Macdunck when I built mine 4 years ago I asked for boric
treated timber, to be told it was not available in Auckland, and that kiln dried
was the industry standard.
I didn't have the stuffing to argue the point or the
initiave to go to H3 for the framing, as all the fight had gone out just getting
recourse consent, permits, overcoming objections from neighbours etc, and
when things were finally moving I weren't going to slow them down, on a
"technicality re timber" I regret this now.
I suspect you feel its mainly the decks/roof that
will leak, I have had decks as roofing and had them done in butynol which
was weather proof for 10 years until I sold the house.
I feel that if I had decks again I would tile over
butynol, which is hellishly expensive compared to tiling over a membrane, [I
have used hlm 5000 and "the blue stuff"] but not as expensive as removing tiles,
and starting again.
I am not a builder, but saved a bundle by helping my
builder, which as a builder you will know is generally not a good idea,
but It worked in our case.
Subject: [sharechat] off topic leaky home
disputes by macdunk
The front page in sats heralds picture of a house that Is in
dispute Is typical of what home owners with plaster exterior houses can expect
when they try to sell. The house In question I would defy
any builder could build It without It leaking using the materials I see In the
picture. Who can you blame If It happens
to you?. The master builders give
out house of the year to similar houses of this type, the designers continue
to design them, and the gullible public still buy them. There Is a
complete Ignorance of the technical aspect of building, from designers,
building Inspectors, the master builders association.
I really think that a person designing a jet plane would know the laws
of aerodynamics, likewise the person designing a house will understand the
laws off capillary action, electrolyses, and the laws dealing with air
pressure In roofs and walls and untreated wood being able to breathe. The
very sad fact Is Ignorance Is bliss they still don't have a clue and I have
argued the point for at least the last twenty years until I am sick of
It. The builders build to the plan the inspectors
Inspect there work and pass
It. Before
all that happens the owner gets someone to draw It all up the probability
being not one of them Is suitably qualified, the checkpoints are non
existent. When It all turns to custard who do we blame when every person
Involved says Its not my fault. The lawyers will make
more than what It costs to repair some of them. I
think the master builders are most at fault for there complete Ignorance for
so long on the problem, Why do
we bother having them?. An airtight wall
creates a vacuum that only requires a pin hole that will suck water
uphill like water through a straw. This might only happen when the
wind Is In a certain position,so perhaps will go unnoticed for a long period
of time. The danger spots are corners flat decks as roofs,
balconies and anything screwed into or bolted to the
structure. The lovely home In the
herald built In concrete would have been leakproof for the next thousand years
Instead of ending up with poor innocent people fighting each other In
court. The lesson to be learned Is find a old time builder, and
ask before buying, the same way that I ask a mechanic to look over a car
before I buy It. If I wanted to build a rolls royce I wouldnt use Lada
parts houses are the same.
cheers macdunk ps I always refused to build plaster exteriors on a
timber frame It cost me or did It?
See IRG research reports
