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

[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.

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!

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

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.

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.

[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)

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..