Stanely Martin??? Options

[Bo-Peep]

I have to say that I feel fortunate our inspector spent a lot of time in our home and to date, we've had nothing major go wrong.

[MrsDepp]

I have to say that I feel fortunate our inspector spent a lot of time in our home and to date, we've had nothing major go wrong.

Yeah, the funny thing is the one in the Centex townhome only found three very, very minor things, one of which wasn't a problem at all.

[LeakingStanleyMa...]

deleted - duplicate post

This post has been edited by LeakingStanleyMartinHomes: Oct 22 2008, 12:12 PM

[Boby Riverside]

List of Shoddy Workmanship, Materiels and Warranties in my Stanley Martin Home (built in 2001/2002)




Multiple Virginia and International Building Code violations to include:
improper flashing and weep holes on brick exteriors and chimneys;
improper spacing behind brick veneer;
improper roof, dormer and bay window flashing and kick-outs;
Improper moisture barrier installation
these code violations result in rainwater leaking into the home (ceiling and walls) causing damage to carpets, walls, ceilings and wood trim - including mold ($3,700 in damages/repairs)
clothes dryer dryer exhaust ,mounted in utility room ceiling, exceeds vent distance to exterior of home; all dryer manufacturers recommend less than 8 feet to prevent fire
Water leaks in through roof-mounted gas fireplace vent during wind-blown rain weather conditions (you can hear the water dripping into the top of the fireplace)


Cheap/Improper Building Materiels:
Untreated soft pine or other unsuitable woods used for exterior windows and dormer trim on roof;
cheapest water heater used which failed after only five years old ($650 dollars even though it was still covered by the heater warranty);
cheapest exterior paint was used that required repainting after 5 years ($1,600 to repaint and replace rotted wood);
cheapest air conditioner which fails to properly distribute to upper levels and keep the house comfortably cool during the Summer;
cheapest door hinges used which excrete a black powdery substance that discolors walls and stains carpets;
cheapest exterior door hardware/handles (brass finishes completely failed and rusted after 4 years) - $350 to replace
cheapest plumbing mixing valve installed above water heater; valves is completely corroded and leaking after only 5 years
plumbing backpressure relief valve/tank failed after four years ($260); plumbing pipes "rattle" when water is turned on or off (toilets flushing, washing machine, etc)
cheapest light fixtures were used in bathrooms; plastic domes became "sealed" to the lighting fixture and unable to remove to change bulbs ($250 to replace)


Improper Workmanship:
A Stanley Martin employee fell through my ceiling, into my family room, while climbing around in the attic;
multiple repairs for the same problem (four and five times) without actually fixing the problems;
PVC piping in the home was not primed before glueing which caused the A/C drain line to fail and $2,300 worth of damage to wood floors, ceilings and walls (to include mold);
exteroir wood trim was not properly primed and painted;
exterior wood trim on dormers installed improperly butting directly against the surface of the roof (and the ends/joints were not primed or painted) causing wood rot and repair ($450);
Stanley Martin refused to hire an engineer or architect to properly diagnise and repair the problems the right way (I hired my own $650)
The dryer exhaust pipe was improperly installed in the ceiling (so my flexible dry exhaust pipe runs from behind my dryer up to the ceiling - very unsightly)
Drywall installation extremely poor; drywall tape exposed and peeling away in multiple areas;
Stove fan is not vented to the outside (fan just blows smoke and fumes from stove into the kitchen)
None of the bare drywall walls were primed before painting
Concrete slabs were not properly leveled before installing wood floors (wood flooring has voids)
Upstairs guest bathtub was improperly installed/leveled and has cracked ($650 to replace)


Unsatisfactory Warranty and Customer Care:
The home only came with a 1 year (all inclusive warranty) and a 10 year structural warranty; Stanley Martin should stand by their products and extend the 1 year to a 3 year all inclusive warranty
Warranties are not transferrable to subsequent owners (Stanley Martin should stand by their products and extend the warranties to subsequent owners)
Stanley Martin Warranty group insists that water intrusion is not a structural warranty issue and not covered by the 10 year part of the warranty; a professional will tell you that water causes significant structural damage to wood frames, mold and wood destroying insects (all of which will result in structural failure)
Check out all the other issues with Stanley Martin homes and Belmont Bay community below. You are not alone!



http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qi...24164344AAxke6E



http://www.brambletonian.net/forums/index....mp;#entry187669



http://groups.google.com/group/rwi-consultants?hl=en



http://marviniavecchia.spaces.live.com/blog/



http://groups.yahoo.com/group/leakingbelmontbayhomes/



http://www.hobb.org/index.php

I was thinking "good work, good research." But it's all the same person/people. Even the supposed "Consultant" is YOU, as far as I can see. Doesn't look like you've built a community rally, here, fellow. Sorry about your house.

This post has been edited by Boby Riverside: Sep 30 2008, 09:35 AM

[MrCheeks]

I was thinking "good work, good research." But it's all the same person/people. Even the supposed "Consultant" is YOU, as far as I can see. Doesn't look like you've built a community rally, here, fellow. Sorry about your house.

[Lee j]

I was thinking "good work, good research." But it's all the same person/people. Even the supposed "Consultant" is YOU, as far as I can see. Doesn't look like you've built a community rally, here, fellow. Sorry about your house.

I know being in the building business our county inspectors are extremely thorough and tough. Especially on structural and mechanical and electrical and plumbing. Does not mean things can't fall through the cracks especially when things were booming but as a rule these county inspectors do a very good job. Stanely Martin has always had an excellent reputation and most of the time take care of problems very quickly.

I have also read the thread on leaky basements. Here are a few comments. First water takes the path of least resistance. There is no such thing as total waterproofing when it comes to what is applied to the basement walls on the outside. You know that black stuff which is water resistant NOT waterproof. Her are a few tips before calling one of those waterproof experts that many times charge way too much and do things that many times are not necessary to justify their huge bills. First make sure water drains away from the home. Many times people come in and landscape without thought to drainage. Second it is always smart to drain your downspouts with that black flexible pipe away from the home. Better yet run that pipe underground and drain to daylight away from the home. also make sure your sump pump drains away from the home. So many times the plumber puts the pipe just outside the basement wall. SO guess what happens the water seeps right back into the drain pipes and gravel along the bottom of the basement walls and back into the sump pump. Eventually possibly causing moisture problems in the basement.

Those few things usually eliminates 90% of moisture problems in the basement.

Now when building the home make sure there is plenty of gravel around the basement and on top of it a slit sheet so the grvel does not get clogged up with dirt years later. Now the real trick is to make sure that gravel also is plentiful over the sewer pipes going to the street connection. also make sure the gravel is continuous from the basement walls to the sewer pips and all the way to the street. Plenty of gravel all over and a slit sheet over. What that does is gives the water another way to to drain away from the home all thru the gravel ending up in the gravel along the street pipes and dissipating. We do this on every home we build and never had a leaky basement or moisture problems.

Roof leaks are usually a flashing problem and they just need to be checked out and redone correct. Another source of roof leaks are the rubber flashing around the vent pipes popping thru the roof and many times are the wrong size and are not snug around the pipe coming up thru the roof. Vents can also be another source of water penetration if not properly installed. Leaks come be hard thing to solve sometimes because where the water enters the home can be far from where you notice it in the home because water can travel in many mysterious ways once it enters the home.

Water problems should not be taken lightly because of the damage it can do even minor water leaks can cause serious damage especially in mold and rot. We had built a home where the homeowner kept complaining they thought there must be mold somewhere. We checked everything and could not figure it out. Now this was years ago before all techology we have today that can detect mold very easily. Anyway we finally figured it must be in the kitchen area actually the laundry room attached to the kitchen. We took the drywall off the ceiling and could not believe what we saw. It looked like one of the caves with all this black mold hanging down like stalactites. The source of the leak was the slowest drips I have ever seen from a pipe. We timed them a one per about every two minutes or more. So the water dripping that slowly never penetrated the drywall but did it create the worst looking black mold I have ever seen and it must of been doing it for years and years.

[Boby Riverside]

Must of.

Dammit, Lee. I wasn't saying Leaking's issues weren't valid. Just that his community organizing ploy was FAIL. But hey -- why shouldn't you enjoy the sound of your own voice? I do.

[Lee j]

Must of.

Dammit, Lee. I wasn't saying Leaking's issues weren't valid. Just that his community organizing ploy was FAIL. But hey -- why shouldn't you enjoy the sound of your own voice? I do.

Boby Boby Boby I was actually defending Stanely Martin. They are excellent builders and I find it hard to believe they have not fixed this persons problems after such a long time.

Most good builders try to go out of their way to keep home owners happy. Then again you always get the few no matter what you do you can't make them happy.

Boby I have to admit you are a character and you do bring a smile to my face and I mean that in a good way. :-)

[Boby Riverside]

Boby Boby Boby I was actually defending Stanely Martin. They are excellent builders and I find it hard to believe they have not fixed this persons problems after such a long time.

Most good builders try to go out of their way to keep home owners happy. Then again you always get the few no matter what you do you can't make them happy.

Boby I have to admit you are a character and you do bring a smile to my face and I mean that in a good way. :-)

Oh great. Go pick on Red, why don'tcha.

[Lee j]

Oh great. Go pick on Red, why don'tcha.

Red is a Lawyer and they are too easy to pick on and besides they like being picked on. Just ask my criminal attorney brother he loves the attention just like actors whether it is good or bad he craves attention.

[LeakingStanleyMa...]

deleted - duplicat post

This post has been edited by LeakingStanleyMartinHomes: Oct 22 2008, 12:13 PM

[LeakingStanleyMa...]

From: Mays, Eric M. [mailto:emays@pwcgov.org]
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 2:08 PM
To: mil06@msn.com
Cc: Archer, Frank N.; Hugh, Wade; Collins, James L.; Kirste, Uwe; Adkins, Robert H.; Roop, Chad A.; Eddy, Gary H.
Subject: 13777 Ulysses Street - Water Intrusion Through Brick Veneer

Dear Major Iavecchia:

Thank you for taking the time to speak with me this morning about the problem with regard to the water intrusion through the brick veneer of your house. Following is my understanding of our conversation;
1. Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code - The Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code (VUSBC) dictates the minimum inspections that must be conducted during construction of a building. Currently, a Residential Brick Veneer Inspection is not required. If a Residential Brick Veneer Inspection was required, one of the technical challenges would be when/how to conduct the inspection to ensure proper workmanship. The additional challenges would be having the proper resources to carry the additional inspection workload, as well as adopting a permit fee increase to support the additional resources.

The Virginia Board of Housing and Community Development is responsible for promulgating the VUSBC. It is my understanding that the Board will start the 2009 Code Adoption Process at the beginning of next year. If you would like to submit a Code Change Proposal, I would be happy to assist you through the process.
2. County Inspection Process - In reviewing the report written by Mr. John McLeod (AIA), I've determined based on the current inspection standards that the County Inspectors are to fully enforce the International Residential Code R703.7.6 Weepholes. Last month the Construction Inspections Branch conducted a training class for the inspectors to reemphasize the requirements.

We are conducting additional research to determine if any of the "self flashing" windows would be exempt from the prescriptive requirement to have weepholes above the lintel at the window openings.
3. Current Complaint - It is my understanding that you intend to hire a mason to remove portions of the brick veneer to determine the actual condition of the brick veneer installation. We are initiating a new Building Code Complaint Case. Once you have scheduled the mason's work, I would appreciate if you can inform us. I would like to have senior Code Enforcement staff on site to confirm if a Building Code Violation exist. Since the age of the house is outside the Statute of Limitations for Prosecution, a Notice of Violation could not be issued. However, the County staff will issue a report to you listing any Building Code Violations. The report could be used in civil litigation and/or in association with a complaint to the Virginia Board for Contractors.

I would recommend that Stanley Martin be present during the County inspection.
Please let me know if your understanding of our conversation differs or if you have additional information you would like to provide (i.e. photographs).

Sincerely,
Eric M. Mays, P.E.
Building Official
Prince William County
703-792-6873

[LeakingStanleyMa...]

wrong - i had to hire a consultant/architect. his official findings are listed below. AND I have hired a mason to come out and remove the brick veneer so the county code enforcement and my architect can inspect and publish a report of findings. as for the community rally? That's a joke... their are people in our community (homeowners, realtors, HOA, and developers) who are outright dishonest with their "silence" on this issue... people think that they aren't lying if they physically don't speak it, but their silence is a lie. Unwitting people are buying and renting homes in Belmont Bay and not being told there is or has been water intrusion, mold and mildew problems. Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it isn't there behind your walls, ceilings and floors.

JOHN HUGH McLEOD IIIARCHITECT LLC
2712 Bowling Green Drive, Vienna, VA 22180 703-280-1090/703-819-6663© john@mcleod-arch.com
September 27, 2008
Major Marvin Iavecchia
13777 Ulysses St.
Woodbridge, VA 22191
Re: Water Intrusion
Dear Marvin,
I visited the property at the above address on September 18, 2008 regarding the water intrusion. I
gathered information from the Owner (you) and representatives of the original construction
contractor, Stanley Martin, and made visual observations. The following is a summery of my
observations, analysis and recommendations. No invasive tests were performed, and no
guarantee is made as to the correctness of the analysis, or the effectiveness of the
recommendations.
1. Observations
a. Construction Of Wall
The house wall construction is wood frame with single wythe brick veneer. The east
wall (left side as one faces the front) is the source of the leaks, and is two stories plus the
gable in height. The roof overhangs the wall by about 1 foot. Slight gaps between the
wood trim and brick were observed at the comers.
The roof of the projecting bay window has metal step flashing, and as part of previous
attempts to correct the water intrusion, bricks have been removed and additional counter
flashing installed. Weep holes are located below the windows, but no weep holes were
observed above them, and the joint between the steel angle lintels and the bricks are
caulked with sealant.
According to the Owner, a section of sheathing was removed from inside the attic
allowing observation of the back of the brick veneer. The cavity was of minimal
dimension and encumbered with mortar. The workmanship of the masonry on this
concealed side was poor.
b. Evidence Of Water Intrusion
Damage to the interior finishes of gypsum wallboard and paint were observed at the
heads and jambs of the first floor windows. According to the Owner, water intrusion was
greatest during the driving rains of tropical storm Hannah. During this event, large
amounts of water came through wall around the kitchen window, and the water inside the
wall in the living room was sufficient to telegraph the pattern of the wood framing
through the wallboard.
lof3
JOHN HUGH McLEOD IIIARCHITECT LLC
2712 Bowling Green Drive, Vienna, VA 22180 703-280-10901703-819-6663{c) john@mcleod-arch.com
Significantly, no water intrusion has been reported or observed at the second floor
windows. The water may be getting through the veneer below the level of the second
floor window heads.
2. Analysis
Masonry walls are almost never water tight, and accepted practice assumes there will be
some water intrusion. This problem is solved by having a cavity between the outer wythe of
masonry and the backup wall, whether framed or masonry, with a water barrier on the outer
face of the backup wall. The outer masonry wythe acts as a rain screen, and any water that
gets through it is intercepted by the water barrier in the cavity and directed back out by
flashing through weep holes at the bottom of the cavity. The cavity breaks the capillary
action and provides an unobstructed path to the weep holes. For this reason, it is important
for the cavity to have a minimum dimension and be kept clear of obstructions during
construction.
These elements of design are explicitly required by the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building
Code (VUSBC) which incorporates by reference the International Residential Code (IRC).
The following are taken from the 2006 IRC, earlier codes had similar or identical language.
See also the attached Figure R703.7, Masonry Veneer Wall Details.
R703.7.4.2 Air space. The veneer shall be separated from the sheathing by an air space of a
minimum of a nominal 1 inch (25 mm) but not more than 41/2 inches (114 mm).
R703.7.5 Flashing. Flashing shall be located beneath the first course of masonry above
finished ground level above the foundation wall or slab and at other points of support,
including structural floors, shelf angles and lintels when masonry veneers are designed in
accordance with Section R703.7. See Section R703.8 for additional requirements.
R703.7.6 Weepholes. Weepholes shall be provided in the outside wythe of masonry walls at
a maximum spacing of33 inches (838 mm) on center. Weepholes shall not be less than 3/16
inch (5 mm) in diameter. Weepholes shall be located immediately above the flashing.
The wall, as constructed, appears to be in violation of at least two of these code
requirements. The presence of flashing over the lintels could not be determined. The lack of
weep holes above the window lintels prevents water in the cavity from escaping to the
outside, resulting in it following the only alternate path, into the interior of the house, with
the attendant damage. The caulking of the joint between the lintels and the brick may
actually make the situation worse by preventing the water from seeping out there.
3. Recommendations
It is impossible to know from the visual observation how drastic or invasive a solution will
be required to solve the problem. The following are offered as increasingly sure but costly
repalfs.
200
JOHN HUGH McLEOD IIIARCHITECT LLC
2712 Bowling GreenOrfve, Vienna, VA 22180 703-280-1090f703-819-6663© john@mcleod-arch.com
a. Install weep holes above the first floor window heads. Remove caulking at joint
between lintels and brick, and drill weep holes in mortar joints. The problem
with this is that it will be very difficult to remove the mortar without damaging
the flashing that is presumed to be over the lintel, and it does not address possible
blockages to the cavity.
b. Remove and reinstall brick in a triangular area above the first floor window
heads. With the brick removed, inspect and repair the flashing and clear any
obstructions in the cavity. Reinstall the brick with weep holes.
c. Remove and reinstall the brick veneer from the entire wall, at least down to the
level of the first floor window sills. With the brick veneer removed, inspect the
water barrier, sheathing and flashing. Replace any sheathing or framing damaged
by water. Repair and tape all joints in the water barrier. Insw.llflashing over all
lintels, extending it beyond the ends of the lintels. Reinstall the brick veneer with
a I" minimum cavity, using appropriate methods to keep the cavity clear of
mortar droppings and debris. Install weep holes over all lintels.
Please do not hesitate to call or email if you have any questions or need further assistance.
Thank you for giving me this opportunity to work with you.
Sincerely,
John Hugh McLeod ill, Architect, LLC
John McLeod, Member
Attachments: Figure R703.7, Masonry Veneer Wall Details
Invoice
30f3
MIN. CLEARANCE OF
3/4-IN.(19 mm)
WALLBOARD
WATER.RESISTIVE BARRIER OR .
APPROVED WATER.REPELLANTb
SHEATHING
MASONRYVENEER
1 IN. AIR SPACE OR
1 IN. MOR11\REDSPACEc
WATER.RESISTIVEBARRIEROR
APPROVEDWATER-REPELLANT
SHEATHING WALLBOARD
METAL TIEb INSULATIONBETWEEN STUDS
STEEL UNTELd
SEALANT
MASONRYVENEER
For SI: 1 inch =25.4 mm.
a. See Sections R703.7.S. R703.7.6 and R703.8.
b. See Sections R7032 and R703.7.4.
c. See Sections R703.7.4.2 and R703.7.4.3.
d. See Section R703.7.3.
FIGURE R703.7-continued
MASONRYVENEER WALLDETAILS
2006 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODe8
WALLCOVERING
I
I
237

[LeakingStanleyMa...]

deleted because it was a duplicate

This post has been edited by LeakingStanleyMartinHomes: Oct 22 2008, 12:11 PM

[Richmond]

Uh...you posted the same letter just an hour ago. You just keep throwing punches in the air, and it makes you look a little crazy. You aren't building your case against Stanley Martin, your building their case against you.

Sorry you're having such a hard time, but you need to reign it in a bit.

[stuarts wife]

Uh...you posted the same letter just an hour ago. You just keep throwing punches in the air, and it makes you look a little crazy. You aren't building your case against Stanley Martin, your building their case against you.

Sorry you're having such a hard time, but you need to reign it in a bit.

Have to agree with you Richmond. My sympathy meter is waning. Maybe OP should try to engage instead of just posting attachments.

This post has been edited by stuarts wife: Oct 9 2008, 10:25 AM

[pcoxva]

Have to agree with you Richmond. My sympathy meter is waning. Maybe OP should try to engage instead of just posting attachments.

Or just keep his complaints down within his own community and not bother ours. I'm annoyed I must say...(now granted, I can also stop reading the posts, but I own a SM home and am curious when another post comes on this topic).

[LeakingStanleyMa...]

Or just keep his complaints down within his own community and not bother ours. I'm annoyed I must say...(now granted, I can also stop reading the posts, but I own a SM home and am curious when another post comes on this topic).

You - all should do a better job at "reading" because you suck at "judging." I recieved the final report from the Prince William County Code Enforcement Office citing Stanley Martin Homes for at least four code violations. Copied-and-pasted report below, but you should go to my blog to see the photographs and actual scanned copies of all the reports I have now ( [url="http://groups.google.com/group/leaking-stanley-martin-homes?hl=en"] ). The unfortunate and sad truth here is that many of the code violations are clearly visible from the street... missing weepholes, flashing above windows and roofs does not go thru the brick (merely glued and caulked to the face of the brick). Alot of the Miller and Smith houses are leaking because of this (the front box windows) because the flashing on top of them does not extend thru the brick to the actual frame of the house. Several Miller and Smith homes on Fleet Street have leaks. In fact, just yesterday, a woman was replacing her 2d floor window above the 1st floor boxed window (with improper flashing). It will still leak. What's even more sad is that she is the 2d or 3d owner of the home and no one disclosed it to her. Too bad we have so many "neighbors" in the Belmont Bay community who are so dishonest... everyone knows - everyone saw all the blue tarps last summer, all the chimneys being replaced the year before that. Guilt falls on homeowners, realtors, home inspectors, county code inspectors and the Belmont Bay Homeowner's association. Shame to you all.

COUNTY OF PRINCE WILLIAM
5 County Complex Court, Suite 120, Prince William, Virginia 22192-5308
(703)792-6930 Metro 631-1703 Fax: (703)792-5285
DEPARTMENT OF
DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
Division of
Building Development
October 17,2008
Mr. Marvin lavecchia
13777 Ulysses Street
Woodbridge, VA 22191
RE: Brick Veneer Installation
Dear Mr. lavecchia:
Thank you for inviting me to your home on October 15,2008 to observe the installation of
the brick veneer on your home.
The house was constructed in 2002 by Stanley Martin under the 1996 Virginia Uniform
Statewide Building Code and the 1995 CABO, One and Two Family Dwelling Code. Based
on the partial and limited area of brick veneer removal above the first level window to a
height below the second level window, the following observations were made:
1. Section 703.7.2.2 Weather-resistance sheathin2: paper
Tyvek@material was used over the sheathing, and the Tyvek@material
complies with this code section. This code section also requires that a one-inch
air space between the backing and the brick veneer. However, the actual
conditions varied from 3/8 inch to 1/2 inch. This condition does not meet the
minimum code standard.
2. Section 703.8 Flashim!
Flashing shall be provided at the top and sides of all window opening and sills;
however, there was no evidence of flashing being installed around the windows.
There was flashing at the bottom of the window sill; however, the installation
did not appearto be a codecompliantapplication.Thecodesectionprovidesan
exception that allows self flashing windows to be used to satisfy the flashing
requirement; however, the manufacturer's installation information for the
window was not available to validate the window type. This condition does not
meet the minimum code standard.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
3. Section 703.4 Weenholes
Weepholes shall be required immediately above the flashing for the brick veneer
installation. There were no weepholes installed above the masonry lintels for the
opening or under the window sills. This condition does not meet the minimum
code standard.
Subsequent to the field meeting, you provided a photo of an exhaust vent that was not
properly sealed and does not comply with the minimum code standard. The applicable code
section is:
4. Section703 Exterior Coverin2- General
All exterior walls shall be covered with approved materials designed and
installed to provide a barrier against the weather and insects to enable
environmental control of the interior spaces.
This report conc1udesmy finding for the brick veneer installation. Please contact me at (703)
792-6940 if there are any questions.
Sincerely,
James Collins
Code Enforcement Branch Chief
J\ttachment: Photos
C: Dave Duggar, Stanley Martin
DPOR

[TerpFan]

You - all should do a better job at "reading" because you suck at "judging." I recieved the final report from the Prince William County Code Enforcement Office citing Stanley Martin Homes for at least four code violations. Copied-and-pasted report below, but you should go to my blog to see the photographs and actual scanned copies of all the reports I have now ( [url="http://groups.google.com/group/leaking-stanley-martin-homes?hl=en"] ). The unfortunate and sad truth here is that many of the code violations are clearly visible from the street... missing weepholes, flashing above windows and roofs does not go thru the brick (merely glued and caulked to the face of the brick). Alot of the Miller and Smith houses are leaking because of this (the front box windows) because the flashing on top of them does not extend thru the brick to the actual frame of the house. Several Miller and Smith homes on Fleet Street have leaks. In fact, just yesterday, a woman was replacing her 2d floor window above the 1st floor boxed window (with improper flashing). It will still leak. What's even more sad is that she is the 2d or 3d owner of the home and no one disclosed it to her. Too bad we have so many "neighbors" in the Belmont Bay community who are so dishonest... everyone knows - everyone saw all the blue tarps last summer, all the chimneys being replaced the year before that. Guilt falls on homeowners, realtors, home inspectors, county code inspectors and the Belmont Bay Homeowner's association. Shame to you all.

NOBODY CARES!!! GO AWAY!!!!

This post has been edited by TerpFan: Oct 22 2008, 12:16 PM

[el8]

Thread closed. Enough.