Leaky homes are all just a fairytale

[flyingcrocodile46]

Let me tell you a brief fairy tale. Once upon a time, several years ago, in a land awfully much like this one, a government department called the BIA, and an eager young researcher cousin BRANZ, were set up to mandate and oversee standards and practices in buildings, to authorise and dictate building systems, and to stamp the government's authority on an errant building industry -- in essence to say what the King would and would not allow in building, and to give what they had allowed the Royal seal of approval.

Many people rejoiced that this would save them the brain-ache of being allowed to decide for themselves what was safe and sound. 'Stuff with our seal of approval is safe and sound,' said the nice bureaucrats. 'Excellent!' said the people. Meanwhile, those who did wish to decide for themselves were told not to. 'Don't worry,' the BIA and BRANZ told everyone, 'as long as you all do what you're told and as you're told and when you're told, we'll make sure nothing untoward happens to you.'

And for a while, everything was good in the BIA, and many careers in government were confirmed, and many building suppliers got rich by getting their building systems and their materials approved by the BIA; and many important meetings were attended, many bureaucratic salaries paid, and many BIA determinations and approvals issued.

And the little people of this fair land did all that they were allowed to do and all that they were told to do, and many houses on many hills were erected in the fashion that BIA determinations and approvals said they were allowed to be and told to be - and everyone knew they were safe and sound and could stop thinking for themselves, because as everyone knows the job of the King is to keep everyone safe and sound, and wasn't he and his men doing their job so well! 'Approved by the BIA.' 'Tested by BRANZ.' These were Royal seals of approval and official stamps of safety and soundness that could be relied up on to keep everyone warm and dry. And lo, the people rejoiced in ther homes, and the bureaucrats rejoiced in their big, shiny offices that the people were made to pay for. And the King decided that all was good, and he went off to climb a mountain.

Until one day, the rains came. And it turned out the job had not been done so well; that some of what the BIA had determined had to happen, and had approved should happen, shouldn't have happened at all. And then it also turned out that the people at BRANZ and the BIA were not all-seeing and all-knowing, and that their job had really been one of 'all care and no responsibility.' 'Whoops,' said BRANZ. 'Whoops,' said the BIA; and they changed their name and withdrew their approvals. 'It wasn't our fault,' they said, 'and anyway, you can't sue us because we don't exist anymore.' And they pointed fingers, and vanished in a puff of bureaucracy.

And the good people of that merry, green land looked to each other and wondered why they had ever taken the government and their minions seriously. They wondered why they had worried more about 'fly-by-night' builders, when it was clearly 'fly-by-night' government departments that were the witches and warlocks. And meanwhile, good builders and good designers and home-owners who had relied upon the determinations and approvals of BRANZ and the BIA as being safe, found that the policy of 'all care and no responsibility' only applied to government, and to government departments, and to big suppliers with big legal departments. And the goverment passed laws to encourage the people to fight amongst each other instead. And many good people were ruined. And many other good people went to <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comhttp://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/ /><st1:State w:st=Queensland </st1:State>and retired. And the cost of building doubled in that green and merry land.

And everyone wondered why they had let it happen.

[imdying]

For the dark universe users that don't like stupid colours and stupid fonts:

Let me tell you a brief fairy tale. Once upon a time, several years ago, in a land awfully much like this one, a government department called the BIA, and an eager young researcher cousin BRANZ, were set up to mandate and oversee standards and practices in buildings, to authorise and dictate building systems, and to stamp the government's authority on an errant building industry -- in essence to say what the King would and would not allow in building, and to give what they had allowed the Royal seal of approval.

Many people rejoiced that this would save them the brain-ache of being allowed to decide for themselves what was safe and sound. 'Stuff with our seal of approval is safe and sound,' said the nice bureaucrats. 'Excellent!' said the people. Meanwhile, those who did wish to decide for themselves were told not to. 'Don't worry,' the BIA and BRANZ told everyone, 'as long as you all do what you're told and as you're told and when you're told, we'll make sure nothing untoward happens to you.'

And for a while, everything was good in the BIA, and many careers in government were confirmed, and many building suppliers got rich by getting their building systems and their materials approved by the BIA; and many important meetings were attended, many bureaucratic salaries paid, and many BIA determinations and approvals issued.

And the little people of this fair land did all that they were allowed to do and all that they were told to do, and many houses on many hills were erected in the fashion that BIA determinations and approvals said they were allowed to be and told to be - and everyone knew they were safe and sound and could stop thinking for themselves, because as everyone knows the job of the King is to keep everyone safe and sound, and wasn't he and his men doing their job so well! 'Approved by the BIA.' 'Tested by BRANZ.' These were Royal seals of approval and official stamps of safety and soundness that could be relied up on to keep everyone warm and dry. And lo, the people rejoiced in ther homes, and the bureaucrats rejoiced in their big, shiny offices that the people were made to pay for. And the King decided that all was good, and he went off to climb a mountain.

Until one day, the rains came. And it turned out the job had not been done so well; that some of what the BIA had determined had to happen, and had approved should happen, shouldn't have happened at all. And then it also turned out that the people at BRANZ and the BIA were not all-seeing and all-knowing, and that their job had really been one of 'all care and no responsibility.' 'Whoops,' said BRANZ. 'Whoops,' said the BIA; and they changed their name and withdrew their approvals. 'It wasn't our fault,' they said, 'and anyway, you can't sue us because we don't exist anymore.' And they pointed fingers, and vanished in a puff of bureaucracy.

And the good people of that merry, green land looked to each other and wondered why they had ever taken the government and their minions seriously. They wondered why they had worried more about 'fly-by-night' builders, when it was clearly 'fly-by-night' government departments that were the witches and warlocks. And meanwhile, good builders and good designers and home-owners who had relied upon the determinations and approvals of BRANZ and the BIA as being safe, found that the policy of 'all care and no responsibility' only applied to government, and to government departments, and to big suppliers with big legal departments. And the goverment passed laws to encourage the people to fight amongst each other instead. And many good people were ruined. And many other good people went to <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comhttp://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/ /><st1:State w:st=Queensland </st1:State>and retired. And the cost of building doubled in that green and merry land.

And everyone wondered why they had let it happen.

[george formby]

The invisible ink is not quite dry yet.



I guess all the bureaucrats became council building inspectors?

[flyingcrocodile46]

I guess all the bureaucrats became council building inspectors?

I don't think anyone lost their jobs. The new department needed competant and experienced people.

[SPman]

The invisible ink is not quite dry yet.



I guess all the bureaucrats became council building inspectors?
No - the bureaucrats became the arsehole building inspectors that wouldn't recognise a sound building if it bit them on the todger, but knew how to pedantically enforce rules......

[flyingcrocodile46]

No - the bureaucrats became the arsehole building inspectors that wouldn't recognise a sound building if it bit them on the todger, but knew how to invent and pedantically enforce rules......

TBH I don't think you will find anyone from BRANZ or the old BIA working as an inspector.

[Swoop]

It's perfectly alright. We have solved the "leaky homes crisis" today with a very simple solution.

If you have a leaky home, just invite your local gang around to use it for manufacturing "P"!
When the police raid the place, the cleanup operation will need to demolish the structure and you get a new house*!







* "New house" may or may not include a genuine new house, conditions apply, see conditions, no free set of ginzu knives included.

[Winston001]

Interesting Croc. Can't say I knew or thought the BIA or BRANZ were at fault. It seemed to me the leaky buildings were/are caused by inexperienced or shoddy construction methods. Coupled with stupid "dry climate" designs which ignored the fact rain and wind are normal throughout NZ and houses need to shed the weather.

[FJRider]

Interesting Croc. Can't say I knew or thought the BIA or BRANZ were at fault. It seemed to me the leaky buildings were/are caused by inexperienced or shoddy construction methods. Coupled with stupid "dry climate" designs which ignored the fact rain and wind are normal throughout NZ and houses need to shed the weather.

Nobody pointed out to them what the SUB means, in NZ's status as Sub-Tropical ...

And gave no thought about the large amount of coastline ... and amount of ground that is described as Coastal ... with the benefits coastal weather brings ...

[Reckless]

Finally some sees this for what it really is! 10000 points Croc!

A lot of us where building with materials and systems we thought where 100% ok, told to use or could buy! (There was a long period there all you could buy was untreated frame the timber suppliers simply didnt produce treated frame)!

We where doing the best job we new how, with the materials, systems and processes available at the time! and that includes the inspectors!

A lot of us are now sitting in our homes wondering when the axe is going to fall for something we thought we did 100% right, with untreated frame and approved cladding systems!!

This mess was first and foremost created, cultivated and manufactured by the people in the fairytale!

Finally! thanks Croc!!

[BMWST?]

Finally some sees this for what it really is! 10000 points Croc!

A lot of us where building with materials and systems we thought where 100% ok, told to use or could buy! (There was a long period there all you could buy was untreated frame the timber suppliers simply didnt produce treated frame)!

We where doing the best job we new how, with the materials, systems and processes available at the time! and that includes the inspectors!

A lot of us are now sitting in our homes wondering when the axe is going to fall for something we thought we did 100% right, with untreated frame and approved cladding systems!!

This mess was first and foremost created, cultivated and manufactured by the people in the fairytale!

Finally! thanks Croc!!

treated timber was always available..

[flyingcrocodile46]

treated timber was always available..

But not allways when you wanted it in the quantities you wanted and the treatment type you wanted. Strictly speaking you aren't wrong as even chemical free framing was deemed to be 'treated' It went through a process which altered its properties. However it is unlikely that there was enough kiln dried H1.2, 3.1 or 3.2 (properly treated) framing in Akld to frame up more than a half a dozen houses at any given time.

Anyway the point is that the government told everyone that it was ok to use Chem free framing as it would be perfectly fine despite a wealth of evidence to the contrary and it was in fact anything but fine and has more than quadrupled the cost of fixing what would otherwise be repairable defects.

It was a politically motivated decision by scum bag politicians so that they could win votes. They couldn't have cared less if it worked or not.

It didn't work, and rather than standing up and accepting blame for their part they disbanded the BIA and made it all but impossible to join either the BIA or BRANZ to any recovery action while at the same time they paved (and paid) the way for owners to sue builders for the failures (which had always been there, but with lesser consequences) in order to take the heat off themselves for legislating inferior building systems that weren't fit for purpose.

The fucking wankers have created a litigious environment which has caused housing costs to skyrocket and duped the public into lynching each other over it so that not only are the home owners victims but potentially everyone who ever worked in the industry and relied on the advice given to them by the regulatory authorities set in place to govern the industry. Its a fucking sham. A cunt act of epic proportions.

The biggest pity is that it worked and we are all so busy hating on each other that we aren't seeing the truth.

[Reckless]

I typed this a few weeks ago I seldom log on to kiwi biker so I didn't post it up!

I learnt something last week that had been worrying me, as part of my original post explains Diffusion treatment I'd thought id post it up!

Here goes a few thoughts/ideas put out there for discussion??


treated timber was always available..

Disagree about timber supply as well! I asked for it many times! Got told, had to wait for it to be specially processed, it would cost mega bucks as a special order, it would take weeks, it would simply be cost prohibitive IF they could get the mill to produce it! It was basically a no go! The last house I did 8 years ago was Insulclad with full H3 frame at huge cost. Some houses being built where untreated frame with H3 bottom plates, some where not, the whole thing was a huge mess!! We went from boric treated frame, to untreated frame, and now back to dipped H1.2 frame! A cock up with the timber companies dictating, not controlled by the BIA!!

Case in point the latest 3604 2011 has regulated the MSG6 and MSG10 grade timbers to the back of the book! We only had these grades for one reason. So the timber producers could charge more for different grades! Another example of the DBH making stupid decisions and being pushed from pillar to post by the timber producers.Why the hell we have H3.1 and H3.2 grades for different areas also makes no sense what so ever?? Bloody stupid! But the DBH permits it!

ok let a history lesson from personal experience! I was gen manager of a natural timber housing company at the time and we resisted very very strongly this change to no timber treatment. From the customer reaction angle to the fact the glues wouldn't stick to our manufactured panel with the alternative dipped treatment processes! The timber producers refused to give us boric treated timber or dipped timber and also refused to gaurantee untreated timber without so many out clauses it wasn't funny. Go figure?? We produced homes with untreated timber because we simply couldn't buy anything else!

My Opinion only! What I learnt! The why it all happened!

ok here goes the old Boric treatment was a diffusion treatment! Expensive!
The timber had to be manually fillet stacked (with gaps all round each piece), put under tarps for 6 weeks for the treatment to defuse through, then repacked for sale. As you can imagine this process had large stocks tied up for many weeks and was very labour intensive! The big timber companies used the fact that untreated timber was allowed under our existing NZ Standard as we had been using it in early years IE Rimu and the rough sawn framing, that was in the old old bungalows etc! They convinced the BIA that if kept under a certain percentage untreated pine would be ok. The BIA excepted this, much to the dismay of damn near all builders in the trade.

This was about money and money alone and the BIA as our controlling authority simply fucked up! Failed us and Joe public And the DBH and Govt should front up, pay for their cock up and fix it! The BIA created the game, the rules and the result!

Combine this with Harditex and the poly systems that relied on the paint layer to keep them waterproof. These systems sat against framing that had no resistance to the moisture that now migrated into it when you didnt paint your house every five years or had a little leak! And if you don't paint it your liable as the owner for creating the leaky home! oh I cant wait for homeowners to claim against previous home owners because they owned a house for 8 years and didn't paint it, therefore causing the leaky home! Any twit could have told you kiwis don't religiously paint their homes every 5 years but the BIA & Branz permitted these systems and the untreated framing under.

So you had framing that was doomed if not under a certain percentage and cladding systems that wouldn't keep the water out unless they where 1000% correctly installed and kept up by successive owners for all time!

The whole situation became a big cock up your paying the price for it, created by the BIA now the DBH!

We now have a situation that if you have a leaking window you don't go to your builder and get it fixed for 3k you go to your lawyer and he fires of a scatter gun at all involved over the last 10 years that costs over 200K and your home goes on the leaky homes register.
Why does this cost so much? Well lawyers fees and the fact that the councils refuse to inspect these dwellings and require engineering companies like Prendos to certify them when being repatriated. Why? One reason! to use the engineers professional indemnity insurance to take liability off the councils. Only one reason for this its "Risk Limitation" and who is paying for it! well you are!! Why do they cost so much to be repatriated? Because the structure has failed, not just the weathertightness.

Mark my words registration and the way I hear the new rules are being fabricated to get the councils and the DBH out of any liability are going to make things worse not better! I dare you to find the one in thousand sole trader, independent building practitioner that certified your house 9 years down the track! As I understand Councils are asking for personal Names as the architect or builder on plans, LTD company protection is gone. there's talk even working for a boss in a large firm the individual architect will be personally liable. The lawyers are already dictating things based on risk liability! Not whats right or wrong for the NZ home owners and the NZ housing industry. Its not about doing a good job for the councils and DBH its about shifting responsibility! Because the DBH is largely responsible for this situation!

Independent Licensed building practitioners cannot guarantee there own work (if this happens)! This system will fail and who will pay the price you! There is already talk of putting everything into trusts and simply going belly up if the shit hits the fan! By the good builders who try to do a good job and oh my watch out for the rough buggers doing this deliberately! And what happens when the next cladding system is launched by some multi national company and it fails??
Councils and the DBH jointly are into risk limitation and risk limitation alone! Not doing whats best for joe blow public home owner and the future of NZ's housing stock IMHO!

We need a well versed and intelligent, responsible, liable, controlling authority!
This industry cannot self govern!

As an architectural designer I'm seriously thinking of getting out! Even if my plans are perfect I still have no control over what goes on onsite! And even if I can prove (after big ligation) I'm in the clear and the faults not mine, the cost of said litigation is a deal breaker! There is a number of designers, and builders looking to leave this industry we simply don't have the money, time or power to fight the bureaucrats and we see great danger for us, you, and our industry in the new game that the DBH are manufacturing and what lies ahead!

I certainly wouldn't be urging my kids to become architects or builders.
If I was building as a home owner I'd certainly be going steel frame!

[Swoop]

As an architectural designer I'm seriously thinking of getting out!
I know of an architect in Palmy who has left the game. Simply too much shit involved now... dealing with the council and their bunch of public-servant idiots being top of the list.

[Reckless]

OK What I heard!

Was talkin to a Builder of large volume that that builds new homes and does extensive renovation work!

I couldn't believe what I was being told?

He is sending quantities of timber back to his supplier! Its already has mold on it from new!
According to rumor???
Timbers Suppliers are trying to dip timber in retail packs!
Therefore the outer timber is treated and as you go into the packs the inner timber is either getting very little or is untreated??
I'd guess the timber companies are producing and packing untreated timber then dipping it once its due for shipping!
I'd imagine these packs are sitting in yards for long periods untreated (before they are dipped) and I'd guess that dipping pre-packed packs is a failed system?

So its still happening folks "how treated" does that stamp on the side of your timber really mean??

Are you seeing this Flyingcroc??

[Reckless]

I know of an architect in Palmy who has left the game. Simply too much shit involved now... dealing with the council and their bunch of public-servant idiots being top of the list.

Personally swoop I do have a certain amount of sympathy for the councils and rough work practices aside??
Oh shit now that brings up another whole can of worms! Who has controlled the industry, the training of apprentices, updating skills programs, certification etc etc etc

Oh the BIA of coarse! Where are they now?

But back to my answer to you! The councils are last man standing mate, I do feel for them a bit. As I said previously we all thought we where doing the best we could with what we had at the time!
I can understand how councils have got paranoid about this whole shambles!

It is a systemic breakdown covering Industry standards, training, industry skills, failed products, failed cladding systems, failed training for these systems, failed structural components, that should have been controlled at the source long before councils or you and I ever got involved.

All allowed by the Govt.

Have I got the answer no.
Am I shitting about houses I have built-yes.
Also houses I have designed, others have built and I have had nothing to do with since the plans where lodged-yes.
Would you get out reading the above? :facepalm:

I have been very lucky I did a Harditex job 25 (or more) years ago! I got caught with the pricing it big time as I thought I could join the sheets up the side of windows etc. Then had to spend heaps of time cutting sheets around windows, buying more etc.
I also simply couldn't see how you could nail this product hard to framing with a bit of foam under the joint then have the plaster not crack and leak when the building expanded and contracted! I've never touched the stuff since!
I have done a few chilly bin houses, insulclad and rocote! But never knew it relied solely on the paint for weathertightness! I think we all thought the plaster had enough polymers in to do the job with minimal paint??

and I have only designed one house with parapets!
An old builder always told me NEVER put your water line inside your building line!
He even hated the internal gutter/fascia we where all using because it was the fashion at the time!

I have been building for many years designing for the last 15 years he was right!

Now there is no building goin on?? Recession, industry has bad rep, customers are weary, wonder why there's very little work out there at present!

ha if I had any atm I'd not be wasting my day on kiwibiker lol!!

[flyingcrocodile46]

I typed..... a truckload of accurate observations

An excellent analysis of the bigger picture :first::clap:


He is sending quantities of timber back to his supplier! Its already has mold on it from new!
According to rumor???
Timbers Suppliers are trying to dip timber in retail packs!
Therefore the outer timber is treated and as you go into the packs the inner timber is either getting very little or is untreated??
I'd guess the timber companies are producing and packing untreated timber then dipping it once its due for shipping!
I'd imagine these packs are sitting in yards for long periods untreated and I'd guess that dipping pre-packed packs is a failed system?

So its still happening folks "how treated" does that stamp on the side of your timber really mean??

Are you seeing this Flyingcroc??


see bottom paragraph in quoted section below (Pinched from www.insights.co.nz (http://www.insights.co.nz/)) which describes the Boron diffusion process. The process is usually carried out by the mills rather than the "timber supplier"/reseller.
Block treatment isn't new. As long as the correct moisture content is established at treatment time and it is dipped for the correct duration, wrapped and allowed sufficient standing time, it is a proven method of chemical delivery.

It may be that the timber in question was subject to establishment of sap stain fungi prior to milling, as it leaves a visible stain that might be considered to look like mold. It is usually rejected during grading but as most grading is by machine stress grading rather than visual sorting, I guess it is more likely to slip through the system from time to time.

The filleting process you described may be used immediately after treatment as part of a full air drying process (employed rather than kiln drying to dry the timber down to to prevailing natural MC of dry timber as applicable to the season.. usually somewhere between 18 to 24%ish) but is not typically used these days due to handling costs, covered storage space and time.


Preservation Processes
There are a number of types of treatment techniques utilised in wood preservation:
Pressure Impregnation - uses vacuum and pressure to obtain chemical penetration of permeable timbers, while controlling the amount of preservative retained. The timber must be free of stain and have a moisture content of less than 25%. Many treatment schedules are used, the pressure fluctuations and timing being distinctive in each.
The Bethell process is the most important of the treatment processes and achieves about 90% of the theoretical maximum uptake in radiata pine. The Lowry treatment is designed to achieve maximum penetration with a low retention of preservative. Retention is around the 60% of theoretical maximum. The Rueping process is used principally with preservative suspended in hot oil such as creosote and PCP where a low net retention is desired for some hazard categories. Net retention here is as low as 40-50%. The Alternating Pressure method utilises repeat applications of pressure and vacuum to force preservative into green wood.
Vapour Phase - utilises the fact that some Boron esters boil at low temperatures. The liberated gas can be drawn into timber where it reacts with water and condenses. For this reason, timber must be very dry (<5-6% moisture content) or only low penetration is achieved. Treatment of framing timber in the drying kiln is possible and can offer considerable cost savings.
Vacuum treatments - utilise volatile organic solvents to transport the preservative into the wood. It is designed to treat dry profiled or machined wood. TBTO is typically used, being introduced to the timber by either a double vacuum or low pressure cycle. The advantage of this technique is that there is no dimensional swelling as associated aqueous treatments and the wood can be painted within a couple of days of treatment.
Diffusion - is used to introduce boron salts to green timber. The timber is sprayed or dipped in the preservative solution and block stacked (without fillets). The wood is then tightly wrapped and left for a number of weeks during which the boron salts diffuse into the wood. Thicker timber may require a second dip to top up the salt levels. For this technique to be successful the timber must have a moisture content of over 50%. If even just the timber surface dries out, the process may not work at all, or be uneconomically slow. Another method using the diffusion process is called double diffusion. This works in the same manner except two successive chemical treatments are used. The second chemical treatment (Na²Cr²O7/Na²CrO⁴ and Na²HasO⁴) precipitates with the first (CuSO⁴) to form a non-leachable preservative.

[avgas]

that's nothing.

You wait until you want a mine inspected.

There used to be a whole department dedicated to that.......

And now we have dead people.

[Reckless]

[QUOTE=flyingcrocodile46;1130152043]An excellent analysis of the bigger picture :first::clap:

Thanks mate at least some of us are on the same page but can we do anything? Have we the time money are desire in our little worlds? Maybe we should? But I doubt it will make a difference there many men funded by our tax dollars and our rates dollars changing things to suit their agendas.

About the timber I understand he sends quite a bit of timber back and from his description he knew genuine timber deterioration when he saw it. But I will re ask the question hopefully he has some plan work for me so I will be talking to him again?

Thanks for correcting me on the Diffusion thing I thought it had to be fillet stacked and repacked? DUH! But its the time sitting under wrap to diffuse that killed the process. IMHO Diffusion Boric treated timber was by far the best to use. Would it also have rotted under Harditex yeh probably. Is the home I mentioned we built 25 years ago a rotting mess now yeh probably?? Am I being called a rough builder because I used the methods/systems of the day to the best of my ability? yeh probably?

I know my opinions and posts probably seem a bit cynical? But I worry about whats happening with the future of our industry over the next few years!
The saving grace may be that anti plaster feelings and cavities may save the day!

Although rumors abound that these new manufactured weatherboards that are allowed to be painted dark dark colours are blowing up in some instances. One case where the weatherboard was all good but so much heat was absorbed by the dark painted wall the framing twisted badly? Go figure LOL!!
ah well time will tell with this one to aye??

I have a mate doing leaky homes. His boss buys and sells them. I understand they put nothing but timber weatherboards on as a reclad.

This thread doesn't look very popular but for those that may read it.
My humble opinion
Roofing:
Use anything, Concrete tiles, colorsteel or stone chip tiles all good these days.

Cladding: Timber weatherboards or brick
If you want plaster build in blocks or use brick seconds and plaster over.
Stick to the tried and true!
If you must use a newer cladding system ie Linea etc use a cavity! Even if your risk matrix says you don't need it! Its only a days work and a few meters of baton.

Oh and steel framing its the thing of the future and very economical!
Roofers are tech screwing on most products and Builders are gluing and screwing damn near everything on the inside now so not much of a change to use a screw gun for the rest of it!

My 2c

[Clockwork]

This thread doesn't look very popular but for those that may read it.
My humble opinion
Roofing:
Use anything, Concrete tiles, colorsteel or stone chip tiles all good these days.

Cladding: Timber weatherboards or brick
If you want plaster build in blocks or use brick seconds and plaster over.
Stick to the tried and true!
If you must use a newer cladding system ie Linea etc use a cavity! Even if your risk matrix says you don't need it! Its only a days work and a few meters of baton.

Oh and steel framing its the thing of the future and very economical!
Roofers are tech screwing on most products and Builders are gluing and screwing damn near everything on the inside now so not much of a change to use a screw gun for the rest of it!

My 2c

Cheers for this. I have a steel frame/brick house about 2 years old. All good so far (just hoping rust it doesn't become an issue in future)

The only issue I have with the steel frame so far is that it's a bugger to get around the roof space. It really needs some sort of deck laid up there for you to crawl on.

[Reckless]

Cheers for this. I have a steel frame/brick house about 2 years old. All good so far (just hoping rust it doesn't become an issue in future)

The only issue I have with the steel frame so far is that it's a bugger to get around the roof space. It really needs some sort of deck laid up there for you to crawl on.

As I understand it Clockwork there is a 50 year warranty with steel from the manufacturer. Don't think you get any with timber?
Rust? as I understand it as long as you don't use heat to cut Galv steel, it wont rust! The Galv migrates over snip cut edges and the Galv screws into holes drilled through galv steel form a complete galv situation in there own right.

I understand there is steel framing sitting outside in the grass, on a site in Christchurch from a project that ran out of money. It's been there 8 years and is still ok!

I'm researching getting into steel framing atm!

Roof space ha yes the sharp edges on the bottom Chords of the trusses face upwards. LOL!!!

Mind you you can do 8m lintels, joists and trusses! Can't do that in timber!

Question for you?
Is there any noise from the framing when the house expands/contracts or gets hit by a good gust of wind?
You on a slab or did they use steel floor joists as well??

TIA mate

[Clockwork]

The house is single story and sits on a slab. No noises associated with expansion, although there is something loose just above the master bedroom that rattles a bit (when a good Wellington gust hits from just the right direction)

The noisiest thing is the light weight tin/tile roof in a heavy rain. I reckon they could use some sort of coating on the inside to deaden the noise a little, give them a little mass. That said I was more than happy to have a very light frame and roof when you consider we live in an earthquake prone part of the world.

We have considered an upstairs extention but I haven't yet learned if there are any issues associated with retro-fitting to a steel fame.

[Reckless]

The house is single story and sits on a slab. No noises associated with expansion, although there is something loose just above the master bedroom that rattles a bit (when a good Wellington gust hits from just the right direction)

The noisiest thing is the light weight tin/tile roof in a heavy rain. I reckon they could use some sort of coating on the inside to deaden the noise a little, give them a little mass. That said I was more than happy to have a very light frame and roof when you consider we live in an earthquake prone part of the world.

We have considered an upstairs extension but I haven't yet learned if there are any issues associated with retro-fitting to a steel fame.

The something lose is most likely the roofing underlay flapping at the eave under the strength of a good gust! Shit how to i describe it?? ok Best I can come up with is the sound of maybe sticking a piece of plastic into a spinning bicycle wheel? Best I can do there mate :)

HA got the right guy here! Second story transformations are my specialty to be honest LOL!!
An addition will be easier in steel because the large spans steel joists can achieve over timber mean the load points I would normally have to transfer down through the lower floor are greatly reduced. Cant see to many other issues a good pair of tin snips wouldn't fix :yes:

[flyingcrocodile46]

The govt's Funding Assistance Package (or FAP as it is appropriately named).

For those considering accepting the FAP package and then later pursuing other parties such as Councils (not part of the FAP deal or who didn't issue a CCC), or designers, Builders etc. Be aware that as part of the FAP agreement you must withdraw your existing claim (WHRS or high court).

On the surface that may not appear so bad as you may think you can simply file a new claim against those other parties, but (and here's the kicker).. The reverse time clock for the statutes of limitations starts from the date of the new claim. You can not use the original claim date as the starting point. Most existing claims are made within the last of the 10 years of the limitation so in most instances a new claim will be ruled out of time and declined.

Just so you are aware.

Particularly those considering accepting the package based on only the 25% Govt contribution (which with all the constraints and hoops, will likely only cover the resulting budget/cost shortfalls):yes:.