Below is a gallery showing all sorts of general damage encountered during our Building Surveys and Inspections. These include water ingress, dampness and damage to cladding and frames.

Early 20th Century home with major renovations in 1992, 2-storey, house in Dunedin, with some high-risk design elements, and affected area a 2-storey front addition having Hardies cladding (monolithic). Serious questions raised over builder’s, owner’s, and Council’s roles in failures that ensued. Taking cladding into ground/building ground up around cladding is really not a sensible thing to do, and the decay, obviously known for some time, was not declared by previous owners, leaving new owners to fund medium costs for remediation.

Stucco plaster to insulated precast panel structure 2005, 3-storey house in Queenstown, with some high-risk design elements (monolithic cladding). Many poorly installed elements, some of which have failed allowing water ingress and decay to timber elements, and others elements suspected of contributing to this, and signed of by Private Certifier. Issues missed by pre-purchase inspection, and now new owner faces high expense to remediate.

Another architecturally designed 2003, 2-storey house right on beach in Whitianga, also with multiple high-risk elements, with majority clad in Hardies cladding, and some stucco (monolithic cladding). Poor and non-existent protection to penetrations, and generally poor installation of external finishes led to serious decay in numerous locations, signed off by Council as acceptable. Situation was not dealt with for several years, so decay worsened. High expense remediation.

High-end development 2002, 2-storey house not too far from sea in Mt. Maunganui, clad in modified plaster over polystyrene (monolithic cladding). Poorly sealed penetrations, and cladding in touch with ground, allowed moisture ingress unseen, and slow deterioration of timber framing, signed off by Council as acceptable. Most of issues went unnoticed by resident, as is often the case. Medium expense for remediation.

Another architecturally designed 2003, 2-storey house right on beach in Whitianga, also with multiple high-risk elements, with majority clad in Shadowclad ply. Common issue of materials not being installed as per manufacturer’s instructions, and as with most properties, signed off by Council as acceptable. Many of the issues were out of sight and out of reach for any owner. Medium expense remediation.

Referred to as architecturally designed 2002, 3-story house right next to sea in Mt. Maunganui, with multiple high-risk design elements, with majority in Hardies cladding, and some stucco (monolithic cladding). Poor and non-existent protection to penetrations, vertically fixed handrails to decks, and generally poor installation of external finishes led to serious decay in numerous locations, signed off by Council as acceptable. Problems only found when owner decided to sell. High expense remediation.

Modern-looking 2001, 3-bedroom house, close to sea in Mt. Maunganui, clad in modified plaster over polystyrene (monolithic cladding). Poorly sealed penetrations, and cladding in touch with ground, allowed moisture ingress unseen, and slow deterioration of timber framing, signed off by Council as acceptable. Most of issues went unnoticed by resident, as is often the case. Medium expense for remediation.

Mid-sized 2001, 3-bedroom house in Taupo, clad in sand and cement stucco (monolithic cladding). Poorly designed and installed cladding with no control joints led to greater differential movement than stucco could contain, and so many cracks developed, leading to water ingress and eventual timber decay, signed off by Council as acceptable. Situation was not dealt with for several years, so decay worsened. High expense for remediation.