Buying a brand new house: many questions
Stephanie
see some houses that are currently being built near our town.
First of all, if we were to buy one of these new houses, do we need to
purchase it using a realtor? Would there be any benefit to buying
directly from the builder?
I am somewhat uneasy at the prospect of buying brand new. For one
thing, the area is being developed little by little, and what today is
a beautiful view might easily become something else. Also, the house
is not going to look like the one in the model, so there is
landscaping to do, etc. Is there any advantage to buying brand new
(excepting the obvious: ego gratification, potential price deal, etc)
How do i find out if the builder is reputable?
If anyone has any insight to share, i'd be most grateful.
Thank you!
Steph
TopJ
years old, have a good inspection done, save yourself a lot of heartache and
misery. Building sucks. If you decide to still go through with it, be sure
that you can back out if necessary, and don't be afraid to back out, even if
it means you'll lose your $earnest money. Save yourself the grief though.
Good luck
"Stephanie" <step...@yerz.com> wrote in message
news:de9cfda2.02050...@posting.google.com...
CS
there are increasing numbers of bad ones out there building shoddy
homes and not honoring the warranty. These two sites,
http://www.hadd.com and http://www.hobb.org are must see's before
buying/building new. Also, at least find and skim thru the book "Your
New House" by Fields and Fields...buy it if you plan to build. One
way to research builders online is if the states the builder operates
in have court records online. There are many other ways, most
detailed on the websites or in the book above. If you do this be sure
the contract doesn't just favor the builder. Don't waive the right to
have an inpsection, don't agree to binding arbitration clauses, etc.
Eric Lee Green
> landscaping to do, etc. Is there any advantage to buying brand new
> (excepting the obvious: ego gratification, potential price deal, etc)
The only advantage is if you cannot get a used house of acceptable quality
in that area.
> How do i find out if the builder is reputable?
This varies from state to state. Here in Arizona, you can contact
the state Board of Contractors and find out things like how long the
contractor has been in business, whether the contractor is actually
a licensed contractor (don't laugh, there are fly-by-nights who go into
business without a contractors' license), and how many complaints have
occurred for this contractor (and you also want to know how many houses
this contractor has built, it may be that he's only built 1 house, but
that 1 house fell down).
> If anyone has any insight to share, i'd be most grateful.
The basic problem with buying a new home is one of quality. You won't
know until 5 years or so down the road whether the foundation is any
good and whether the framing is any good. That's about how long it
takes a house to "settle" into its steady state. Houses with shitty
foundation and framing will settle into a state that's ready to fall
down and has $0 resale value. But you won't know that until 5 years
later, unless you have every structural piece of the house carefully
inspected at each stage -- and even that's not fool-proof.
--
Eric Lee Green er...@badtux.org http://badtux.org/eric
GnuPG public key at http://badtux.org/eric/eric.gpg
BadTux News Links http://badtux.org
LarryT
I checked the two sites listed above. Why is it they all refer to
problems in the states of Florida, Texas and Arizona? It appears from
the articles that contractors are not strictly licensed in those
states. Is that correct? An ariticle in the "hadd" website talks
about how ineffective binding arbitration is. Again, I don't
understand. Fortunately I haven't had to use this process but I know
people who have found it to be extremely effective where I live in
Northern California. All contractors are also required to be bonded.
Doesn't that give the new homeowners some recourse? Just curious.
I've been involved in several brand new house builds, including the
one we're in now, and have had virtually no problems. Why are these
web sites so anti-new house??
Eric Lee Green
> cschn...@fourteen.net (CS) wrote in message news:<b98760f8.02050...@posting.google.com>...
>> Stephanie, if it's a good builder it could be a good experience, but
>> there are increasing numbers of bad ones out there building shoddy
>> homes and not honoring the warranty. These two sites,
>> http://www.hadd.com and http://www.hobb.org are must see's before
>> buying/building new. Also, at least find and skim thru the book "Your
>> New House" by Fields and Fields...buy it if you plan to build. One
>
> problems in the states of Florida, Texas and Arizona? It appears from
I saw a lot of problems in Florida and Texas (comes from the Bush
brothers being governor in those two states in the past -- the Bush
brothers believe that business should be able to screw you at will,
and that suing a business because they screwed you is Evil and thus
should be illegal). In Texas the state passed a law saying that the
counties cannot inspect homes to see whether they comply with code.
"Wildcat" developements outside of city limits thus are built "on the
run", with no code enforcement. I'm not familiar with Florida (never
lived there), but I do know that Florida is the home of most of the
fly-by-night moving companies that rip people off ( see
http://badmovers.org , another one of the sites I run ). Florida
appears to be the new outlaw state, home of scofflaws and villains.
Maybe it's the drug money that did it, but I wouldn't want to live
in Florida -- too many criminals living there (starting with the
governor).
I did not see an inordinate number of complaints from Arizona, given
the number of new houses built here every year (over 40,000). Arizona
has a fairly effective state Board of Contractors, though the BoC is
hampered by poor funding and lack of manpower. The biggest cause of
complaints with new houses in Arizona came from an area of southeast
Maricopa County where excessive pumping of groundwater caused massive
subsidience. When a 10 foot sinkhole opens up under your house, there
ain't a helluva lot that a contractor can do about it, but the
homeowner is understandably upset when his new house collapses into
that sinkhole. We also have expansive soil problems in some
areas. That is why all the builders here have moved to post-tensioned
slabs (which, however, can't help if the earth opens up and swallows
your house!).
> the articles that contractors are not strictly licensed in those
> states.
In Texas that is certainly true.
> Is that correct? An ariticle in the "hadd" website talks
> about how ineffective binding arbitration is. Again, I don't
> understand. Fortunately I haven't had to use this process but I know
> people who have found it to be extremely effective where I live in
> Northern California.
Arbitration is useful for medium-sized disputes -- disputes of between
$5,000 and $15,000 in scale. For small disputes, those that lie within
the realm of small claims courts in your state (usually anywhere from
$1,000 to $5,000, depending upon the state), small claims court is
cheaper. Note that the American Arbitration Association consumer
arbitration rules specifically allow you to use small claims court for
claims that fall within your state's limits, so if you do agree to
arbitration in order to avoid the expense of a lawsuit, agree to use
the AAA rules. For large disputes, such as a shitty foundation that
is threatening the collapse of my home where I want the builder to
"buy back" my $150,000 home, I want a jury of my peers to stick it to
the builder if the builder refuses to do the right thing.
The American Arbitration Association's consumer arbitration rules are
generally pretty "fair" to consumers. You want a three-judge panel,
those tend to have results that are more consistent with the law. A
one-judge panel (with no right of appeal) means that you are at the
whim of that one arbiter, who might be as flakey as the arbiter who
allowed 2/3rds of Arthur Andersen Accounting to waltz away as an
independent company with no compensation to Arthur Andersen (the
famous Andersen Consulting split, where the only thing Andersen
Consulting had to do was change their name to Accenture). If
the arbitration agreement specifies a one-judge panel, RUN. If it
specifies anybody except the AAA, *RUN*.
Even there, however, note that the judges for these arbitration
bodies are generally specialists in business law, and have spent most
of their career as business lawyers. They are inherently more
sympathetic to business than they are to consumers. They are, in
essence, a jury of the builder's peers -- NOT a jury of your peers.
I have no problem with voluntary arbitration agreements. For a case
where the dollar amount is between $5,000 and, say, $15,000,
arbitration is going to be cheaper than a full trial, and if it
doesn't work, well, that's life. But for most people, their home
represents their lifes' savings. If it's a case where the home is
rendered unoccupiable and unsellable due to the builder's
incompetence, and the builder refuses to make it right, I want a jury
of my peers deciding that -- not a jury of the builder's peers.
> All contractors are also required to be bonded.
> Doesn't that give the new homeowners some recourse?
No, the "bonded" part only means that if you win a lawsuit or
arbitration against them, you can forward the judgement to the bonding
company and the bonding company will pay the judgement. If they are
not bonded, they could refuse to pay the judgement, at which point the
only thing you could do would be to file for leins on their properties
(debtors' prison is not, alas, an option). Also, if they're not
bonded, they could declare Chapter 13, and then you have to apply to
the bankruptcy court to have your judgement fulfilled. Chances are
you'll be behind a long list of others in that event.
> Just curious.
> I've been involved in several brand new house builds, including the
> one we're in now, and have had virtually no problems. Why are these
> web sites so anti-new house??
I think the deal is that on average, according to a series done by the
Arizona Republic, 1 out of 200 homes built here in Arizona has
problems serious enough to involve the Board of Contractors. Given
that few new home buyers know about the Board of Contractors (it lives
a somewhat subterannean existence), that means that probably 1% of
homes built in the state of Arizona each year has serious problems
(i.e., something structurally deficient, not cosmetic in nature). Now,
that's over 40,000 homes built here per year. So that's going to be
over 400 complaints per year from this state alone. States like
Florida and Texas that don't have anything like the BoC to force
builders to abide by code are going to have even bigger problems, and
it would not surprise me if 2% of the homes built there every year had
serious problems.
So the point is that while the defective houses are a minority of the
new homes built every year, it's still a sizable number. I think what
most infuriates home buyers is when the builder refuses to make good
and fix his defective work. *THAT* is where you see people motivated
enough to go to these web sites and post their experiences.
Stephanie
do i really need a realtor?
I am in the Bay Area, CA. As you all probably know, $250K won't buy
you a dog house. Whether the house is new or used, you can't make a
low offer. On the contrary, the higher the better. Therefore, there
is very little room for negotiation. How valuable is a realtor in
this situation then?
Thanks,
Steph
Ken Schumm
I'd think a recruiter would be more valuable. Maybe they could
find you a job where the cost of living is reasonable.
D. Gerasimatos
Ken Schumm <kwsc...@IH8SPAMqsolv.com> wrote:
>
>I'd think a recruiter would be more valuable. Maybe they could
>find you a job where the cost of living is reasonable.
Reasonable all depends on one's perspective does it not? The average
(urban) California homeowner could own a much, much larger house in many
parts of the country for what his is worth, but that does not mean that
the average homeowner in a given locale is capable of purchasing said
house. What is more true is that a smaller % of people in California can
afford to be homeowners at all, and perhaps owning a home versus renting
does tilt the scale towards leaving the state. If someone is living in
California and CAN afford a home, however, I think that "cost of living"
is not as relevant.
One of the many reasons I live in California is the flexibility it affords. If
one sells his property here after owning for a time (to build equity) he can
move to almost any part of the country and live a great life. In addition
to home equity, the retirement money one is likely to save in a place like
California (assuming some fixed % of income like 10%) also stands to be
greater. This is useful if one then uses that spending power elsewhere. It's
obviously not useful if one remains in California.
Many people in certain other parts of the country where cost of living is
"reasonable" do not have the option to move to California (and be a
homeowner) if they wish to, but Californians are likely to have the
ability to relocate and/or retire to other areas of the country, or
perhaps split time between California and another state.
Whether that's likely to be an option is an individual preference, but I
like to keep my options open. That I really enjoy living here on top of it
is icing on the cake.
I don't think a recruiter would be particularly valuable.
Dimitri
Ken Schumm
> In article <Voyager.020509164154.296E@dilbert>,
> Ken Schumm <kwsc...@IH8SPAMqsolv.com> wrote:
> >
> >I'd think a recruiter would be more valuable. Maybe they could
> >find you a job where the cost of living is reasonable.
>
> I don't think a recruiter would be particularly valuable.
Well, it was meant to be tongue in cheek.
But since you took it seriously....
I lived and worked in LA for three years. I was constantly
amazed at the number of people that lived in RIVERSIDE and
commuted to LA. They did this because that's the only place
they could find an affordable house in a decent neighborhood.
So, they spent 5 hours on the road each day so they could
own a house. Several of them would have gotten out, except
they had extended family nearby - who, of course, had lived
there in the same house for 50 years and didn't have to worry
about the price of housing.
They were all highly skilled high-tech workers with BS CS
minimum earning at and above the wages prevalent in the
industry.
We have since moved out of California, and are far, far better
off both financially and from a quality of life perspective.
YMMV.
JD
Even more reason to use a real estate agent.
First, there is much more to a deal than price. Do you know all there is to
be done, watched for, considered?
Second, you need to be educated or have someone watching out for you. the
opinion you express is incorrect. Bay area prices have been on the decline.
Let me ask you a question. Do you think it's more important to have an agent
working on your behalf if you're buying an $80K home in say, Kansas, where
you might have a fair amount of price flexibility? So why would you not want
an agent if you're prepared to spend $400K or more?
If you think you will be able to get the house cheaper because you don't
have an agent you're mistaken.
Bill
involved in buying a home. I would swear I signed about 70 pieces of paper
to buy my house. Some of this is silly stuff such as a form which says you
will not eat any lead based paint which may be in the house, etc. Someone
requires this form to be filled in and signed, as well as all the others. I
think there are forms for the lender which could vary depending on the type
of loan, forms for the title company, forms for the IRS, and forms for
various government requirements. I think they even had a form explaining
the forms!
Anyway, there are lots of forms and a realtor would know what needs to be
filled out and signed. I guess a lawyer could do this, but the realtor
might be more familiar with the forms...
"Stephanie" wrote in message
CS
> I checked the two sites listed above. Why is it they all refer to
> problems in the states of Florida, Texas and Arizona? It appears from
> the articles that contractors are not strictly licensed in those
> states. Is that correct? An ariticle in the "hadd" website talks
> about how ineffective binding arbitration is. Again, I don't
> understand. Fortunately I haven't had to use this process but I know
> people who have found it to be extremely effective where I live in
> Northern California. All contractors are also required to be bonded.
> Doesn't that give the new homeowners some recourse? Just curious.
> I've been involved in several brand new house builds, including the
> one we're in now, and have had virtually no problems. Why are these
> web sites so anti-new house??
Hobb.org is based in TX. Hadd.com has complaints on builders in quite
a few states besides those three. You would find builder complaints
under "builders" on hadd's site. Another reason in FL is that a lot of
retirees go there and build a new home, and many are defective.
Builders that don't know how to build for the local soil conditions,
or just won't do it right, are common everywhere though.
The person that said certain politicians/industries have helped ensure
that consumers can't sue a company that's ripped them off is quite
true. I have watched this in action in my state's capitol when the
homebuilders association objected to licensing, and the committee
chairman decided not to let a licensing bill even be heard. Also
watched on video tape in TX, when homebuilders were trying to have
"habitability" removed from the requirements for a new home.
Homebuyers are largely unaware this stuff goes on, and falsely assume
the gov't will stand behind them if anything goes wrong with their new
house...wrong!
That is why these sites are "anti-new house" as you say. The people
volunteering for those organizations have been through major house
failures, and found out how little recourse homebuyers really have.
Only a few states even have regulations that make suing a bad builder
a practical option. And many times complaints on builders are kept
confidential by the very agencies and org's that people normally
research at, for company reliability before buying. Those sites would
not exist and have literally millions of hits on them if not for a
real and serious problem with shoddy construction and erroded consumer
protection laws. (Stepping off soapbox for the day now.)
Stephanie
could have made them in a kinder way.
Just a couple things:
* I live in the wine country, which is generally considered part of
the Bay Area. Home prices have certainly NOT declined in the recent
past.
* Back to buying a new home: What would be the advantage of bringing
in a realtor versus bringing in a real-estate lawyer? Maybe this is
very obvious to many, but i am new to this circus.
Steph
JD
> Good and valid points you make, and i thank you. I only wish you
> could have made them in a kinder way.
Sorry if I hurt your feelings. You're about to make a huge investment, I'd
rather make a strong point at the risk of ruffling your feathers rather than
hear about you making a mistake. This is serious business, not kindergarden.
> * I live in the wine country, which is generally considered part of
> the Bay Area. Home prices have certainly NOT declined in the recent
> past.
I'm not too far from you. There are definitely pockets of stable and even
escalating prices out there, but on the whole, prices have fallen in our
region and higher priced homes have been hit the hardest. San Jose has
taken a big hit but Marin County is pretty stable.
But one thing never changes -- a home that is priced right will sell
quickly, probably with multiple offers.
By the way, I just found these numbers for Sonoma County:
For the week ending May 9:
New Listings: 228
New Sales: 86
Price Reductions: 93
That looks like softening to me. More price reductions than sales? Unheard
of 2 years ago. And look at new listings vs. sales -- almost 3 to 1.
> * Back to buying a new home: What would be the advantage of bringing
> in a realtor versus bringing in a real-estate lawyer? Maybe this is
> very obvious to many, but i am new to this circus.
Fair question and not so obvious if you've never been involved in real
estate and only know what you read or hear in a forum like this.
It does seem like a circus sometimes.
Real estate is a funny thing. It's handled differently depending on where
you are. Not only state by state, but sometimes county by county. For
example, escrow in Southern California is handled by independent escrow
companies, up here, there are very few independents, most escrows are done
by the title company. Just a curiosity, doesn't really affect you but...
In California, attorneys are rarely used in simple home sales. In fact,
rarely is too generous. Just this side of never is closer. And when I say
"simple" sales, I'm referring to the typical sale. The only times I've seen
attorneys involved have been in probate sales and they typically use a real
estate agent to handle the transaction.
A major reason for this is California law which is much more extensive than
most, if not every other state. Virtually every agent uses the standard CAR
(California Association of Realtors) forms and we must use the various state
disclosure forms.
That being said, you will likely find more attorney use in your neck of the
woods. I suspect that this is because the people who buy million dollar
homes tend to have more experience with using attorneys and do so as a
matter of course on a transaction of this magnitude.
One thing to remember is that you have to find a house. An attorney is not
going to drive you around to look at properties they found on the MLS.
Another aspect of the sale that will protect you is title insurance. Never
purchase real estate without it.
There are cases where I would use an attorney in addition to an agent. The
most prevalent involve financing. If you will be using any form of seller
financing or a lease option or any type of creative financing, definitely
consult an attorney. Of all the problems I've heard about and seen, lease
option is probably the number one cause, the second is undisclosed defects,
which lead to another point.
Always get a homeowner's warranty. The seller usually pays but if they
refuse, pay for it yourself. But if they refuse I have to wonder about the
deal. I'm talking about a few hundred dollars on a home valued at hundreds
of thousands of dollars. BTW, make sure you add the appliance coverage. The
appliances don't have to be part of the sale (like your fridge) and it's a
great value unless all of your appliances are still under original warranty.
If the house has a pool or spa, add that coverage too. A friend of mine just
got a new pool heater and pump for $50!
I also recommend inspections but this is a tricky area. There are good
inspectors and there are lousy ones. The only advice I can give is to get
some trusted referrals. Also, the home you consider might have features that
may require special investigations. A couple that come to mind are pools and
hillsides. I once had a client who lost his entire home because the
seemingly gentle slope behind him ended up on top of the house one winter.
It turned out that a simple investigation by a soils engineer would have
exposed the problem.
The bottom line is that real estate agents deal with all of this stuff on a
daily basis. Attorneys are great with contracts but unless the seller
insists on using a non-standard purchase agreement, there is no need for an
attorney except for significant, unusual circumstances.
The key is to find a good agent. Spend some time with one before going out
to look at properties. If you're not comfortable, don't waste your time and
theirs, move on until you find the right agent for you and stick with them.
For example, it's OK to go to open houses alone, but don't discuss a
possible purchase with another agent. If you're interested, call your agent
and go from there. Loyalty breeds loyalty and a higher level of service.
Good luck.
[For anyone reading this outside of California, this post may not apply to
you.]
Darryl Okahata
> Just a couple things:
>
> * I live in the wine country, which is generally considered part of
> the Bay Area. Home prices have certainly NOT declined in the recent
> past.
>
> * Back to buying a new home: What would be the advantage of bringing
> in a realtor versus bringing in a real-estate lawyer? Maybe this is
> very obvious to many, but i am new to this circus.
[ NOTE: the following talks about the wine country area of Northern
California. Other procedures and customs may be (and are) followed in
the rest of the country. ]
In Northern California, at least, I suspect that the vast (?)
majority of home purchases are done using realtors (or without them, as
in the case of FSBO). I think lawyers are rarely used (except for after
the sale, if something goes horribly wrong, but lawyers are needed in
this case regardless of whether or not they were used earlier).
However, you're talking about buying a new home. In an hot market
(which is probably still true for midrange homes in the wine country),
builders are generally reluctant to deal with a buyer with a realtor;
there are plenty of other buyers without realtors, so why bother (the
realtor significantly cuts into their profits)? Similarly, they
probably won't want to deviate (much) from their standard sales
contracts, and so they may not want to deal with buyers with lawyers,
either.
[ *HOWEVER*, having a lawyer may tell you if the sales contract is a
really bad one or not. Note that you're not totally at the builder's
mercy, though: the builder still has to meet certain minimum standards
(e.g., house built to code, etc.). ]
Personally, as you're thinking about buying a new house, I strongly
suggest you check into the builder's reputation. Some builders are
good, while others are not. If you get a new house, you're also going
to be dealing with all of the new house issues ("Hey, the toilet's
leaking!" or "Hey, the floor isn't flat!"), and you want a builder
who'll deal with these satisfactorily.
--
Darryl Okahata
dar...@soco.agilent.com
DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not
constitute the support, opinion, or policy of Agilent Technologies, or
of the little green men that have been following him all day.
Stephanie
yes, i was specifically interested in the case of a brand new house.
Your advice sounds good. I have seen too many "Dateline" type
programs unmasking shabby builders and the nightmares they create.
Thanks JD for the info as well. If you happen to have data regarding
Napa County, i'd be very interested as well :-)
Steph
Frank
and see how they spend the least amount of money to build you that
$350K to $2.5 million home. The bad part about the bay area is that
you are paying $350K to $2.5 million for the same exact home that
would sell in a cheaper state for $125K or less.
I have seen realtors in the bay area representing specific new home
projects when the builder has trouble selling their homes. In fact,
if a large new home builder is using a realtor, I personally would be
even more concerned about the quality and pricing of their homes.
For the bay area, I would not recommend purchasing a new home from
Western Pacific Housing, Schuler Homes, KB Homes, or Ryland. These
builders really do not respect your time, and if you place any value
on your time, you are going to spend a fortune in time and legal
expenses getting them to properly complete the home. Which is why
buying a good 3 to 5 year old home isn't a bad idea. IMHO.
step...@yerz.com (Stephanie) wrote in message news:<de9cfda2.02050...@posting.google.com>...
CS
> about how ineffective binding arbitration is. Again, I don't
> understand. Fortunately I haven't had to use this process but I know
> people who have found it to be extremely effective where I live in
> Northern California.
Arbitration appears to be very effective if you're the company
choosing the arbitrator, but if you're a consumer it's a kangaroo
court. The following articles go into far more detail and would be
good reading for anyone who is about to sign a contract with an
arbitration clause because this is the part the company won't tell you
about:
http://www.citizen.org/hot_issues/issue.cfm?ID=291
http://www.consumersunion.org/i/Financial_Services/Contracts___Arbitration/index.html
There's more but don't want to overwhelm anyone. CS.
ila...@earthlink.net
>> We have decided to move and buy a new house. Our realtor took us to
>> see some houses that are currently being built near our town.
>>
>> First of all, if we were to buy one of these new houses, do we need to
>> purchase it using a realtor? Would there be any benefit to buying
>> directly from the builder?
We didn't use a realtor, but they can be of assistance in helping you
select options, e.g. advising you on which options are worthwhile and
which aren't.
>>
>> I am somewhat uneasy at the prospect of buying brand new. For one
>> thing, the area is being developed little by little, and what today is
>> a beautiful view might easily become something else. Also, the house
>> is not going to look like the one in the model, so there is
>> landscaping to do, etc. Is there any advantage to buying brand new
>> (excepting the obvious: ego gratification, potential price deal, etc)
Well, you know what you are getting and you have a warranty. You can
pick and choose the options, colors, features that you want. You can
do your own inspection during the construction process. You can
contract and then have several months to get ready to move, and you
don't have to worry about bidding wars if you are looking into buying
in a sellers market. We bought new to avoid all of the above.
Another reason is demographics. If you are buying a house to get more
room to start or raise a family, you'll likely find more kids in a new
reasonably priced neighborhood than if you buy in an existing
neighborhood where people have lived for a while.
On the downside, prepare to spend six months to a year getting the
bugs out. Prepare for lots of maintenance workers coming and going.
Make sure you are dilligent in all your inspections. And finally, yes
you are taking a risk that things won't look exactly as promised. A
good idea is to review the actual site plans as approved by the
town/county/city.
>> How do i find out if the builder is reputable?
Check references, ask neighbors who have built from the same builder.
Check your local BBB.
Irwin
Frank
> >>
> >> I am somewhat uneasy at the prospect of buying brand new. For one
> >> thing, the area is being developed little by little, and what today is
> >> a beautiful view might easily become something else. Also, the house
> >> is not going to look like the one in the model, so there is
> >> landscaping to do, etc. Is there any advantage to buying brand new
> >> (excepting the obvious: ego gratification, potential price deal, etc)
>
> Well, you know what you are getting and you have a warranty. You can
> pick and choose the options, colors, features that you want. You can
> do your own inspection during the construction process. You can
> contract and then have several months to get ready to move, and you
> don't have to worry about bidding wars if you are looking into buying
> in a sellers market. We bought new to avoid all of the above.
>
Well, that is how it is suppose to work, but that is not reality for
many new home buyers.
1) Typically, homes are not delivered when they are scheduled to be
delivered, sometimes over a year late as has been some Laferty (sp?)
home buyers in the bay area. A new home being at least 3 months late
seems almost normal these days.
2) Many new home builders focus on their quarterly revenue numbers
because they are public companies, and they build homes to meet those
quarterly numbers. Building new homes in America is a poorly managed
process both by the builders and the government.
3) Warranty and contracts? Builders can give you what looks like a
great warranty, but then have a purchase contract that lets them do
whatever they want to you, and they often do. If a builder requires
arbitration, brace yourself for a potential nightmare.
4) Here are just a few items where our Western Pacific Housing
(Schuler Homes) models and marketing materials didn't match the
finished homes. Meaning, this is what we were led to believe would be
part of our homes, but surprise...
a) fence positions -- they put the fences for their models in an
easement without a permit, and then when it came to delivering the
homes, they pushed the fences in 15 to 20 feet from the sidewalks and
refused to install the fences as shown. The permit costs $20 for
Western Pacific Housing to deliver on their commitments.
b) baseboard - in the written final marketing materials and in the
models they used Coronado baseboard as a standard feature. Surprise,
when the home was delivered they installed reversable baseboard and
have refused to install the baseboard as advertised. Worse, Western
Pacific Housing - San Francisco Bay Area Division also installed and
painted the reversable baseboard as if it were done by a sixth grader
... it was horrific. By the way, the person who did our baseboard
within 6 months became a construction supervisor for another new home
builder.
c) in the model unfinished garages they installed metal corner bead on
the outside corners. For the actual homes, they did not install any
corner bead in the unfinished garages, but rather just half-axx
wrapped a piece of sheet rock tape around the corners.
d) trim board around garage door -- all of the models have it, every
other new home builder does it, but when it came time to install this
board on the actual homes, Western Pacific Housing Customer Service in
Pleasanton California has refused to do it.
e) Western Pacific Housing's web site (Schuler Homes) and marketing
materials indicated that our home came standard with 5 bedrooms and 3
full baths. Well, we missed a line on the price sheet that said the
homes came standard with 4 bedrooms and a den with 2.5 baths. For
months after this, Western Pacific Housing's web site still advertised
5 bedrooms and 3 full baths as standard.
The list goes and on. Many new home builders deliver the American
nightmare, not the American dream, and so ground yourself in reality
when you talk to their sales people, and brace yourself for at least 6
months to 1 year of your life where you will deal with people who will
attempt to rationalize everything they do to you. They are
professionals at getting the most 1 sided deal from you, and they have
done it typically to thousands of other new home buyers, and so they
have plenty of experience where this may be your first new home
purchase.
>
> Another reason is demographics. If you are buying a house to get more
> room to start or raise a family, you'll likely find more kids in a new
> reasonably priced neighborhood than if you buy in an existing
> neighborhood where people have lived for a while.
>
Yes, more kids and new families... however...
When you purchase a new home, you have absolutely no idea who your
neighbours are going to be and how many of those new homes will turn
into wrecks within 12 months, and so you are gambling more by
purchasing a new home versus one that has been around for 3 to 5 years
where the homes and crime statistics are established.
>
> On the downside, prepare to spend six months to a year getting the
> bugs out. Prepare for lots of maintenance workers coming and going.
> Make sure you are dilligent in all your inspections. And finally, yes
> you are taking a risk that things won't look exactly as promised. A
> good idea is to review the actual site plans as approved by the
> town/county/city.
>
Things will not look as they are promised for most new builders. They
will deliver the cheapest possible home in the worse possible
condition they can get away with and still win arbitration or a
lawsuit. One good idea is to look at the models, and assume that is
absolute best case for the quality of construction for your home.
However, having said that, I've watched the construction of some
models and simply been amazed at how well new home builders can mask
homes that are wrecks from the start. Recently I was left utterly
speechless at the quality of one model, and walked in two weeks later
and was amazed at how much they hid - I use "hid" versus repaired
because the problems are still there, you just need to know where to
look.
> >> How do i find out if the builder is reputable?
>
> Check references, ask neighbors who have built from the same builder.
> Check your local BBB.
>
Talk to your family, close friends, and co-workers. If the BBB has
anything bad to say about a builder, run from that builder.
Go to each city government and ask them what their building codes are
and how they are better than the national codes: Uniform Building
Code, etc. that is your best hope of getting a better built home.
I just visited another builder construction site this weekend, and
they are about to pour a slab that is about 2.5" in one area, and that
is a slab that the city inspectors are going to pass. UBC saids the
slab must be a minimum of 3.5", and that code applies to that lot.
There are cities in the bay area that are incompetent at properly
inspecting new home sites. And some of these same cities have
employees who are also employees of the builders.
Welcome to the horror known as new home construction in America. Of
course those 2 to 5 year old homes were also once new homes too.
Tip: If there are already built homes for a new development, go door
to door with your spouse and ask people about how well their homes
were delivered and are holding up. Ask everyone you can. This is a
big investment in many ways.
God Bless America
ameijers
Frank <coolw...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4f0613c2.02051...@posting.google.com...
> ila...@earthlink.net wrote in message
news:<3ce28527...@news-east.giganews.com>...
> > >step...@yerz.com (Stephanie) wrote in message
news:<de9cfda2.02050...@posting.google.com>...
> ...
No, Frank, tell us how you really feel.... :^/
But seriously- sounds like you got the chain homebuilder from hell. Good
example of why I am always paranoid about spending big bucks with ANY
company (housing or otherwise) where I'm not dealing with the owner.
But when it comes to housing, there is a 3rd choice between an existing
structure, and a McCookieCutter. Most towns still have independent home
builders, with their own framing crews, and sometimes even their own HVAC,
plumbing, and electric crews. You will have to ask around, since these
companies typically do not have to advertise, and can stay as busy as they
want via word of mouth from satisfied customers. I'm not talking about
fly-by-nights with their office in a truck, just smaller companies that
build maybe a couple dozen houses a year, usually custom designs. The cost
may be a little higher than a cookie cutter, but any independent that has
been around a few years is unlikely to screw their customers. My father used
to own such a company, and he had many repeat and referral customers. Drive
around your town, especially at isolated or infill sites, and look for the
jobsites with the plain trucks, and crews that look like they aren't still
in high school. A good independent will work with you on the design, and
have no problem with giving you referrals, and tours of other house
currently under way.
aem sends...
BuildaLittle
company and I deal with all of my buyers.
--
C h a r l e s H e s t e r
General Contractor/Homebuilding Consultant
Hester Homes/Build a Little, Inc.
www.build-a-little.com
"ameijers" <aeme...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:_SVF8.31619$Vm2.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Frank
mentioned in my previous postings that otherwise seems to have better
built homes. The slab issue is what I also believe to be a smaller
builder, and that slab still has not been poured yet and it looks like
they may have fixed the problem and so I need to recheck it again.
One other interesting thing that Western Pacific Housing does is that
they have two developments, Vintage and Chateau, where instead of
reenforcing the entire house slab with rebar, they primarily only use
rebar in the footings with about 3 foot bars that stick out from the
footings into where the house slab will be poured. In the actual slab
areas they are then using some thick wire mesh instead of rebar or
post-tension cables. This wire mesh then overlaps with the 3 foot
bars that stick out from the footings. Does anyone know what the
advantages and disadvantages of this approach are?
Frank
>
> One other interesting thing that Western Pacific Housing does is that
> they have two developments, Vintage and Chateau, where instead of
> reenforcing the entire house slab with rebar, they primarily only use
> rebar in the footings with about 3 foot bars that stick out from the
> footings into where the house slab will be poured. In the actual slab
> areas they are then using some thick wire mesh instead of rebar or
> post-tension cables. This wire mesh then overlaps with the 3 foot
> bars that stick out from the footings. Does anyone know what the
> advantages and disadvantages of this approach are?
>
...
By the way, between May 24, 2002 and May 31, 2002, Western Pacific
Housing poured 8 new slabs at Vintage and Chateau. For these 8 new
slabs in question, 4 in Chateau and 4 in Vintage, Western Pacific
Housing did not have their soil's water content prepared in a manner
similar to how other builders prepare ground soil in the same area.
In that area, other builders run sprinklers for days, 24x7, on the
ground before they begin digging: Lafferty does it, KB Homes does it,
New America Homes does it... For these 8 new slabs at Vintage and
Chateau, the San Francisco Bay Area Division of Western Pacific
Housing did not run sprinklers 24x7 on the ground beneath those slabs.
Before the first board was put on any one of these new 8 slabs
(actually there were just 4 slabs and 4 additional footings poured at
the time notice was sent to Western Pacific Housing), I did notify
three executives at Western Pacific Housing in writing on May 25,
2002, including the executive who runs the San Francisco Bay Area
Division, and I did recommend that those slabs be removed and repoured
after the soil was prepared for moisture content similar to how other
builders do it. Apparently, Western Pacific Housing does not prepare
ground soil in the same manner as other builders do, because they have
started framing on those slabs, and this does not say that the ground
soil is not properly prepared, it just says that Western Pacific
Housing does things differently than other builders in the same area.
Also, we did videotape the start of the pours in Vintage on May 24,
2002, and I did not see any city employees or Western Pacific Housing
employees overseeing the pour, nor did I see Western Pacific Housing's
engineering firm present at the start of the pour: all on videotape
and we took 360 degree pictures to get everyone present on record at
the time of the start of the first pour in Vintage on May 24, 2002.
For these first pours in Vintage, the concrete trucks waited for
almost 40 minutes before the pours started as the concrete workers
arrived and finished preparation. Also, Western Pacific Housing had
concrete trucks backing and driving over city sidewalks, because
Western Pacific Housing did not hire a concrete pump truck as other
builders are known to do in the area. That included sidewalks
immediately in front of the homes, a sidewalk area on Peony, and a
sidewalk area on Corral Hollow.
... the remainder of this message is largely off topic ...
By the way, we have on record the Tracy Police Department officially
making false statements to cover up misconduct by other city
employees. Yes, there are great cops on that police department, but
there are also 1 too many bad cops on that department and how high in
the organization the dishonesty goes in the Tracy Police Department is
one of my biggest concerns.
For example, on September 21, 2001, 10 days after the 9/11 attack on
America, the City of Tracy accepted responsibility for the
distribution of a still identified white powder on the sidewalks in
front of a home in Tracy owned by a person who has been challenging
substandard contruction in the city, and now bad cops in Tracy
California. The odds are it was concrete powder, but the city and the
builder that did it have both refused to tell the victim what the
powder was: call it evading answering the question time and time again
all in writing. The powder was distributed by the builder apparently
under directions of the City of Tracy, and the City of Tracy
California later accepted 100% liability for this action against a
resident of Tracy. The next day, the City of Tracy, apparently
realizing it was guilty, and actively witnessing the messages being
sent to the US Justice Department in regards to the powder, proceeded
to cover up their actions. As part of this coverup, the Tracy Police
Department intentionally made false statements that conveniently
elminated/minimized the large civil and criminal liability accepted by
another city department for what was actually done by a builder's
workers, non-city employees.
We have it all on record, and we have the photgraphs. Also, the FBI,
Dateline, and the Tracy Press were all immediately sent in real-time
all communications between the city employees and the victim, to
ensure they were properly recorded.
There are many really good people in Tracy California, but they really
need to ask the FBI to review their police department and other city
departments. This definitely is not Rampart, the bad cops in LA, but
it is a city police department that is failing to properly police its
own employees, as most police departments fail to do that, not just
Tracy California.
God Bless America
Karen Mintz
A bit long, eh?
>
> ... Apparently, Western Pacific Housing does not prepare
> ground soil in the same manner as other builders do, because they have
> started framing on those slabs, and this does not say that the ground
> soil is not properly prepared, it just says that Western Pacific
> Housing does things differently than other builders in the same area.
If the moisture content is too low
and the soil is expansive then if
water ever gets under those slabs
the slab may lift up where the broken
sections will be uneven. This can
lead to structural issues for the home.
But I am not a civil engineer just
a home owner.
> still identified white powder on the sidewalks in
I think you meant to
say "still unidentified white powder".
Keep up the good work.
Best Regards, Karen
Frank
> Frank,
>
> A bit long, eh?
>
For future reference for anyone who is going to purchase one of the
homes in question. The homes in question are Chateau #6, #5, and #4;
and Vintage #15, #14, #13, and #12. Also, for Chateau #6, Western
Pacific Housing left the faucet running on-low overnight on the
southern side of that slab, and so if anyone is doing soil tests, skip
the areas between slabs #6 and #5.
The model that had a slab that was cracked up like a kid's jigsaw
puzzle, was the second model (northern-most) model in Western Pacific
Housing's Cambridge development. This is the third home down the
street, where the first is now being built. The slabs at Cambridge
did have their ground soil completely flooded before the pours, and
the slabs are completely reenforced with rebar: footings and main slab
area. Now why did that particular slab crack up so much, I don't
know. Maybe if new home builders put plastic over the wet concrete
there would be less cracks; I've yet to see a bay area developer do
this though.
Finally, before anyone buys a new home from Western Pacific Housing
... Schuler Homes, also remember the following:
#1. Western Pacific Housing picks the walk-thru date.
#2. Regardless of the state of the home at walk-thru, Western Pacific
Housing will proceed to close escrow the next business day and if you
tell them that you will not close escrow because of the mess your
house is in, Western Pacific Housing will threaten you with a per-day
fee for each day you do not close escrow. You cannot refuse to close
escrow because your home is a mess at walk-thru. Western Pacific
Housing has complete control.
#3. From my personal experience, Western Pacific Housing acted in bad
faith or an in unethical manner in the marketing, sale, purchase
contract, construction, delivery, and warranty of the home. Across
the board, this builder's conduct has been at best unethical.
#4. This builder has one executive who called the 9/21/01 victim home
buyer an "axxhole" in an e-mail message sent to that new home buyer by
that executive. That executive and his organization have still not
told that victim what that white powder was, and almost 9 months have
elapsed.
God Bless America
Frank
> For future reference for anyone who is going to purchase one of the
> homes in question. The homes in question are Chateau #6, #5, and #4;
> and Vintage #15, #14, #13, and #12. Also, for Chateau #6, Western
> Pacific Housing left the faucet running on-low overnight on the
> southern side of that slab, and so if anyone is doing soil tests, skip
> the areas between slabs #6 and #5.
>
On 6/13/02, Western Pacific Housing sprayed some water on the two lots
bordering Peony across from Chateau #4; and also the 5th and 6th lot
south of Peony on Memoir (Vintage lots). We did not see Western
Pacific Housing put any similar water treatment for Vintage #15, #14,
#13, and #12; or Chateau #6, #5, and #4.
Now I can expect to see Western Pacific Housing drill core samples out
of the above 7 slabs to have their engineering firm do tests on the
soil beneath those homes, and so if you purchase one of these homes,
that engineering report should be available from your City of Tracy
building inspector, and so get it as soon as escrow closes and see
what your soil moisture % is.
God Bless America
Frank
> >
> > For future reference for anyone who is going to purchase one of the
> > homes in question. The homes in question are Chateau #6, #5, and #4;
> > and Vintage #15, #14, #13, and #12. Also, for Chateau #6, Western
> > Pacific Housing left the faucet running on-low overnight on the
> > southern side of that slab, and so if anyone is doing soil tests, skip
> > the areas between slabs #6 and #5.
> >
Western Pacific Housing is now introducing confusion as to which new
homes they are selling that map to the above seven lot numbers. The
above lot numbers map to the following Western Pacific Housing pricing
sheet lot numbers as of June 29, 2002. These seven homes are the
homes that are already framed without stucco as of July 3, 2002. They
did use sprinklers for most of the lots they are now getting ready to
pour in Chateau and Vintage.
Vintage:
Lot 1015-A
Lot 1014-C
Lot 1013-B
Lot 1012-B
Chateau:
Lot 3004-C
Lot 3005-B
Lot 3006-B
Western Pacific Housing is also cracking/breaking City of Tracy
sidewalks throughout their Edgewood construction area due to their
outright lack of respect for City of Tracy property. These sidewalks
have already been accepted by the city. I have not inspected all of
these sidewalks, but we have them on videotape driving fully loaded
concrete trucks over city sidewalks because they were too cheap to
hire a concrete truck pump like other builders. In particular, at a
minimum they have already cracked the following sidewalk areas in
Edgewood:
* two sidewalk areas north of the driveway entrance for Lot 3006-B
* they completely broke the corner at Peony and Bastille by stacking
sheetrock about 10 feet high on that corner sidewalk rather than stack
it on the street or on a dirt lot, and there are plenty of dirt lots
all around that area. This sidewalk was installed by Treichert (sp?),
not Western Pacific Housing's concrete contractor, and let's see who
the City of Tracy gets to pay for this particular damage. My bet is
that they will blame it on the new home buyers turning on their
sprinklers, and take it out of the Mello-Roos funds for this
development, thus victimizing the new home buyers in Tracy yet again.
As of July 2, 2002, for Lot 3006-B, the front concrete entrance area
to that home is completely shattered. Knowing this infamous bad
builder, they will just put a quick coat of new concrete over the top
and call it as good as new. Heck, they may even leave it that way at
walk-thru, and unless the home buyer asks for it to be fixed and
fights for it to be fixed it may stay in its shattered form.
On a positive note, and in 100% contrast to D.R. Horton's business
practices, this week New America Homes had their engineering firm
on-site during their recent post-tension slab pours in Tracy. They
even took concrete samples as the concrete was being poured. We
applaud that there is at least 1 builder in Tracy that tries to build
quality homes. Thank you New America Homes for at least trying to get
it right.
KB Homes continues to be KB Homes, which is just 1 small government
mentality step above Western Pacific Housing's business practices.
For one of their construction sites in Pleasanton California, they are
drilling holes for at least 20% of the concrete anchor bolts for a
home. Is it really that difficult to have these bolts properly placed
before the concrete is poured? Also, KB Homes is using particle board
for the exterior of these homes where in the same area other builders
are using plywood.
God Bless America.
Frank
California Homes: Valley Junction, Tracy, California, 95376
Wow, it just gets more pathetic everyday when I visit new home
construction sites in Tracy, California (95376/95377). I like this
city because it has about 750 new homes that will be built in it this
year by every builder imaginable from Pulte to KB Homes. It is an
easy way to compare builders who are constructing homes for the same
market area.
Today, I visited a California Homes development in Tracy, Valley
Junction, just driving thru this time. I noticed they had their
sprinklers running, and so I decided to check to see how this builder
did soil preparation. I quickly noticed that they only had 1 sprinkler
covering two lots on Sunnyside Lane where about 25 feet on the eastern
edge of the second lot was not being covered. This is at the
intersection of Sunnyside Lane and Applebrook. When you drive in on
Applebrook, it is the two lots immediately to your right (southern
most) on Sunnyside Lane. The supervisor said they were doing this that
way because they didn't want to wet the fence for the third home down
the street.
When I came back to pace off how many feet the sprinkler was not
covering and photograph it, the California Homes construction folks
became upset and started screaming at me from across the street that I
could not do that because that was their lot. I informed them that I
was on a public sidewalk and that I could do this.
I then went down the street, and noticed that they had another
sprinkler on its side and not covering the whole lot, it happens all
the time, and I photographed it for my records. No big deal there.
Now, I am not saying there is anything wrong with the soil preparation
for this development. However, given how nasty these construction
supervisors were, I would seriously recommend "not" purchasing homes
at Valley Junction in Tracy, these are not the sort of people I would
recommend doing business with.
Can you image that California Homes would tell someone who is busy
taking pictures of a lot that was not being prepared properly that he
could not do that and threaten to call the local cops. Call the Tracy
Police because I was on a public sidewalk measuring how many feet they
were not covering with their sprinkler. That is the construction team
at Valley Junction (California Homes) in Tracy California does
business.
Do you want to purchase a home from a builder that has that much to
hide?
Speaking of the ultimate bad builder...
--------------------------------------------------
Western Pacific Housing Update: Tracy, California
--------------------------------------------------
The 9th lot south on Memoir, south of Peony, and on the western side
of the road, I never saw them spray that lot with water with
sprinklers and they are getting ready to pour concrete there. They
did run sprinklers first for the 5th, 6th, and 7th lots south on
Memoir; one day later they started it for the 8th lot; but they never
did for the 9th lot. They sprayed these lots for 6 days. My degree
of confidence on this 9th lot is 50% because they could have done it
after they marked the lots and removed the sprinklers from the 5th,
6th, 7th, and 8th lots, I would have missed it if they did after the
lot stakes were put in. Unlikely they did this, but I have to give
them half a vote of confidence on the 9th lot south on Memoir.
God Bless America
Lil
sibilings and myself) have decided to invest in a home, and the
majority vote was to invest in a new tract home. Well, after looking
through the purchase agreement, I had some misgivings...what bothered
me was the arbitration clause and the rather one-sided nature of the
contract.
We nearly signed up to buy a Western Pacific or Schuler home, but we
felt that their models looked kind of cheap. We figured the models
would represent the "best" that the builder will do. Instead we opted
for Shea Homes...
Have you heard anything about that particular builder?
Any advice you can provide will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Lil
coolw...@yahoo.com (Frank) wrote in message news:<4f0613c2.02070...@posting.google.com>...
Frank
in their construction. That builder is still a coin toss on my score
card. Shea Homes feel cheap, but then so do 90% of the tract home
builders I've seen.
Lil
felt "average cheap" as opposed to Western Pacific Housing's ultra
cheap (I was thinking of their Chesapeake in American Canyon). When
we checked out the models we rapped things, swung doors, etc. just to
get a feel for the quality...
Just out of mere curiosity, which tract home builders in your opinion
build quality homes?
Lil
coolw...@yahoo.com (Frank) wrote in message news:<4f0613c2.02070...@posting.google.com>...
Frank
> I agree with you that most tract home models feel cheap. Shea Homes
> felt "average cheap" as opposed to Western Pacific Housing's ultra
> cheap (I was thinking of their Chesapeake in American Canyon). When
> we checked out the models we rapped things, swung doors, etc. just to
> get a feel for the quality...
>
> Just out of mere curiosity, which tract home builders in your opinion
> build quality homes?
>
The problem you need to work is: which "least cheap" tract builder do
you want to do business with? You may want to visit each city
inspector's office and ask them how their new home building codes
differ from what is normal. For example, do they require fire
sprinklers in the homes for their city? What else do they do that is
beyond what is in the Uniform Building Code and other published codes?
Some of the better quality homes we see are those where the city
forces builders to build better quality tract homes. Builders tend to
build to minimum building code for a specific city.
Is the American Canyon area where you are looking at?
If you give me your current list and geographic area, we'll gladly
drive around the bay area and see what we find.
What we were told last year is that Western Pacific Housing had to
temporarily stop construction at American Canyon due to construction
problems. Now for this builder to actually stop construction there
must have been some gigantic problem that they could not
"intentionally" hide from the home buyer such as insects started to
swarm from the wood and a section of the house collapsed before they
could "making it happen" get their money from a new home buyer. In
fact, last year for all of the developments they have in the bay area,
20+, they were having a problem getting a single reference community.
They were desperately trying to get one bay area community that would
say nice things about them; and even though they were trying, they
still couldn't do it, well, at least not by June 2001. This must have
been related to them getting purchased by Schuler Homes, which then
was quickly purchased by D.R. Horton.
----------
California Homes: Valley Junction, Tracy, CA - Update - July 7, 2002
I revisited California Homes's Valley Junction again to do a visual
inspection of their homes from the sidewalk, and we found that the
models at Valley Junction had tile roofs that were a complete mess:
broken tiles, tiles that are not set down properly: one of the most
horrible roof jobs I have personally ever seen. This is also the same
builder that about 6 months ago had a realtor trying to sell their new
homes.
They have one home on Sunnyvale Lane that is still for sale that has
at least two rake tiles (those 90 degree side tiles on the edges of
tile roofs), that are missing nails -- this is completely visible from
the sidewalk. The latter is sigificant because the third rake tile up
was missing its second upper nail that typically is covered by the
tile above it. Thus if the lower nail rusts off in 10 to 15 years
because of cheap nails, that tile is going to fall off the house. What
concerns me here is that if I can quickly find two missing rake tile
nails, one of which is the upper nail that is typically hidden from
view, you have to wonder just how many nails are missing. This roof
does not follow the Monier Lifetile installation instructions, and
thus does not meet building code in the City of Tracy California.
Now, I know that the inspectors in Tracy have this unethical habit of
passing next to anything that is built, and I'm more than confident
that they will say this home passes building code because that is how
business is done in Tracy. We photographed and videotaped the tiles
and homes in question.
God Bless America
Lil
Wish I had posted the same question a couple of months back when we
were trying to come to some sort of consensus as to which homes we
want to buy. For a variety of reasons, some financial and some
personal, we have decided on American Canyon or Hiddenbrooke area.
Initially, some of us were very keen on SCS Development out in
Richmond, but the ones in American Canyon, Hiddenbrooke(Greystone,
Shea, Davidon, Western Pacific, Schuler), and Suisun City (Seeno) felt
less cheap than SCS and were more "reasonable." Although most of us
liked the layout of the Greystone communities in American Canyon, we
hated the location (right next to a marsh!). We picked Shea beause it
seemed very average and because of its location--it was right off the
freeway, it's the farthest from the town of American Canyon (and the
marsh--it also felt more "rustic"). We felt that those would be
pluses when we decide to sell (whenever that may turn out to be.)
Also, when our parents finally got used to the idea of a trek from
their current home, they liked the location of the Shea homes the best
of all that they saw (and they saw plenty because I literally spent
about a year trying to come up with candidate homes, both new and
resale, that my siblings and I would be okay with.)
I know it's kind of late, but if you have seen the community in
American Canyon, I would like to get your opinion on it....
Thanks in advance!
Lil
coolw...@yahoo.com (Frank) wrote in message news:<4f0613c2.02070...@posting.google.com>...
Frank
I will make this easier until we visit your area, hopefully over the
next week. I would never recommend doing business with any of the
following new home builders.
#1. KB Homes
#2. Western Pacific Housing, Schuler Homes, D.R. Horton
#3. California Homes
#4. Fitzgerald Homes
#5. Ryland Homes
If the builder isn't on the list then we haven't yet been personally
shocked by them ;) ... which is a good thing. Our personal favorite
is New America Homes, and that was the firm we originally wanted to
purchase a home from, but we second guessed ourselves and gambled on a
builder with a bad reputation and lost. It was our first new home and
so we didn't fully understand just how bad these builders can be.
We just added #4 because we found one of their new homes in Tracy with
a single story wall of 2x4s that were visibly bending from about 30
yards away and the concrete tile roof hadn't even been put on it yet.
That is shocking to us and so they are #4.
----
Western Pacific Housing Update :)
Provided below is the actual e-mail message sent to the 9/21 victim by
the President of Western Pacific Housing's Bay Area Division. This is
how a senior executive at Western Pacific Housing (Schuler Homes /
D.R. Horton) write's e-mail messages to the 9/21/01 victim, 15 days
after the 9/11 Attack on America. No repairs were ever done to the
sidewalks on 9/27 or since then. In reviewing the communications
between the victim and Western Pacific Housing, the next message from
Western Pacific Housing did identify the powder as concrete. Though
the repairs Western Pacific Housing claimed to have been making were
never made, because the sidewalks are as they were on 9/22/01. I
"xxxx"'ed out names and used "..." instead where it helps context.
From: "The President of Western Pacific Housing's Bay Area Division"
To: "The 9/21/01 victim in Tracy"
Subject: RE: What was the purpose of leaving concrete-like powder on
my sidewalks?
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 09:32:58 -0700
"Another Western Pacific Housing employee" either give him the answers
asap or e-mail him and tell him you"ll get back to him at some given
point in time when you have the answers. If this goes to court, I
don't want to look like the bad guy. This guy's such a nut case that
as long as we are courteous and responsive, no judge would hold us
responsible for this asshole.
-----Original Message-----
From: "The 9/21/01 victim to Western Pacific Housing"
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 8:27 AM
To: "Western Pacific Housing"
Cc: xxxx; xxxx; xxxx; xxxx
Subject: RE: What was the purpose of leaving concrete-like powder on
my
sidewalks?
xxxx,
Will you provide us with answers to these three questions?
#1. What was the powder substance that was placed on my sidewalks by
your
contractor?
#2. Why was the powder left only on my sidewalk, but not on anyone
else's
sidewalks in the development?
#3. What exactly is the "official" word for when your contractor was
going
to clean up this powder?
Thanks, xxxx.
At 07:42 AM 9/26/2001 -0700, from "Western Pacific Housing" wrote:
>xxxx, Your repairs will be completed on Thursday 27 September. I
apologize
>for any inconvience this repair has put on you.
>Thanks
>xxxx
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: "The 9/21/01 victim to Western Pacific Housing"
>Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 8:59 PM
>To: Western Pacific Housing
>Cc: xxxx; xxxx; xxxx; xxxx
>Subject: What was the purpose of leaving concrete-like powder on my
>sidewalks?
>
> xxxx,
>
>On 9/21/01, your concrete contractor, xxxx, randomly
>distributed a layer of concrete-like powder on my sidewalks. This
was left
>on new pieces of sidewalk as well as old pieces that had been poured
>earlier this year. I have photographs of the powder, a sample of the
>substance, as well as depth measurements.
>
>#1. What was the substance that was placed on my sidewalks by your
>contractor?
>
>#2. Why was the powder left only on my sidewalk, but not on anyone
else's
>sidewalks in the development?
>
>#3. What exactly is the "official" word for when your contractor was
going
>to clean up this powder?
>
>I've cc'ed xxx from the Tracy Press on this, as well as the city
>inspector, and so please reply to everyone.
>
>Thanks, xxxx.
>
Lil
Thanks for the heads up. Will steer clear of these builders in the
future. I had an inkling of how dicey buying a new home from the few
books on buying real estate that actually dealt with this process.
Scarey that there are "businesses" with CEOs that think like that. I
guess that's why we have Enron, Worldcom and..... Capitalism at its
best....
Lil
coolw...@yahoo.com (Frank) wrote in message news:<4f0613c2.02070...@posting.google.com>...
Frank
wetlands and flood plain of the Northern San Francisco Bay. I have
not yet found the flood plain map for that area.
We will soon have a posting on the new home builders in American
Canyon :)
+----
I also had one name spelled wrong in my last list. Here is the
accurate list of new home builders that I would recommend avoiding in
the San Francisco Bay Area.
#1. Western Pacific Housing, Schuler Homes, D.R. Horton
#2. KB Homes
#3. California Homes
#4. Fitzpatrick Homes
#5. Ryland Homes
I moved Western Pacific Housing to be the #1 worse builder because
they are just so incredibly predictable in terms of how they ripoff
new home buyers.
For California Homes, this past week one of the Valley Junction
supervisors driving a white dodge truck drove on the wrong side of the
road as I was walking towards the rear of my vehicle and came fairly
close to me: violating at least 1 motor vehicle code -- driving a
vehicle on the wrong side of the road. Also, this past week they put
one of their new home's footings 8 feet into an area that they were
not wetting down during my past visits to that development; and, it
was for this same exact lot that the supervisor in the white dodge
truck had previously attempted to stop my work: photographs,
videotapes, and distance measurements on an open public sidewalk. It
is rather interesting that the only people breaking laws at Valley
Junction in Tracy California (95376) are the California Homes
construction supervisors, and in particular the supervisor who drives
a white dodge truck on the wrong side of the road with little respect
for motor vehicle code in Tracy.
God Bless America and God Bless Tracy California
Lil
If you check any National Geologic Survey, you will see that most of
the soil in American Canyon is clay or clay loam (typical soil type
around river systems), and if you add the fact that the Napa River
flows into San Pablo Bay around there....
Lil
coolw...@yahoo.com (Frank) wrote in message news:<4f0613c2.02072...@posting.google.com>...
Frank
> Frank,
>
> If you check any National Geologic Survey, you will see that most of
> the soil in American Canyon is clay or clay loam (typical soil type
> around river systems), and if you add the fact that the Napa River
> flows into San Pablo Bay around there....
>
Great.
Here is my summary of Shea Homes at American Canyon.
These homes look similar to other homes I've seen from Shea. There
was nothing I found where I would put them on my not recommended list,
but then I am not jumping up and down in excitement either. The
neighborhood looked rather nice. The homes facing American Canyon
road are going to get road noise.
It was nice to see that they
* actually used more particle board on the exterior of the home, prior
to applying stucco, than I typically see
* installed the black water runoff pipes for all of the homes
* were actually being careful about where they were putting the fences
* were sealing the roof tile peaks
* really looked like they were trying to complete homes before
walk-thru.
* actually painted the garage doors properly
* actually sealed the concrete areas around the garage doors
* actually tried to plant some nice plants around the homes
Compared to D.R. Horton (Schuler, Western Pacific Housing...), Shea
looks competent :) They are still cheap, and no doubt you are going
to have to create a walk-thru list and ride them for walk-thru and
warranty repairs.
Overall, the only subcontractor that I am concerned about is the firm
installing the drywall and texturing. But honestly, these homes look
much better than what you would get from D.R. Horton, and I was
pleased to see that Shea Homes appears to respect Bay Area new home
buyers enough to at least wet down all the soil areas before pouring
their slabs.
On the downside:
* at least two of the models were missing HVAC filters
* there were cracked roof tiles, but just about every new home I've
ever seen has this problem; and new home buyers need to catch this at
walk-thru; and often they will also fix them as part of the warranty
claim work too
* they did have 1 lower nail on a rounded rake tile that didn't look
like the right type of nail
* there are homes in that development that have chimney top plates (I
don't the exact name for these plates that fit over the top of the
chimney) that appeared to be not level and potentially loose. On the
plus side, at least they had them installed. The incompetent
construction team at D.R. Horton actually forgets to install these
plates for entire developments.
* no window sills (there are other developers that do this: Standard
Pacific, D.R. Horton...)
* quite a bit of drywall joint cracking around the inside corners
around the windows and other texture cracks, but that is probably only
about 25% as bad as I've seen at D.R Horton developments (see my note
at end of this message)
* it would be nice to see metal poles installed in front of the hot
water heaters in the garages, but other builders with similar hot
water configurations also do not have the poles. They install a pole
to keep you from accidently smashing your car into your hot water
heater and gas line.
Just a couple of things I would pay extra attention to at walk-thru
are:
1) first, do your normal walk-thru list, you can research what to
check for on the web, etc. Be thorough. New home quality in the bay
area is in part about how well a new home buyer can inspect their own
home, and how patient you can be with endless rounds of seeing if a
builder can fix things.
2) for this builder, I would carefully inspect all interior walls to
make sure the texture and paint are OK.
3) look for cracks in the inside-corners around your windows and in
the areas around the corners on the adjacent walls, especially for the
windows around the front door areas.
4) review your roof tiles and see if you can find cracked ones, it is
easy for them to replace broken tiles if you point them out
5) check to make sure you have your HVAC filter
6) check your roof tile peaks, and if they do not have sealer on them
that looks as good as the models, ask for that to be addressed -- it
is easy to do. Not all of the roof peaks in this development are
consistently sealed at the same quality level.
7) carefully check your kitchen counter tiles and see if any have
cracks in them, especially the corner tiles
8) check the ledge above the fireplaces to see if you are happy with
how well the texture was applied, if not, ask them to make it look
better
9) Inspect the rubber at the bottom of the garage door and make sure
it actually goes from one side to the other.
Be patient and thorough at walk-thru, and remember to read your
contract, read your warranty, and file those warranty claim forms for
anything that does not look right with your home anytime during the
warranty period. And, if you miss something during walk-thru,
immediately put it on a warranty claim form and send it in.
Good Luck
My Worse Drywall Texturing Story
How bad is the worse I've seen. The most horrible and incompetent
drywall work I have seen to date has been done by Home Finishes of
Pleasanton California for D.R. Horton new home tracts. We were told
that their best team did the work in question, and you should see the
messes they create. First, they spray texture on the walls in a
manner that does not match existing texture. Next, they spray it on
in a manner where air bubbles are everywhere. Next, they do not knock
it down, but rather later lightly sand it in certain areas after it
drys. To further mess up new homes, they literally have gone into
homes and oversprayed hundreds of square feet of walls with texture
and not cleaned it up or painted it. All of this work is done by the
best drywall team that Home Finishes has, at least that is what they
told the new home buyer, and is done with the approval of Western
Pacific Housing of Pleasanton California. Now, using that as the
measurement for the most horrible drywall people in the San Francisco
Bay Area, Shea Homes is not even close to being that bad.
Lil
Thanks for your tips; we'll do what you suggests. One thing did occur
to us. Are we going to be in any position to look at the roof tiles
close up during our walk-throughs? I imagine that we will NOT be able
to get more than a superficial inspection from the distance.
Nice to know that you were able to provide us with concrete evidence
of Shea Homes' average-ness (not that average is something to rave
about)....
Lil
coolw...@yahoo.com (Frank) wrote in message news:<4f0613c2.02072...@posting.google.com>...
Lil
However, it is OBVIOUSLY V-shaped--the posts were not properly
aligned. When we went to the sales office, the salesperson told us to
wait until the first walk-through because they may not be completely
done with the fence yet....
By now, being thoroughly suspicious, we went back to the house and
inspected the house in greater detail. We spotted obviously cracked
and crushed tiles on the roof, which were visible from the street, and
the garage door when shut had an obvious gap between the door and the
concrete floor.
From what I've seen, I am beginning to believe all the horror stories
I've heard and read about the horrific experiences of people buying
new homes. It will be a miracle if the house is habitable....
Lil
Frank
Your concrete tile roof should be installed days, if not at least a
week before your actual walk-thru, and so you can inspect it prior to
walk-thru which would allow you to focus more time on the quality of
the rest of your home at walk-thru :) At walk-thru, you can also look
out the second story windows of the home to review the tile areas
visible from the windows as well as review it again from outside the
home. Also inspect it after walk-thru, typically a roof is covered
under warranty. Remember to read your warranty, because walking on
your roof might void your X year roof warranty, and so use other means
to inspect your roof such as binoculars, camcorders...
What you want to look for are cracks on your roof tiles that are not
the normal lines where two tiles overlap. If this were a D.R. Horton
Western Pacific Housing new home, I would also recommend looking at
the bottom fronts of the tiles to see if you can see any glue mark
lines where they glued tiles back together rather than replace them.
If you have a good pair of binoculars with zoom, use them. From about
50 feet I can focus on a single tile as if I were about 2 feet away
from it. Also, a camcorder with a good zoom is of help, but you will
not be able to see as well as with binoculars with zoom.
One of my favorite catches is that without ever setting foot on the
roof, I found a broken lower tile section that the infamous San
Francisco Bay Area Western Pacific Housing construction team had glued
onto the tile below it because they were too lazy and dishonest to
replace the tile. The lower portion of a concrete Monierlife tile
broke off, and Western Pacific Housing glued it back on rather than
replace it. We do have that particular broken-off tile piece in our
boxes of evidence on this builder.
lill...@hotmail.com (Lil) wrote in message news:<e245b78e.02072...@posting.google.com>...
> Frank,
>
Frank
> Nice to know that you were able to provide us with concrete evidence
> of Shea Homes' average-ness (not that average is something to rave
> about)....
>
In this market, average / competent is great.
There are new home buyers that actually purchase new homes in the bay
area without my "nice to sees"; in fact, not having all of the "nice
to sees" for their new home.
I can imagine that your development is going to have problems with
specific subcontractors, such as the drywaller. Hopefully with Shea
you will not have the builder actually looking the other way and
almost encouraging substandard work so that they can meet their
quarterly revenue objectives, which appears to be how D.R. Horton's
Western Pacific Housing does business. Western Pacific Housing lies
as an entity to ripoff California home buyers and to meet their
quarterly revenue objectives. That level of inherent dishonesty across
the board is why they must feel so at home and at ease in working with
the people who run the City of Tracy California (95376).
Frank
> did the footings have a groove in them? up here in canuck land they don't
> use rebar in home construction either.
>
No. What is the groove for?
Do you have basements?
Down here most of the tract homes do not have basements, and so the
frames are directly anchored to the concrete footings.
The D.R. Horton homes in question were poured by a major earthquake
fault line.
I have not seen any other non-post-tension homes in the bay area that
are missing vertical rebar in the footings and reenforcement between
the footings and the main slab.
kww
> Been wondering that myself, for his last several posts. There has to be a
> back story we aren't hearing, why this fellow has such a mad on for the
> local contractors that he is spending considerable hours and expense to
> 'get' something on them. I see a restraining order (or more likely, a
> broken nose from a pissed-off sub) in this guy's future. Not saying he is
> wrong in his observations, since I don't know the code and 'usual and
> customary' practices out there, but why does he CARE so much? Did they sell
> him a house that fell down or something?
>
Go get'um Frank!
kww
Frank
I knew that you would be the first person to post a flame.
I am impressed that you waited so long to do it.
But at the end of the day, I knew you would be first because you
defended these crooked builders once before.
Just so we all know where we stand.
Have you ever been paid once cent, or do you ever expect to be paid at
least one cent, past, present, or future from a new home builder?
v.viv...@verizon.net (v) wrote in message news:<3d532de0...@news.bellatlantic.net>...
> On 7 Aug 2002 22:13:29 -0700, coolw...@yahoo.com (Frank) wrote:
>
> >Bad Builder Report: August 7, 2002
> >
> Dude, what IS your problem?
>
> They pour a slab that meets code but does not meet YOUR specs? If you
> want more rebar in your slabs, then spec it and pay for it in your
> house.
>
> Residential slabs here don't have individual rebars (they have 6-6
> 10-10 wire mesh). Residential foundation walls here don't have bar
> either, unless they are below the thickness to height ratio set out in
> the code; it is usually more economical to make it thick enought that
> then no rebar is required. Bending over vertical rebar to connect to
> a slab is a recognized practice where engineering calls for it (such
> as bridge work) but again is not the usual for residential
> construction.
>
> I don't see what the problem is. Maybe THEY need to start following
> YOU around with a camera every day, to see if you ever make a faux
> pas?
>
> Get a life. (Apparently, nobody IRL was at all interested in your
> 'complaint', so that is why you are here with it?)
>
> -v.
Frank
First, see your post below and my comments are on the other side of
it.
>From: v (v.viv...@verizon.net)
>Subject: Re: Pulte Home developments in the greater Boston area
>Newsgroups: misc.consumers.house
>Date: 2001-09-02 09:21:20 PST
>
>On Sat, 01 Sep 2001 16:57:48 -0500, ga...@delta-graphics.com wrote:
>>
>>If it were taken care of it would be a success story about a builder
(tract or
>>otherwise) who actually gave a damn about their purchasers. Now that
would be a
>>real story.
>>
> Right. And all these big builders get big with lots of customers
> because they are all no good whatsoever. Right.
>
> With tens of thousands of customers there are bound to be a few
> dissatisfied ones.
>
I would bet that at least 75% of D.R. Horton's new home buyers in
specific developments would be beyond dissatified with D.R. Horton. I
realize that you may find that hard to believe, and until I actually
purchased a home from one of these horrible builders I wouldn't have
believed it either. It is a surreal experience.
OK, and so this builder does sell 10000s of homes. Now assume they
take 6 months to a year of life from each of their new home buyers
because of their unethical business practices. That would mean that
this builder takes 5,000 to 10,000 years of life from Americans
(someone's parents, children, brothers and sisters...). Now assume
they deliver homes that really should be priced on average at least
$50,000 less than they are because of their business practices, that
means they take in an extra $50,000 x 10,000 = $500,000,000. And that
is just one conservative estimate for a single bad builder in America.
Now they can take that extra $500,000,000 that a good builder will
not have and put that into more hypergrowth and more creative ways to
get even more 1-sided deals from Americans, and they do, and they very
quickly become big builders.
>
> I have never bought from a 'big builder' or in a 'tract' developoment,
> but suspect that a good part of the problem is in the irresponsible
> consumerist mentality of many of the people who are attracted to such
> things.
>
> to each their own, I guess.
>
> -v.
Yes, today in America there are very large builders such as D.R.
Horton and KB Homes who got that way precisely because they do not
give a damn about new home buyers and so they have more profits with
which to grow faster. Yes, good honest well-intentioned builders
probably do grow slower or fail because they have to spend more money
and resources to build their better built homes; and they probably
even write fairer contracts that eventually expose them to big
lawsuits that stunt their growth or put them out of business. Sad, but
probably very true. While new home builders who act like they hate
new home buyers, write contracts that let them do whatever they want
to new home buyers and legally get away with it; and they do just
that, and yes I was one their victims. I knew their track record
prior to purchasing a home from them because I researched them on the
Internet, but I really did not fully appreciate what a complete
nightmare it really was for the new home buyers until I actually
experienced it first hand myself.
I stood alone back in 1999 as I went to the FCC and complained about
unethical billing practices at MCI (which during the battle became MCI
Worldcom). My work did lead to MCI Worldcom completely reissuing
their FCC consumer tariffs because they had instances where consumer
rate plan rating rules where not being followed as they were stated in
the MCI Worldcom consumer tariffs filed with the FCC: accounting
problems at MCI Worldcom. AT&T didn't have these problems. Sprint
didn't have these problems. MCI Worldcom did. Now, almost 3 years
later everyone is surprised that nobody caught the problems at MCI
Worldcom earlier. I didn't catch the problems that are now on the
front pages of every paper and now going past $7 billion in fraud, but
I did catch a big clue to the business practices at work at MCI
Worldcom that I did report to the FCC in 1999 and 2000.
Today, D.R. Horton has at least one new home tract in the San
Francisco Bay Area where they were not able to sell a single home in a
year because of their reputation and the quality of their homes.
You just don't get it until you have been a victim of a bad builder.
This is beyond what I think anyone can imagine or fully understand
until you first hand see what bad builders do to America.
God Bless America
Frank
> I have not seen any other non-post-tension homes in the bay area that
> are missing vertical rebar in the footings and reenforcement between
> the footings and the main slab.
>
CORRECTION:
This weekend I did some double checking, and I did find builders not
on my "not recommended list" that do not have vertical rebar in their
footings. But they at least have the main slab's rebar tied to the
rebar in the footings.
Now the question is why did D.R. Horton use the 90 degree rebar from
the footings to the main slab for the first 100 or so homes they built
in a couple of their developments, but now have decided to stop using
it and also at the same time also go to a 1 pour (footings and slab at
the same time) instead of a 2 pour (first pour the footings and let
them dry and then pour the main slab).
I am going to double check with their engineering firm to see if they
are aware of this change as well as with the city those homes are
being built in.
God Bless America.
CS
it was like to get a defective house until they had one. It probably
ISN'T something most people could fully understand unless they go thru
it. Even people's own friends and relatives sometimes don't get it,
because they aren't the ones paying the associated bills or living in
it 24-7, thus being forced to think about it day and night for months
and years on end. Having a seriously defective house case to fight
takes over the home owner's life, and negatively impacts every aspect
of it. Most home buyers who get stuck with a lemon think hiring a
lawyer will take care of it at first, then they find out that the laws
are skewed in the builder's favor. Very few people have any idea
going into a house purchase that the research they did might be
inadequate, or that if anything goes wrong, the contracts, laws, and
warranties may all be useless. Builders associations have united and
they lobby to make it this way. Their methods of deception are far
more sophisocated that most buyers realize. I just cringe when I hear
anyone tell buyers to just check the BBB before buying, because I know
that will often get you nothing but a misleading report our outright
lie. Yet realtors, consumer sites, etc, constantly give buyers no
better advice than that. It's not enough, anymore.
Oak 1900
future?
I appreciate your sharing what happened to you. I will be making a purchase
sometime in the next couple of years and am thinking of avoiding any new
construction, on the grounds that it's for people who have money with which to
"gamble."
CS
> Based on this experience, will you avoid purchasing brand new houses in the
> future?
>
> I appreciate your sharing what happened to you. I will be making a purchase
> sometime in the next couple of years and am thinking of avoiding any new
> construction, on the grounds that it's for people who have money with which to
> "gamble."
This experience has made us "gun shy" about purchasing any other
house, new or not. We bought a new spec house, after having had two
good experiences buying new homes. We researched the builder in the
usual ways, BBB, asking around, internet research, etc. After moving
in, the damages from defects that were not observable began to show
up. Foundation failure, leaky roof, and some less serious things as
well. For the first few months we really believed this would all get
fixed; the thought of having to move again so soon never occurred to
us. We wrote many letters, filed many complaints, etc, and our
builder steadfastly refused to accept responsibility for errors and
outright omissions of material, plus as we later discovered, falsified
documents pertaining to our inspections. The estimates for repairs
grew, til we began to question the logic of even trying to repair it.
After thinking about it for a year, HUD/FHA decided our builder was no
longer worth the risk and he is not to sell to FHA buyers for a year.
That'll run out in Dec. We have had to pay numerous experts to do
reports on our house, and for most of the last two years have had a
steady stream of contractors and others traipsing thru the house
tearing up carpet to look at the latest giant crack, etc.
We have not really been able to live a normal life since buying the
house, and it affects everything in our lives, negatively of course.
It would be hard to describe...it's a lot of little and big things
that add up, all with this underlying huge problem of a house that
will probably never be right, and certainly never be worth what it
should be even if fixed. We will have to disclose all of this, after
all.
Without writing a novel, that's why we're afraid to buy another house
again...knowing what we know, we would probably never find a builder
who'd be willing to agree to the kind of contract we'd insist on, for
starters. And we still have as many, if not more, of the fears
regarding resales as we ever did. After all, selling without
disclosing defects is a common practice, sometimes stemming from a
builder's errors they couldn't get fixed in the first place. A home
buyer these days has to know more and do more, than even a few yrs
ago. If our first and/or second home had been like this we'd have
gone back to being renters.
Lil
beginning to have a horrible feeling in the pit of my stomach
regarding purchasing a home....
I found out from a friend that Schuler Homes uses "synthetic stucco"
in their homes, which absorb water and causes the home to rot on the
inside. (This was the basis for a class action lawsuit.) What the
heck is "synthetic stucco"? How common is this material in new
constructions?
Lil
cschn...@fourteen.net (CS) wrote in message news:<b98760f8.02081...@posting.google.com>...
Eric Lee Green
> After reading these posts, as well as talking to someone I know, I'm
> beginning to have a horrible feeling in the pit of my stomach
> regarding purchasing a home....
>
> I found out from a friend that Schuler Homes uses "synthetic stucco"
> in their homes, which absorb water and causes the home to rot on the
> inside. (This was the basis for a class action lawsuit.) What the
> heck is "synthetic stucco"? How common is this material in new
> constructions?
"synthetic stucco" (now known as EIFS) does not absorb water. In fact,
that's the whole problem with it -- it's impermeable to water. That
would not be an issue, except that home builders applied it directly
to the sheathing of houses without providing for the
manufacturer-mandated drainage plane and weep screeds to allow any
moisture that manages to get behind the EIFS to excape out the bottom
of the house. Because the EIFS is impermeable to water, it does not
itself allow moisture to escape the house, thus causing the house to
rot if no other provisions for moisture control are made.
There's nothing inherently "bad" about EIFS, if properly applied. For
example, a proper application of EIFS may have sheathing, then black
paper, then polystyrene then the EIFS applied to the outside of the
polystyrene, with a weep screed at both top and bottom to allow
moisture that gets beind the EIFS to escape. The 15#
asphalt-impregnated felt and polystyrene provide the drainage plane,
allowing moisture to escape, and the EIFS serves to protect the
polystyrene from sun, wind, and direct rain being driven through
it. Unfortunately, builders trying to cut corners left out the
drainage plane, trapping moisture behind the EIFS, causing the house
to rot, and giving EIFS a bad name that it really doesn't deserve
(because there's nothing wrong with the material itself, just in how
idiot home builders applied it).
As for whether I would buy a home built with EIFS: emphatically *NO*,
unless I had documentation and pictures of the house under
construction demonstrating that it was built *EXACTLY* to the
specifications as laid out by the EIFS manufacturer. This is one
material that is unforgiving of typical builder bungling. About the
only home I would unreservedly accept EIFS on would be a concrete home
built with concrete block or insulated concrete form, where rot is not
a problem.
--
Eric Lee Green EMAIL: mailto:er...@badtux.org WEB: http://badtux.org
There is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress.
- Mark Twain
Frank
>
> As for whether I would buy a home built with EIFS: emphatically *NO*,
> unless I had documentation and pictures of the house under
> construction demonstrating that it was built *EXACTLY* to the
> specifications as laid out by the EIFS manufacturer. This is one
> material that is unforgiving of typical builder bungling. About the
> only home I would unreservedly accept EIFS on would be a concrete home
> built with concrete block or insulated concrete form, where rot is not
> a problem.
>
I don't know exactly what type of stucco they are using, but the
majority of the homes in the bay area tossed together by the tract
builders have that white styrofoam board put down and then the stucco.
If there is a problem, how long does it typically take for this rot to
start? I really cannot imagine how any new buyer can trust that
specific bad builders are doing this right. These builders cannot
even install reversible baseboard properly and yet home buyers are
trusting them with this?
In the bay area, it typically rains from November to about April, and
then we get little or no rain from May to October. And there are
areas that frequently get fogged in during the Summer months too.
Are there any visual clues that new home buyers can identify to know
that something is going wrong before it is too late?
Eric Lee Green
>> unless I had documentation and pictures of the house under
>> construction demonstrating that it was built *EXACTLY* to the
>> specifications as laid out by the EIFS manufacturer. This is one
>> material that is unforgiving of typical builder bungling. About the
>> only home I would unreservedly accept EIFS on would be a concrete home
>> built with concrete block or insulated concrete form, where rot is not
>> a problem.
>
> I don't know exactly what type of stucco they are using, but the
> majority of the homes in the bay area tossed together by the tract
> builders have that white styrofoam board put down and then the stucco.
I assume that it looks like: building paper (15# felt or tyvek),
styrofoam board, wire lathe, then stucco. This is a quite valid method
of applying stucco, as long as they remember the weep screed at the
bottom, and the windows are properly flashed. The styrofoam board and
building paper provide an air gap/drainage plane to allow moisture to
drain out the bottom.
The thing most often goofed in the above is the flashing. Typically,
the siding folks forget or don't bother with tucking the building
paper under the bottom course of flashing under windows when they
apply the building paper. This means that water will get funneled into
the house under the windows.
> If there is a problem, how long does it typically take for this rot to
> start?
Pretty much immediately. Mold and fungal spores are everywhere, all
they need is moisture to grow. "Rot" is actually the action of
wood-eating mold and fungus. However, it could be several years before
the bugs eat enough wood that it becomes obvious that something's wrong.
> I really cannot imagine how any new buyer can trust that
> specific bad builders are doing this right. These builders cannot
> even install reversible baseboard properly and yet home buyers are
> trusting them with this?
Indeed.
> Are there any visual clues that new home buyers can identify to know
> that something is going wrong before it is too late?
Put a clause into your contract that you will inspect the house
between the time that the building paper goes on, and the time that
the styrofoam goes on (hiding the flashing problem), and that the
contract is automatically null and void and all monies refunded if
they fail to honor this clause. This is one of the most common
problems with houses, and one of the most difficult to detect --
structural problems can be detected at framing walkthrough, concrete
problems can be detected via core samples at pretty much any time, but
weatherproofing problems are hidden between layers of the house until
you get that really BIG rain that sends a flood coming out of your
baseboards or through your roof.
Talking about roof, roofs can have flashing problems too. However, you
can detect that more easily by just going into the attic when it's raining,
and it can typically be fixed more easily too.
--
Eric Lee Green GnuPG public key at http://badtux.org/eric/eric.gpg
mailto:er...@badtux.org Web: http://www.badtux.org/eric
johnsa...@gmail.com
> All this info has been great, but i still have a question unanswered:
> do i really need a realtor?
>
> I am in the Bay Area, CA. As you all probably know, $250K won't buy
> you a dog house. Whether the house is new or used, you can't make a
> low offer. On the contrary, the higher the better. Therefore, there
> is very little room for negotiation. How valuable is a realtor in
> this situation then?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steph
Hello Steph,
I'm a property buying agent in UK and I run the Propsavvy property website. And to your question, a good Realtor is always valuable in purchasing a property. Because the home/property buyers must not be aware of all the factors related to the property. But a good agent can act in this situation. He might be aware of the property market, the price worth for a particular property, the area, the nearby amenities, to make out the best deals with the property owner & even can find the property within one's budget.
But finding out a best Realtor is a key factor. Else you will be simply throwing your money down the drain. For this you can inquire your acquaintances in those area you are looking to buy property. On the other hand, you can check the reviews on the Realtor online and can fix the deal.
If you are going to buy a property don't go for new ones unless you are sure about the property. Else you will have to run behind each and every patch up works that a new house is subjected to.
- www.propsavvy.com
Bob F
SPAM to.