them eh they are all GONE

Which leaves it for the ratepayer to pay.

At this point I will concede that the removal of Asbestos from the flat sheet products was not good, coupled with the above shoody behaviour it was a recipe for issues, however as I said thats a very small part of the problem, it just happens that through the 90's Hardietex was the cheapest cladding option available so YES it appeared in many failed building , and of course it did, it was the cheapest option and "cheap" ruled the building sites as you know and as I know

[Spearfish]

I find incredibly interesting that when you all want to point to a company its always hardies, you are either baiting me or are just plain stupid, there are many more companies and organisations that could be brought into this and based on what im reading in the preceeding few pages many notations about the failure of builders carpentors or what ever the fuck you choose to call the professional responsible for the erection of the particular leaking buildings.
Builders and parties responsible for the erection of a leaking homes failed on at least these common faults DIRECTLY

1/ Flashings, and weather proofing around windows, penetrations, parapets, waterproofing of decks etc
2/ Utilisation for timbers that where untreated, yes some didn't use it, I know of two local real builders that imported there own treated timber
3/ Over use and Poor use of silicon as a primary defence against water ingress
4/ Poor installation of "add ons" aerials, vents, sky lights, flues etc

THOSE things alone have everything to do with the builder

Add other influences BRANZ, the Councils, The architects, Mum and Dad wanting a cheap house, POLYSTYRENE (NOT A HARDIES PRODUCT) Narrower window flanges
Crap building paper and the list can go on for a bit yet.

In saying all that if I was to label one party responsible as you all seem to be doing, and after recent research of my own I cannot go past the single individual "the professional" who was expected to have the knowledge and ability to utilise suitable materials and knowledge based skills to prevent a "leaky home"
And that party is the Builder or developer.

He did not have to use hardies, or poly or cheap arse windows, or non treated timber, or as much slicone, he could have used his abilities to prevent poor installation of add ons, he could have over seen a project better in respects of the sub trades, he could have used the Hardies within specification (they never did fuck we even provided a service that wasnt used as they didnt like the cost of it done correctly)

So like I expect my doctor or dentist to be competent (professionals) as I do the organisations that represent them (hello where are the MB and CB in all this) I expect the builder to be able to hand the keys over to the CUSTOMER a water tight safe home, the DODGY builder didnt!!

so I have already conceded that there are more issues to it than just the builders and that opinion remains however I have concluded if there was a single party at fault then the DODGY (no not every builder the Dodgy ones) builder was ultimately responsible, BUT no chance of getting any money out of them eh they are all GONE

Which leaves it for the ratepayer to pay.

At this point I will concede that the removal of Asbestos from the flat sheet products was not good, coupled with the above shoody behaviour it was a recipe for issues, however as I said thats a very small part of the problem, it just happens that through the 90's Hardietex was the cheapest cladding option available so YES it appeared in many failed building , and of course it did, it was the cheapest option and "cheap" ruled the building sites as you know and as I know

Quasievil... dude, mate , bro, cuz, o'l pal (I know I've missed a few)... your taking this all to personally, you havent even been peddling their products for years and years.
Your loyalty is certainly admirable.
If we had an insulclad rep here I'm sure he would be getting a kick in the pills far worse than a hardies rep, in fact I'm sure I'd be taking a few strides to build up momentum....

I think we all know its not just the cladding materials its owners, designers, builders, suppliers, inspectors and legislators then on top of all that there are the odd ones like the house I mentioned earlier that seem to get as much rain forced upwards as falls naturally downwards depending on wind strength and direction.

[Ocean1]

Question. What, if anything can be done to prolong the life of a KD framed house that is otherwise well designed and built and doesn't leak?

[Spearfish]

Question. What, if anything can be done to prolong the life of a KD framed house that is otherwise well designed and built and doesn't leak?

Thats a trick question to see if anyone has been paying attention in class.

[flyingcrocodile46]

I...[Snipped only cause of its massiveness]....know

:second:

Only thing stopped a 1st prize (IMO) was the fact that you haven't let go of hunting for one party to lynch, cause it just ain't that simple.

When (IMO) you properly understand all of the contributing facts (of which at this stage in your study is 'everything') and the lines of reliance between the various contributing parties from a statutory/regulatory & contractural perspective, you will realise that the FAP deal is proportionally fair (except for its limited claim eligibility) and that of the remaining 50% there are multiple contributing factors/parties including carpenters, Builders (of whom half were joe&blo homeowner rather than developers or "Qualified Builder":laugh:), Timber industry lobby groups (manufacturers), Cladding System manufacturers (incl roof/deck & tanking membranes), Sky technicians:facepalm:, Concrete placers:facepalm:, Landscapers:facepalm:... the list goes on.

There is no one or even two simple individual contributing factors/parties that account for more than half of the joint & several accountability/liability in any claims that I have been involved with or am aware of and doubt there ever will be (though I could be proven wrong). My opinion is formed from multiple first hand experience in claim investigation/reporting through to conclusion and readings of dozens of determinations (that make me want to cry)

[Quasievil]

your taking this all to personally, you havent even been peddling their products for years and years.


yeah I did eh lol, 6 years actually, I loved that company, some of the best people I have ever worked with

[flyingcrocodile46]

in fact I'm sure I'd be taking a few strides to build up momentum.....

on top of all that there are the odd ones like the house I mentioned earlier that seem to get as much rain forced upwards as falls naturally downwards depending on wind strength and direction.

:lol::kick::rofl:

Excessive wind pressures (especially with re-entrant wall/roof planes/parapets and such) can require up to three times usual lap coverage and attention to junction detailing to deal with pressure assisted capillary action (wicking/pumping)

[flyingcrocodile46]

Question. What, if anything can be done to prolong the life of a KD framed house that is otherwise well designed and built and doesn't leak?

You Sir, need to talk to StepUp Group.

I have no interest in them, but I do consider that they are at the cutting edge of alternative solutions and preventative 'steps' in this particular specialist area (timber monitoring/treatment/maintenance).

http://www.stepupgroup.co.nz/Home.html

[flyingcrocodile46]

:o:o:o


Hey... had a shiter of a day aye, a leaking home rebuild I recently finished a block of 4 has a leak... a serious leak had the boys strip an area out and man is there some water in there, someone said houses will still leak and well fark me, this prick of a thing sure as hell is.

Knowing the building inside out its got me buggered, we will wait till the next pour to try and find the issue, I have pin pointed it to 2 possable issues, one we delt with one we did not... kinda tarnishs my "endorsement of competency" LOL :facepalm:

Check your flashing upstand heights, cladding laps, coverage and separation from flashings/ horizontal surfaces and capillary gaps and breaks. Particularly in re-entrant shape wall/roof areas where wind action/pressure waves can cause pumping. Iddy biddy lil holes can move a lot of water when air pressure changes/balancing comes into play. You can quite literally see water pumping/pulsing through pin head sized holes when extreme conditions are present.

Is the surface water drainage ok (rate of fall), gutter capacity, downpipe/rainhead capacity? Hard to know without looking to see where it is and what the features are.

[YellowDog]

yeah I did eh lol, 6 years actually, I loved that company, some of the best people I have ever worked with

Hardy gets the blame for everything however you did hit the nail on the head in your previous post. If you use it appropriately I'm sure it's good stuff. BUT who would buy a plaster clad house now? I woudn't. The 7mm ply board plus a spray of plaster is something that I would avoid regardless.

I prefer: The inside wall of concrete blocks supporting the flooring with a 100mm cavity to the external brick wall structure that houses the windows and supports the roofing. A DPC damp course would also be a desirable option.

My present house has 500mm overhang eves which covers the Hardiplank cladding - Very good indeed :yes:

[flyingcrocodile46]

yeah I did eh lol, 6 years actually, I loved that company, some of the best people I have ever worked with

I know some of them, and yes some of them are good people. and some tell fibs :yes:

[dangerous]

Check your flashing upstand heights, cladding laps, coverage and separation from flashings/ horizontal surfaces and capillary gaps and breaks. Particularly in re-entrant shape wall/roof areas where wind action/pressure waves can cause pumping. Iddy biddy lil holes can move a lot of water when air pressure changes/balancing comes into play. You can quite literally see water pumping/pulsing through pin head sized holes when extreme conditions are present.

Is the surface water drainage ok (rate of fall), gutter capacity, downpipe/rainhead capacity? Hard to know without looking to see where it is and what the features are.
Ohhhhhhhhhhhh... now whos telling who how to suck eggs :woohoo: hahaha thing is that would be the entire building Id need to check, as far as the "surface water drainage ok (rate of fall), gutter capacity, downpipe/rainhead capacity?" is concerned is... well theres 200mm of snow on the roof so ummm LOL no drainage at all and this is why I cant do any thing at the moment... yeah I should have said that in the privious post.

Quasie... I thought you fucked off, good to have ya back, ya might be happy to know my little issue under the snow contains NO hardies, ok wee lie the taller parapit inside walls are lined with the shit... AHHHH that must be the problem, all sorted Croc :shutup:

[Swoop]

Concrete placers:facepalm:
My opinion of concrete guys went up some time back.

Out West there was an indian guy "developing" some land with 4 houses which were exactly the same design. Exactly the same.

Foundations inspected and signed off prior to the concrete pour.
Concrete arrives and there isn't any steel reinforcing... BUT the next foundations along (which didn't have any steel) miraculously now has all its steel sitting and ready!
"Developer" says "pour the concrete!".
Concrete fellah says "get stuffed" and proceeds to call council to alert them.:niceone:

[flyingcrocodile46]

My opinion of concrete guys went up some time back.

Out West there was an indian guy "developing" some land with 4 houses which were exactly the same design. Exactly the same.

Foundations inspected and signed off prior to the concrete pour.
Concrete arrives and there isn't any steel reinforcing... BUT the next foundations along (which didn't have any steel) miraculously now has all its steel sitting and ready!
"Developer" says "pour the concrete!".
Concrete fellah says "get stuffed" and proceeds to call council to alert them.:niceone:

That is heartening stuff to hear. I don't suppose you know the name of the Indian builder or the street name do you?

It sounds like it may relate to a claim that I am working on.

[Swoop]

I don't suppose you know the name of the Indian builder or the street name do you?

It sounds like it may relate to a claim that I am working on.
Sorry. Unfortunately I do not have details of that site.


Another new location was developed by an asian chappy.
The kitchen was so bad that cabinet doors were all over the show. A prospective customer mentioned the state of the kitchen and the asian gentleman said [asian accent]"kiwi's too fussy!!" [/asian accent].:facepalm:

[SPman]

My opinion of concrete guys went up some time back.

Out West there was an indian guy "developing" some land with 4 houses which were exactly the same design. Exactly the same.

Foundations inspected and signed off prior to the concrete pour.
Concrete arrives and there isn't any steel reinforcing... BUT the next foundations along (which didn't have any steel) miraculously now has all its steel sitting and ready!
"Developer" says "pour the concrete!".
Concrete fellah says "get stuffed" and proceeds to call council to alert them.:niceone:
That wouldn't be a certain Developer who imported his labour from Fiji would it?
the houses had to be seen to be believed...:facepalm:

There was also a foundation guy in Browns Bay, 30 yrs ago who used to do that......until a minor landslip exposed a broken footing bereft of any form of reinforcement......


The cualfactions you mention were either not around when I did my time and or were not reconisble, and appretiship was it as it was for all trades. Nope - I didn't do an apprenticeship but went into building when I quit Uni.in 1971 (My brother, father and several uncles & great uncles were all Chippies) After 7-8 yrs, working in every form of building I could, including Joinery and Cabinetmaking factories, I applied to the Trade Certs Board (seeing as how it looked like I would be building for a while), and they approved me to go to Tech and sit the Trade Cert and later, Advanced Trade Cert in Carpentry. This is early 80's Christchurch.
Building a house isn't exactly rocket science, you just have to be very careful, espec. in NZ on the detail work - flashings, overlaps, capillary joints are often overlooked - the record for water tracking we've seen was 15m! from point of ingress to where the leak became obvious! As FC says, water pressure can be a major factor - I've seen amounts of water coming into a new house, that flooded the floor everytime it rained - a pole house, with Hardietex cladding, we tracked it to where the builder had missed the stud with a fixing clout and pulled it out - it was never sealed when the external spray texture went on ....

I got so disillusioned in the 90's with new housing, I went into maintaining and rebuilding old and heritage buildings - yes - they leak as well......

[Winston001]

Would it be reasonable to suggest that money was the biggest contributor to the situation we are currently in.
The cheapest possible method in doing and specifying everything to the point where we now have this issue.

Missed reading a couple of pages so apologies if this has already been said.

The "cheapest" building methods in New Zealand are still bloody expensive. When I had a simple house built in 1997 I could have bought two in Australia for the same money. Yes I know they don't have earthquakes but even so, the cost of building even a basic box here is damned high.

I honestly do not think we can blame the average owner for needing to take the cheap options. They don't have much choice and if the products are approved and the builders know what to do - why would there be problems? It isn't as if building a house is a new idea - we've been doing it for 6000 years.

[flyingcrocodile46]

- a pole house, with Hardietex cladding,

I got so disillusioned in the 90's with new housing, I went into maintaining and rebuilding old and heritage buildings - yes - they leak as well......


:yes:


"a pole house, with Harditex cladding" :gob::facepalm: Who approved that?




builders know what to do - why would there be problems? It isn't as if building a house is a new idea - we've been doing it for 6000 years.

All buildings leak and always have (somewhere). The better ones are/were either designed (usually very conservatively / bland) to minimise and manage water ingress and/or/are/were built of more durable materials and in a way (drafty) that greatly mitigated potential for damage. Even then there has always been plenty of instances where damage repairs have been more than they needed to be (often involving visually obvious but historically ignored leaks)



The "cheapest" building methods in New Zealand are still bloody expensive. When I had a simple house built in 1997 I could have bought two in Australia for the same money. Yes I know they don't have earthquakes but even so, the cost of building even a basic box here is damned high.


:yes: I have never been able to understand that. And why people in Oz & Fiji can/have been able to buy NZ materials (timber and gib in particular) cheaper (after all the additional shipping costs) than we could buy the same product locally. I doubt that would have anything to do with the old business round table days and/or any sort of protectionism though:rolleyes:... so I just can't figure it out.

[ellipsis]

...the kiwi, although being quite an energetic and curious bird, is still an endangered forest dwelling creature...it scurries around the forest floor, looking for the fattest and juiciest grubs...it also has the strangest tendency to loft its arsehole skywards and let any passing hawk or even these days , magpies and sweet talking doves, swoop in and fuck it 'til it was senseless....and senseless is the kiwi, as it trudges off home, to it's warm pile of leaf litter and twigs...its been a hard day at the office...'will there be a few more fat grubs tomorrow'. it thinks...but not a lot of thought goes into why its arse is sore...

[dangerous]

That sir... is farking funny :woohoo:

[fuknKIWI]

That sir... is farking funny :woohoo:

:facepalm: Funny? It's hilarious:yes:














But wait it's not funny it's a true story:shit:

[Sarah311]

If "normal" is north American pine then yes, ours is less dense, and yes that's related to the fact that it grows in half the time. I'm not sure that's anything to do with "genetic modification", I assumed it was the same reason many other things grow much faster here than in their colder, darker homelands.

When we first started selling pine to the Japanese they had to review their building standards as related to that material. Simple really, it might be lighter but if you use larger sections it's as good as it's northern counterpart or better.

The James Hardy thing I agree with. They once introduced what amounted to MDF, (customwood) planks as a cladding material. Guess what...


Gwarne, guess.

My mother was one of the first people involved in tissue culture of plants for forestry, this was in the early 1980's. She could "create" about 1000 Pinus from one "needle".... Trust me, those tree's are all specimans of the same thing - and we know what happens if you stop having genetic diversity and variety, (or we start "making" stuff - a'la "a sheep called dolly!") Eventually it doesn't end well!
Commercial forestry was certainly "assisted" then - I can't imagine it's not now...

[Swoop]

Has anyone else read this (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10823103)?

Leaky Buildings II.

Ms Wells said 10,000 new tradespeople were expected to rebuild quake-hit Christchurch and if even a small proportion of them did dodgy renovations, she said, the costs would be enormous.

"We're looking at a $30 billion rebuild.


Of interest are the reports of builders leaving the city since their work has dried up! The council has not got off its arse with issuing building permits. Their bureauracy runs rampant, still.





The second issue is insurance. You might have noticed a SUBSTANTIAL increase in your insurance premiums...

Builders cannot get insurance cover for new work and this is a requirement prior to commencing a new build. It appears is if the insurance companies willing to cover builders has decreased to just two!

Also, do you own a house on the top of a cliff? Are you looking at buying one?
Good luck getting any insurance cover for your property!

[ellipsis]

...10,000 new tradespeople is a bit of a misnomer really...a few will be tradesman, a lot will be good enough to call , experienced in some field, and the vast bulk will be poorly trained tools for the gathering of money for the crooks in charge of the rebuild...if it ever kicks off..and the dodginess has been obvious from day one and wont improve...