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

**Quasievil** · 25th July 2011, 19:13

Originally Posted by dangerous

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?** · 25th July 2011, 19:16

Originally Posted by Quasievil

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

**dangerous** · 25th July 2011, 19:18

Originally Posted by BMWST?

and add in chemical free framing

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

**flyingcrocodile46** · 25th July 2011, 19:30

Originally Posted by BMWST?

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.

Originally Posted by Quasievil

Well that resolves it then

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

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-buil...ectid=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/rdonlyre...Buildings1.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?** · 25th July 2011, 19:31

Originally Posted by dangerous

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

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

**flyingcrocodile46** · 25th July 2011, 19:33

Originally Posted by dangerous

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

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** · 25th July 2011, 19:35

Originally Posted by BMWST?

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** · 25th July 2011, 20:17

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** · 25th July 2011, 20:24

Originally Posted by BMWST?

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

I thought the 310mm hardie planks were.

**Spearfish** · 25th July 2011, 20:40

Originally Posted by Dodgy_Matt

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** · 25th July 2011, 20:54

Originally Posted by flyingcrocodile46

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** · 25th July 2011, 21:07

Originally Posted by 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...

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

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

**porky** · 25th July 2011, 21:10

Originally Posted by SPman

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** · 25th July 2011, 21:12

Originally Posted by flyingcrocodile46

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

Thats why I got out of being a Building Inspector

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

**flyingcrocodile46** · 25th July 2011, 21:12

Originally Posted by porky

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