Throughout our website we've
presented pictures and discussions of Syncon Homes' construction defects
in our house. In
spite of seeking repairs through their warranty process, Syncon has failed to appropriately address many
of the most severe
problems. They have either denied that they exist, minimized their
existence by calling them "cosmetic" or applied
"Band-Aids" that fail to correct the underlying defect or
bring them into compliance with the building code. It's what has
caused us to seek redress through the construction defect system in
Nevada.
One of the
biggest problems that they've failed to acknowledge as a construction
defect is the
foundation v. wall v. siding situation we've discussed on many pages.
Another is the weep screed defect that they've denied exists.
What have they failed
to do?
As part of the
construction defect system in our State, Syncon has a "right to
repair" their defective construction. It's a system whereby, in
spite of having given them ample notices and allowing earlier attempts at
repairs, we were required to allow them another chance to fix their
defective construction. We accommodated them just as we did on all
earlier occasions.
So, on
August 12th, Syncon Homes came out to make their repairs. This was
after having previously inspected the property and having made decisions
on what items they would repair and what items they would deny.
Weep
Holes
They had already
denied that the siding weep hole defect existed, so it was not on their
repair list. It involved the part of the siding system that allowed
water to exit the siding instead of being held inside and rotting out the
walls.
If the drain holes are blocked in any way, bad things will
eventually result. These bad things can include mold growth, insect
infestation, and structural decay.
Here's
a picture (left photo) of what we found on our house. It's a picture
of the
problem that they denied existed. The adjacent picture (right photo)
is from a
different Syncon-built house. It shows how the weep screed is supposed to look so it performs
properly:
It's
quite clear that a construction defect exists. In the randomly
investigated wall section on our house, 66% of the drain holes are
blocked. It is not a good thing, yet Syncon Homes has denied that the defect exists.
As
a result of Syncon's denial and unwillingness to resolve an obvious
defect, we've been forced to protect the house. We've been forced to
protect it from water intrusion so that it doesn't accumulate in the
siding and cause all kinds of habitability and safety problems.
What
did we do? We spent money, time and a lot of effort. It's
something that goes beyond what is required to be done in a house built
properly as required by the building codes. Please continue reading
to see what Syncon Homes forced us to do.
Foundation/Wall
/Siding Defect
Before we
see how we were required to protect the house,
let's consider another defect that Syncon Homes claimed they would fix on
August 12th. It involves the siding and sill plate that defectively hangs over the side of the
foundation. The current condition of the components allow weather, water, wind and vermin easy access to the interior
of the wall and house.
As a quick
reminder, consider the detail showing how the siding and wall
was required to be attached to the foundation. It's a manufacturer,
construction document and building code requirement that creates a weather resistant envelope
for the house. There
was no option for deviation.
Here's
the detail straight out of the manufacturer's installation instructions
that they were mandated to follow:
Yet,
Syncon Homes did something different around our house. As these two pictures show,
their construction looks nothing like the above detail. The first
picture (left photo) shows the inappropriate position of the sill plate
and how it causes the siding to be pushed out, away from the
foundation. The next picture (right photo) shows the same spot from
the interior of the wall and how there is easy access for the things the
building code was designed to prevent, weather, water, wind and vermin.
Syncon Homes agreed to come out and repair
these defects around the base of
the house. Personally, we didn't know how they could do it
so that it would comply with the building codes, but we were required to allow
their repair. We accommodated them as required.
These
pictures were taken on the day of Syncon's repair, after they were finished.
They are of the same areas shown above.
Unlike
other homeowners' houses in our neighborhood, where Syncon Homes
completely filled in the void, this is the repair that they completed on our
house. They left our sill plate completely exposed and the gaps
unfilled so that they continue to allow weather, wind, water, and vermin
access to the interior of our walls. It's why we have continued to experience
the bad things
that will compromise our health and safety and the durability of the house.
Why would we care
since we won't accept inappropriate Band-Aids?
As
we proved on our Band-Aid
page, Syncon's repair of filling in the void failed to comply with the
manufacturer's installation instructions, their own construction documents
and the building codes. We showed that it was an inappropriate
repair of the existing defect. So, why would we be concerned with
our repair being different? Why would we care if they didn't do the inappropriate
repair on our house?
The
answers are quite simple. It shows that Syncon Homes has again
acknowledged the truth of our observations and evidence. Here's the
situation:
-
Had
Syncon Homes believed that filling in the voids with glue and stucco
and hiding the underside of the sill plate did in fact comply with
the building codes, they would have done the same repair on our
house. It would show that they expected it to be upheld as a
code compliant action.
-
However,
since they failed to repair the same problem in our house in the
same way as on the other houses, it shows that they don't believe
that filling in the void is an appropriate repair. It shows
that they don't want to spend the money, time and effort on a repair
that will never be upheld as code compliant.
In the meantime, their actions have
left us and the house exposed to the debilitating elements we've described
throughout our website. It's again left us exposed to the
approaching winter weather and another season of increased costs required
to try to keep the house in a habitable condition. It's an unacceptable
situation that speaks clearly about Syncon Homes apparent intentions.
What did we have to
do?
Because they failed to
repair these significant defects, we've had to spend money, time, and effort to keep the
weather, water and wind out
of the structure. It's something we wouldn't have had to do if the structure
and siding had been properly constructed.
How
were we able to accomplish it? We had to sand bag the
perimeter of our home. Here's a couple of pictures of what Syncon Homes
has forced us to do:
Syncon
Homes simply left us with no alternative. We need to care for the
home and ensure that bad things don't happen to it. It's not only
our obligation, but it's the right thing to do. It will not only
help temporarily mitigate any habitability issues for us, it will also
help minimize further structural deterioration that would add to Syncon's liability.
How will the sandbags
help?
Ever
since we bought the house, we've had a problem with air infiltration. In the winter, it's very cold
and the defect increases our heating expenses. Syncon's August 12th
repair did nothing to stop it from happening.
Instead,
it is our hope that the placement of the
sandbags will partially accomplish what Syncon failed to do. It may take the curse off the strong wind and its infiltration into the
structure. It's the only
thing we could do to affect the air intrusion and to lower
our heating expenses closer to what they should have been had the house been properly
built.
We also need to protect
the interior of the structure from the wind-blown rain common in this area
as we enter the Fall and Winter season. Although the bags will not provide a water-proof barrier,
we hope they will block the direct assault of the rain as it pounds into the openings at the base
of the wall. Instead, our intent is to cause the rain to strike the
bags and drain to the ground, rather than being forced into the structure by nature's fury.
Then,
we have the issue of snow. Snow will still fall, but it should not be packed up against the foundation and under
the siding. The sandbags will hopefully keep it away from the structure
to help avoid the wicking of the water into the wall as it melts, freezes,
re-melts, freezes, and melts again.
Finally,
there's one other reason for protecting the house with the sandbags:
We
had no other option!
Not only did Syncon Homes fail to repair the house properly, but one of
their partners directed us to "preserve evidence" through
a court order. It's part of the construction defect redress process. It means that we cannot do anything that affects
the current condition of the foundation, wall, and siding systems.
It's all evidence.
Since
Syncon Homes' failed to provide a construction defect-free structure, one
that complies with the mandated building codes and their construction
documents, it has forced us to act to protect our structure. Our
protection of the structure with the sandbags will not only benefit us, but it
will also benefit Syncon Homes in the long run. It will help mitigate any further deterioration
of the house, for which Syncon Homes would be liable, while
we continue to navigate the construction defect system that Syncon Homes has forced us
into.
Just be
careful
What we have shown
are just a few examples of how Syncon Homes has treated us. We've
seen them deny an obvious defect, which forces future liabilities for their
defective construction on us. We've also seen their application of a
repair that does nothing more than . . . uh, absolutely nothing.
In
all cases, Syncon's actions have done nothing but extend the resolution to the
construction defect action further into the future. It has done
nothing but delay the inevitable and force us to continue living with the habitability
problems and increased costs they created. It has done nothing but
speak very poorly of the company of Syncon Homes.
We
now ask you,
-
Would
you like being told that an obvious defect that will lead to severe deterioration
of your house, doesn't exist?
-
Would
you like being told that the foundation v. wall v. siding defect on
your house is
only "cosmetic," but now it's repaired . . . when it
obviously still exists and clearly amounts to building code
violations?
-
Would
you want to be required to sandbag your house in an attempt to
mitigate habitability problems Syncon Homes has failed to resolve?
We think the answers to those
questions are regretfully too obvious.
