[Michael Leavitt's Home Page | Back Issues of the MMM | Current Issue of the MMM]
|
|
It's a great day at Michael Leavitt & Co Home Inspections. Today's issue of the MMM is action packed. For those of you without Errors & Omission insurance it might save you $500,000 and your business. It might also encourage you to invest in the added E&O protection. Those of you that already have Errors & Omission insurance may just want to bump up your premium level.
EIFS Exterior
Insulation Finishing SystemsThis section of today's MMM is very simply titled," EIFS." I was first introduced to the issue through Bill Ball's Inspector's Field Notes a couple of years back. If you don't know what this product is you had better spend some time on the internet. Do a search on EIFS and the first thing you will notice is that almost every site deals with lawsuits. So the million dollar question is....... "How do you perform a normal Home Inspection without all of the technical tools and keep your name off the list of those being sued???"
The answer to the million dollar question is simple.....
Here is a question and response that I posed to a Home Inspector/EIFS Tester in Nashville.... The question is premature for this topic, but look at the advice and the story that he shared......
Michael Leavitt asked........
OTHER THOUGHT:..... How do you handle your normal Home Inspections that end up being EIFS houses??? Do you tell your client.... "Hey listen, I know that you are already paying me $300+ to do your Home Inspection, but I think it would be really keen if you gave me an additional $750-$1,000 to perform a full EIFS evaluation..... Oh yeah.... I am the only person within 700 miles trained to perform the evaluation."
Walter Jowers from Nashville, Tennessee responded.....
We did that very thing today. We load the report up with boilerplate, direct 'em to the NAHB, novashoc.org, etc. We give 'em an overview of the whole awful mess. Plenty of "adequate warning" to keep the lawyers off our @#$$%$.
If they don't want to pay for invasive testing, that's fine with us. We don't really even want to do it. (Boring, time-consuming, miserable in the summer heat.) We just want them to know that's the only way we know to get the best information. Once we've warned 'em, and offered 'em a way to find out more, the liability is off our back.
A while back, a federal judge called us about an EIFS house, and I directed him to the Internet. He called back later that day and said, I still want the inspection, but I'll pay you the $400 just to answer one question: Is it or is it not EIFS? We drove up, confirmed EIFS, and he wrote a check. We did the rest of the inspection anyway. Didn't feel right about making $400 for 10 minutes' work. Plus, you never know when the emotion will swing back the other way. We wanted him to know the *whole* picture.
You'll note that ahead-of-the-EIFS-curve Charlie is now working only for EIFS home *owners,* and staying out of resale deals. There are all kinds of reasons that this is good: Less emotion, more freedom to remove some EIFS and get the real picture, fewer people calling you at night crying... Just as with home inspection in general, there is an underworld of "testers" who basically bless every house. (They tell people they can fix anything with caulk.) We've got one here in Nashville. We've also got an HI who did a general inspection on an EIFS house and went so far out of his way to bless the house that I think he's about to lose his biz ($500,000 lawsuit).
It's ugly out there. Just go ahead and test the house. You'll either like it, or you'll be trying to return the testing equipment for credit within a week. Walter Jowers - Nashville, TN
SEATTLE
EIFS TRAININGSteady readers of the MMM will recall that two weeks ago I went to Seattle, Washington, to attend (with Brent Foster) a special training on EIFS put on by the Northwest Wall and Ceiling Bureau. It was informative and eye opening, yet it has left me searching for answers in other places. The training instructed about 70 of us how to monitor the correct installation of EIFS on new construction. Very little time was spent talking about inspecting existing construction. I did my best to ask all of the questions that you might have asked. Most readers of the MMM are Home Inspectors, not EIFS professionals. Home Inspectors are looking for information that will help accurately report the conditions without running around like either Chicken Little or Joe "Everything's Alright" Smoozer.
Here are the facts as they pertain to after construction regular Home Inspections, or aptly titled...
How Home Inspectors and EIFS Inspectors are HOSED
We are HOSED because....
There is another big issue and that is that an EIFS system has three key parts......
All 3 should be from the same manufacturer for the same installation. The reality is that many installers will purchase the 3 components from different suppliers and go after the cheapest prices. This may give them a coating system from Sto, a mesh from Dryvit and a foam from Eagle Hardware. This is completely unacceptable because this is a cheap hybrid system that carries no manufacturer backing. We are hosed because we have no clue as we look at the final finish coat.
Now I realize that
I am sharing information that is way beyond the need of a Home
Inspector and is really geared towards an EIFS Inspector, but
I feel that it is invaluable background information that will
help you better understand what is really going on. Up until my
trip to Seattle I was under the impression that the moment that
I identified the color of the foam that I could then make assumption
as to the EIFS system...... Not so. I realize that most of you
are shaking your heads saying...... "Just
tell me how I identify that it is EIFS or Stucco and I will be
fine."
With that I ask you...... If you already did know how to clearly identify EIFS vs. Stucco and you added a simple checkbox to your report that said EIFS and STUCCO. Would simply checking the box EIFS be enough to keep you out of a lawsuit??
I think that the answer is NO. EIFS systems already have bad national press, a bad reputation and current class-action lawsuit status. I think Lawyers are required to attend special "How-to-get-rich-off-of-EIFS" trainings. Read what one EIFS Inspector from a humid climate has to say....
I'm starting to come slowly and privately (for now) to the following conclusions:
There are some pearls of wisdom in the above-mentioned realities. Keep in mind that this reality is matter of fact in humid parts of the country. I eagerly look forward to learning what the reality is in arid Northern Utah. It may be that the arid climate allows the water intrusion to dry out before major damage occurs..... Only time will tell.
The EIFS training I attended in Seattle was taught by Robert Thomas (Bob) who is one of the leading authorities of EIFS in the US. I encourage you to visit his website at www.EIFS.com. Bob has worked specifically with the product for over 20 years. He worked with one of the major manufacturers and is filled with lots of horror stories. He knows the strengths and weaknesses, as well as the realities of the product. He states that the EIFS cladding is no better or worse at leakage than any other siding. As mentioned above though..... the press has jumped on EIFS like a shark on a swimming body and has virtually killed the residential EIFS reputation and/or at least created an enormous doubt in the minds of consumers. If you don't believe that all exterior claddings have weaknesses..... Look at LP siding.
The course manual for the EIFS training is the "EIFS New Construction Inspection Guide". It is available at the WWW.EIFS.COM site for $99. I think that the information within is very valuable. It is filled with EIFS construction techniques and evaluation checklists. Since the failure of the system completely revolves around the installation techniques, I found it most eye opening to learn how the detailing was supposed to occur. Knowing this I can better perform an exterior evaluation during my normal Home Inspection.
Here is a bit of info from page 49 of the manuals troubleshooting guide....
Unlike stucco, which can crack on its own (due to the inherent shrinkage that occurs during curing), EIFS walls don't crack unless something is wrong. Cracks should be repaired as soon as discovered to avoid water entry. Cracks are often caused by the following things:
Repairing cracks is a two step process. First, find out why it is cracking (if you simply fix the crack without knowing the cause, it'll probably crack again). Then repair the crack as follows........
So even if you don't understand the majority of what Bob is referring to..... You at least hopefully grabbed onto the part that says....... EIFS walls don't crack unless something is wrong!!! Recommend further evaluation/repair by an EIFS specialist.
That was worth the $99 price of the manual right there.
ALLEN
E&O NOTICEBob Pearson from Marion Allen Errors & Omission insurance recently sent out a memo to all of the covered Home Inspectors that their coverage does protect the Home Inspector from EIFS claims when performing a standard residential Home Inspection. He said ....
We have had a number of inquiries regarding EIFS lately and coverage under the policy - Yes, We have not had many claims (3) but we have successfully defended each as the inspector noted the EIFS and recommended further evaluation....
...EIFS on homes is a potentially serious problem - I know of homes that had to be bulldozed as they could not be repaired.....
The following are the circumstances of a Los Angeles claim as shared by Mr. Pearson.....
The inspector performed a pre-purchase inspection for a home buyer. The inspector stated in his report.... "the Dryvit is in generally satisfactory condition with cracking and some deterioration. The Dryvit should be repaired as needed." He also noted "the trim was in poor condition as were the door and window flashings and sealant/caulking."
The buyer's lawyer wrote a letter to the inspector demanding he pay for "siding water penetration problems". We responded denying liability on behalf of the inspector, noting the report included bold and underlined reference to the need to have the Dryvit repaired. This denial was sent over a year ago and we still have not had a reply.
As the owner of our organization is an ex-home builder, we receive publications with articles on EIFS as well as insurance journals with the same. At this time it is not clear as to the true cause of the problem. Manufacturers blame the contractors and contractors blame the manufacturers, with insurance companies blaming both. Nevertheless, it poses a problem to the inspector. Some insurance companies will not write a homeowners policy on a dwelling with EIFS. Home buyers may find themselves in a home which is not insurable. I feel it prudent if you inspect a home with EIFS to point out to the buyer that EIFS is a controversial product, that it requires regular maintenance and there may be latent deterioration already and suggest they discuss this with their real estate and insurance agents.
BRENNAN
DEPOSITIONShould EIFS be used on American residential stick framed housing??? The following deposition is found on the internet and it sheds an interesting perspective on EIFS and its use on American residential buildings. This is found at: http://www.novashoc.org/brennan.htm. The entire NOVASHOC site is full of incredible information.
NOVASHOC - Northern Virginia Stucco Home-Owner's Coalition
- The Brennan Deposition -
John J. Brennan was deposed December 7, 1998 in the Case of Eric J. and A. Therese Swensen vs. Lincoln Development Corporation, Inc. and David Neal. The deposition was filed in the Superior Court of Fulton County, State of Georgia, No. E-65553.
Following are excerpts. Please note, if you are a critic of Mr. Brennan and dispute facts as detailed in this deposition, please provide comment and relevant information that you can substantiate. Remember, a gratuitous assertion can be countered with another gratuitous assertion.
Q: Well, let me back up for a second. Who were you a consultant for?
A: Well, they're listed there [CV], but I've - virtually every manufacturer, very large distributors. I founded EIMA, so I made my living for a long time providing consultant services to the industry.
Q: And it says here on your CV, "1979 to 1982, board level management consultant to the world's largest EIFS co-inventor"
A: Uh-huh.
Q: Are you speaking of a specific manufacturer?
A: Yes
Q: And who is that?
A: It would be Sto Industries, today.
Q: And what did you consult on, specifically?
A: Technical expertise of EIFS.
Q: All right. It says here on your CV, "Founding Director of EIMA, Exterior Insulation Manufacturers Association; Chairman of Technical Standards Committee; would not allow use of EIFS on typical single-family dwellings during tenure".
A: That's correct.
Q: Could you explain that for me?
A: There was one major manufacturer in the the United States in the 70's, and that was Dryvit. Dryvit had a very limited product mix, if you compare it to the German products that had been developed in - for 40 years, that have evolved.
I brought the new German products into the United States. I was the founding director of EIMA, which originally was the Exterior Insulation Members - or Manufacturers Association. And as the founding director, I was responsible for getting the initial co-testing done in the United States. Shtutmeister Company [Shtutmeister GMBH - the original name of Sto Industries] did not allow the use of exterior insulation and finish systems on any structure that did not pass a vapor pressure analysis of the wall components.
The typical wood construction used in the United States will not pass that test, without severe - well, not severe, but without substantial modifications.
So there was a process in place to keep these materials off of wood-frame construction homes; and it was done technically, by saying, at EIMA, that you can't be an EIMA member, if you don't subscribe to these standards. If you subscribe to this standard, you agree to do a vapor pressure analysis on any contract, or any - on any project, before issuing the products, and the warranty; and it had to be also sold, or sold to a certified EIMA installer. So there was a process in place, and that process kept this product off of homes until the middle 80's.
I left EIMA. When I departed EIMA, Dryvit, who was not a member, moved in, and they excepted the board, did away with those technical specifications, and the stuff was on houses all over the country.
Q: Do you believe that the product should not have been used on residential houses?
A: The product should not be used on any structure that does not pass a vapor-pressure analysis of the wall component system.
Q: Now, you stated that before any contract would be given for use of the product, they would have to do this test. Did the Sto company go - well, who performed this test? Whose responsibility was it to do the test?
A: The EIFS technician in the field, and/or the trained distributor, and/or the architect, and/or whoever it was that was involved in it.
And typically, it would be - a manufacturer's rep, working with an engineer or an architect, would provide the factory with the finished wall components - or excuse me - would provide the technical department at the factory, the Sto factory, the components of the structure.
We would then, in-house, perform a vapor-pressure analysis, a dew-point analysis, a condensation analysis, and a temperature analysis on the wall-component system. And the purpose for that was to see if the wall component system would hold moisture, or not, or would it dissipate moisture, okay?
If it did not dissipate moisture, we would not approve the project for the use of our product, period. We would not ship the the product. And every single structure was that way. Everything.
But that was a commercial business, and the commercial business had a technician on the site, so we could do that, all right? And that's why we never could do it in the home business, because it would turn a high-technology construction product, into a commodity product, put it in the hands of people that didn't know what it was, and present us with a marketplace that has significant damage. And that's -
Q: And do you believe that's what has happened?
A: Oh, it's clearly what happened. There's no question.
Q: And is it your opinion that EIFS - we'll call it exterior installation [sic] and finish system. EIFS. E-I-F-S - that EIFS should never be used on residential homes, even today?
A: No. It should never be used in a home that doesn't pass a vapor-pressure analysis.
Q: In your experience, have you come across any homes that have passed this vapor -
A: Pressure analysis.
Q: Pressure analysis?
A: The answer to that is yes, but you have to make modification to the design, in order to get it to pass. And those modifications are not esthetically acceptable, generally, in the marketplace.
It works well in Phoenix, and other areas that have a deep-well window, but it doesn't - it esthetically does not work, to do this.
And if I may, I'll explain to you what the problem is.
Q: Please do.
A: The problem is, the transfer of moisture from the inside of the house, to the outside of the house. That's the fundamental problem.
If we have a stainless steel wall, we have no moisture transfer - we agree on that, if you have a stainless steel wall. But we don't have that - we have wood-frame construction. And we have insulation on the outside [EIFS], and then we put insulation inside the cavity.
When you do the physics of those components, you wind up with, essentially, plastic on the outside of the studs, and plastic on the inside of the studs.
Because of this, in geographic areas like the Southeast, moisture will not transfer though the system; and in some cases, it collects on the interior of the system, in terms of condensation. But if it gets wet from another way [intrusion], it won't dry, because the physics will not allow that to happen.
And to give you an idea, if we took a board and we put it on the ground, on the outside, and then we laid a piece of plastic over that board, that board would disappear [rot] very, very quickly. That's what happens, in a sense, in some of these EIFS houses, because of the use of insulation on the inside, and the use of insulation on the outside.
Q: And whose idea, if you will, is it, to have insulation on the inside and insulation on the outside?
[Attorney objects - objects to rephrased question. Directs witness to answer without speculation.]
A: The product came out of Europe, as an answer to using rubble as a building material after World War II, with a secondary requirement for saving energy inside of these restored buildings, that they used the rubble to fix the walls with, to be able to insulate the walls. Because Europe was devastated after WWII, and had no energy. So they really created the energy-conservation construction market. The products that you see today basically came out of Europe.
Europeans - in fact, no one - nowhere in the world are you going to find wood-frame construction, with the exception of North America.
This product had no history, when it came into the United States from Europe, on use on wood-frame construction homes. It had no specifications, it had no history, it had no testing. Because the Europeans make their homes, or build their structures, out of masonry. And that's fundamentally what happened.
When I brought the product to the United States for Sto, we only put it on commercial buildings that were masonry substrates. So that's why you have - 95 percent of the market commercial, and then 5 percent is residential, according to EIMA. And the problems are in the residential market.
Q: Do you know how the product came to be used on residential structures, if it was not intended for that use?
A: Absolutely. Sure. It's a high-technology construction product, as we viewed it - "we" being the people that invented it: Schtutmeister Company and Dryvit. It's come a long way in the last 15 years. And some of the other major players. It was a high-tech product.
The problem is that the materials could be accessed by untrained individuals. Once that occurred, the product began showing up in the housing market, without any specific specifications to install it on wood-frame construction.
Those specifications were developed, and they were just never - I'll just use the word "enforced". That's the only thing I can say, is they've never been enforced; so we wind up with all these houses improperly built, from a specifications point of view.
ANOTHER LAWSUIT..... ABS PipingKen Ives has sent along a couple of photos to remind us all of another potential lawsuit issue that revealed its ugly head about 4 years ago...... Faulty ABS piping.
Both of these photos show perfectly the evidence of pipe failure. Neither shows a brand name... In the background of photo #2 it says SUNLIGHT, but no clear name. I have encountered these failures here in Utah also.
QUOTABLE QUOTES: "We've also got an HI who did a general inspection
on an EIFS house and went so far out of his way to bless the house
that I think he's about to lose his biz ($500,000 lawsuit)."
Walter Jowers[Michael Leavitt's Home Page | Back Issues of the MMM | Current Issue of the MMM]
       |
       |
AII™
Web Site: www.INSPECTION.org