New construction with drywall in bathroom

Nanorch · 23 Oct 2008 at 2:46 PM

We are buying turnkey and it has now turned out that they are installing drywall in the bathrooms.

I’m not very familiar, but it looks just like regular drywall. I questioned this and got a vague response back, but it was mentioned that they followed PER.

Now I've read up a bit and PER has been replaced by BBR.

Will the inspector during the final inspection be able to approve a solution with drywall?

The house was erected after 080701 if that matters...

Marive · 23 Oct 2008 at 3:18 PM

If you are going to install tiles, it is not approved, but if you are going to have a plastic mat, it is still approved for a while longer as I understand it.

Nanorch · 23 Oct 2008 at 3:41 PM

Marive said:
If you're going to install tiles, it's not approved, but if you have a vinyl floor, it's still approved for a while longer as I understand it.

It's going to be tile with underfloor heating and tiles on the walls.

Ugh... it's so frustrating!
How much do you have to check yourself when you buy turnkey, believing you won't have to engage in this kind of thing?

Large well-established construction companies are NO guarantee that you'll even get a bathroom that follows industry standards

lajsiiwan · 23 Oct 2008 at 4:33 PM

Write an angry letter to the consumer agency. There's nothing tastier than taking down a large construction company for building fraud ^^

Åsa76 · 23 Oct 2008 at 4:36 PM

I hope they can tear down and rebuild. It's obviously not considered to be according to any rules if you have plaster nowadays. What scam firms - do not accept a PER certificate, demand a BBV certificate.

I would hire a lawyer otherwise. I assume you have a contract that the house should be built according to "current industry regulations". not just industry regulations ......

Nanorch · 23 Oct 2008 at 8:09 PM

From what I can read in the BBV, there was a transition period for paper-coated gypsum boards until July 1, 2008. So before that, it was acceptable, but not after.

The BBV isn't very detailed on that point. I believe that since the wet room was not started with a good margin before 2008-07-01, paper-coated gypsum is NOT okay.

I can imagine the construction company will refer to the fact that the construction began before 2008-07-01 (we're talking about the slab), do they have anything to gain there?

EDIT: What do you think the inspector will say? (I, of course, have photo documentation of the gypsum, as it won't be visible later)

Bezt · 23 Oct 2008 at 10:47 PM

Sure it's not the "new" fiber-reinforced drywall they used then?

StellanKarlgren · 24 Oct 2008 at 8:57 AM

Bezt said:
Sure it's not the "new" fiber-reinforced gypsum boards they used then?

It doesn't matter. They are covered with paper as well. However, the flexural rigidity is better. They are approved for use with matting on the wall under tiles.

Mike Wazowski · 24 Oct 2008 at 12:40 PM

I believe it depends on the rules in effect when the building permit is applied for and when the building consultation has been held. It often takes a long time between the building permit and production, so new rules cannot take effect immediately for all house constructions.

fn76 · 24 Oct 2008 at 1:08 PM

There are non-cardboard covered gypsum boards. Knauf has a board called Humid Board which is a gypsum board with fiberglass fleece, it does not rot/mold. I believe the surface is light yellow. http://byggsystem.knaufdanogips.se/products/boards/glasmat_gypsum/humid_board/index.html

Bezt · 24 Oct 2008 at 2:32 PM

Mike Wazowski said:
I think it's about the rules that apply when the building permit is sought and when the construction consultation has taken place. It often takes a long time between the building permit and the production, so new rules cannot take effect immediately for all house constructions.

I think that sounds funny and just an attempt for the house manufacturers to save some money, the new rules have been known for over 1½ years, even if they didn't come into effect on July 1st this year, so it can't be that long of a planning period.

StellanKarlgren said:
It doesn't matter. They are also paper-clad. However, the flexural rigidity is better. They are approved with a mat on the wall under tiles.

Well, I'm not quite sure about that, the ones I'm referring to are approved by BKR. For example, http://www.gyproc.dk/gyproc/bestall...NID=84BD0E04C8BEE33DC12572DD002396C5&m=mpmgmb

Nanorch: Check which manufacturer the boards they put up are from and look through this list of approved boards.
http://www.bkr.se/branschregler/Alternativa_skivor_2008-09-22.xls

Then it might be a good idea to check if they use an approved waterproofing system so that there isn't any cutting corners in that aspect as well, almost even more important.
http://www.bkr.se/branschregler/Godkanda_system_over_miljonen.pdf

Linus_E · 24 Oct 2008 at 9:31 PM

works the same everywhere. electrical rules, plumbing rules, carpenter rules... the rules apply from when the project starts.

like where we are building now. there they erected 4-story buildings with plaster in the bathrooms as these started being built before the new rules came into effect.

the same applies when we get new electrical rules, etc.

therefore the construction company can have all the rights on its side.

kungkokos · 26 Oct 2008 at 10:35 PM

I had the same problem with Götenehus. However, I checked this before the bathroom was started and "forced" them to change. They wanted payment for this, but I refused. The strongest point was that the contract stated they would build according to PER's industry regulations. Since PER's building regulations had been incorporated into BKR's industry regulations and had clearer direct requirements than BBR, we succeeded. They couldn't quite defend building the house according to a known risk construction. I also pointed out that the transition period until July 1, 2008, was to allow for adjustments and not to have to tear up ongoing projects. Götenehus argued that I shouldn't care since the house would be completed before it became mandatory.

Strange that it should be an option not to build houses that mold! Stand your ground!

Nanorch · 27 Oct 2008 at 9:53 AM

Bezt said:
Are you sure they haven't used the "new" fiber-reinforced plasterboards?

I assume I wouldn't have heard a mumble about PER without being referred to BKR instead.

Mike Wazowski said:
I think it depends on which rules apply when the building permit is sought and when the building consultation has been held. It often takes a long time between the building permit and production, so new rules cannot take effect immediately for all house constructions.

Since it's a stage with multiple houses, I assume they applied for a building permit and had a building consultation all at once. I would guess this may have been held before 2007-07-01

Bezt said:
That seems odd and just an attempt by house manufacturers to save a few bucks, the new rules have been known for over 1½ years even if they weren't effective as of July 1 this year, so planning can't be that long.

Nanorch: Check which manufacturer made the boards they installed and review this list of approved boards.
[link]

Then it might be a good idea to check if they're using an approved waterproofing membrane so there's no cutting corners there either, almost even more important.
[link]

Isn't that how you build trust? No, if there's going to be another construction, it will be managed independently!

Will check on that waterproofing membrane!

Nanorch · 27 Oct 2008 at 9:55 AM

kungkokos said:
I had the same problem with Götenehus. However, I checked this before the bathroom was started and "forced" them to change. They wanted payment for this but I refused. The strongest card was that the contract stated they should build according to PER's industry rules. Since PER's building regulations were incorporated into BKR's industry rules and they had clearer direct applicable requirements than BBR, we got it through. They couldn't really defend constructing the house according to a known risk construction. I also pointed out that the transition period until July 1, 2008, was to allow time to adjust and not have to tear up started projects. Götenehus argued that I shouldn't care since the house would be finished before it became mandatory.

Strange that it should be an option to not build houses that mold! Stand your ground!

I have thoroughly read our contract but I can't find anything that mentions industry rules. It naturally refers to ABS05 but I can't find anything there either. Ambiguous contract, really =(

So what does the panel say?

Should one escalate this to the Quality Manager? Inspector or the Builder?