ᐅ TV show about tips and tricks for building a house...

Then a building surveyor or an expert.

Snowy36 schrieb:

Yes, but the willingness to confront this is very low... what does the site manager do if they damage their relationship with the trade during the site situation right now for the next house they want to build?

Better to have an architect who doesn’t care at all about who they collaborate with.

We’ve actually talked about this before.

The trades are also afraid that the situation might turn against them someday. There have been other, more cooperative times, and there will be such times again. Then the trades will be the ones begging architects for contracts. They’re also afraid to hire permanent staff during the ongoing boom and then not be able to let them go if orders dry up.

Our expert pointed out that there should actually be a bitumen layer beneath the perimeter insulation, and that the panels shouldn’t be fixed to the concrete in the basement with anchors, but rather glued on instead.

The site manager always works with this particular structural builder, so do you really think the expert will help you now? He’s just raising awareness... You’ll have to handle any conflicts with the site manager and the structural builder yourself, and the site manager won’t risk upsetting the person he depends on.

I strongly advise against creating situations like this in today’s times.

The structural builder didn’t want to tear everything down again, and we didn’t want a legal dispute... Even if you visit the site every day to check, they installed everything in about 4 hours—you simply can’t watch that closely.

For the next build, I’m taking time off completely during the structural work, roofing, and plumbing phases.

Snowy36 schrieb:

Our expert pointed out that under the perimeter insulation there should actually be a bitumen layer, and that the panels shouldn’t be fastened to the concrete in the basement with anchors, but rather glued on....

The site manager always works with this structural contractor, do you really think the expert will help you now? He’s just pointing things out... You have to deal with the site manager and the structural contractor yourself, and the site manager won’t upset the person he depends on....

I strongly advise against creating such situations nowadays....

The structural contractor didn’t want to tear everything down again, and we didn’t want a legal dispute.... and even if you go there every day to check... They installed that in about 4 hours—you can’t watch that fast.

Next time I’m taking time off for the entire structural phase, roofing, and plumbing.

Yes, that’s how the manufacturer recommends doing it.
Did your expert also explain why this is done or why the manufacturer recommends it? I’m curious about the answer, because I can quote manufacturer specifications as well 🙂

Yes, he did, both to ensure that no water can penetrate at all and because you should avoid drilling into the concrete, as this weakens it, even if only minimally. Additionally, this results in a smooth surface, which is appreciated by the plasterer.

Snowy36 schrieb:

Yes, it does, firstly to prevent any water from getting through at all, and secondly, you shouldn’t drill into the concrete because that weakens it, even if only slightly. Also, having the surface flush makes it easier for the plasterer.

Okay, for an exposed basement that still needs plastering, I can understand that. For a cast-in-place concrete basement where the soil presses against the perimeter insulation, your method is common practice and, according to my quote, saves about 3,000 euros gross. No water gets through without glued insulation anyway 🙂

Now the question is whether you paid the 3,000 euros and it wasn’t carried out, or if it was credited to you because it wasn’t done.