Originally Posted by
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
Reply With Quote
), Timber industry lobby groups (manufacturers), Cladding System manufacturers (incl roof/deck & tanking membranes), Sky technicians
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.
Bookmarks