Replies

1. 
   gator2121_99 | May 22, 2000 12:22pm | #8

   *
   there is alot more STUFF going on with this house than we know???

2. 
   Guest_ | May 22, 2000 12:22pm | #9

   *
   I ran across this story in a local paper. Seems a building was a total loss due to a rather bizarre sequence of construction defects. It sounds very strange, and I'd assume there is a lot missing, but thought it might be interesting. An excerpt is below.

   The whole thing can be found at:
   http://www.mtdemocrat.com/archives/index.inn?loc=detail&doc=/2000/April/27-607-R426_N.TXT

   Adam

   Mountain Democrat, April 26, 2000:

   ]"But a year after construction started, things took a turn for the worse as, unknown to the Simopouloses, a Sacramento subcontractor installed an insulation product that would eventually doom their dream house.

   ]``Our contractor showed us a video on a cellulose insulation,'' said Lorie Simopoulos, and convinced them to use the product. Cellulose is a sprayable insulation made primarily from shredded paper. Building a home in a wooded area, the couple was attracted to the insulation's flame retardant and mold resistant qualities due to its active ingredient, boric acid.

   ]``The (federally) approved formula calls for 9 percent ammonium sulfate and 5 percent boric acid,'' said Simopoulos. ``(But) the product in our home (was) tested to have 38 percent ammonium sulfate,'' also a flame retardant chemical,which is far less expensive than boric acid.

   ]``Basically, the Simopouloses' problems started because of a subtle screw-up with the roof,'' said San Mateo-based structural engineer Charles Perry, who studied and attempted to correct the various mishaps of the Simopouloses' contractors after the mansion was found uninhabitable.

   ]Initially designed with an over-hang, said Lorie Simopoulos, the contractor and the project's original engineer decided, without contacting the family, to change the roof line, a mistake that also related to the misplacement of some of the load-bearing walls.

   ] `The gutters were then improperly installed'' and angled inward said Perry, allowing water to pool at the roof's edge and seep into the interior of the walls, saturating the cellulose insulation.

   ] ``The house leaked like a sieve. ... the water leached ammonium sulfate out of the insulation,'' said Perry, creating a diluted solution of sulfuric acid, a highly corrosive, dense, oily liquid, which, unknown to the Simopouloses, began to slowly eat away at all of the metals that held the house together. The acid corroded the nails and other hardware, including the copper piping, wiring, gas lines and eventually corrupted the integrity of the wood.

   ] The problem was only discovered about a year later when the original project engineer turned on a faucet and water began to gush out of some of the walls and ceilings. In June 1995 the Simopouloses sued the insulation manufacturer and contractors when they refused to cover all of the repair costs.

   As you can see from the article, the house was donated to a local fire co for practice. I'd venture to say that the difference between "construction costs" and the settlement has to do with the tax write-off from donating the house to the fire dept...(always a cynic)

   Adam

1. 
   Guest_ | May 13, 2000 06:41am | #1

   *Just like the Titanic sinking. So many things going wrong independently but cooperatively leading to the sinking.Rich Beckman

1. 
   Guest_ | May 13, 2000 01:37pm | #2

   *I don't get the part about "The gutters were then improperly installed and angled inward". What does that mean ? Were they built into the soffit or something ?

1. 
   Guest_ | May 13, 2000 02:00pm | #3

   *This is probably why building scientists referr to large custom homes as "experiments."-Rob

1. 
   Guest_ | May 15, 2000 02:41am | #4

   *Ron,I didn't get it either, but I have photos with the paper. There are a few flat roofs/decks-perhaps these didn't drain properly? There are also no downspouts that I could see, so perhaps internal drains?

2. 
   Guest_ | May 16, 2000 04:03pm | #5

   *Adam S et al. The news paper must be running out of new news. This story is at least ten years old if not older. There were a lot of mistakes but both Mrs. s and Dr. s contributed to them. Which is not to say they do not have a legitimate claim.

3. 
   pcg | May 21, 2000 05:21am | #6

   *being a carpenter and a building inspector I ask where are the inspectors when you need them was a cof o issued is so why??????

4. 
   Guest_ | May 21, 2000 03:27pm | #7

   *Remeber something about inspectors - They make sure the house meets thye laws of the state; Not necessarily if it meets the laws of physics or logic.In cases where the codes agree with physics and logic the homeowner wins.I personally have been involved in only 3 or 4 dozen construction projects. The inspector only showed on three commercial buildings. The rest were residential stick frame and never saw an inspector.-Rob