Mark P Posted July 14, 2008 Report Share Posted July 14, 2008 I very rarely see EIFS, so I'd like a 2nd opinion and advice on what I should say in the report. The customer was not at the inspection. I think the pictures say it all. But just in case they don't ... there is just a small section of EIFS to the left of the front door, the rest of the house is brick. The house was built in 1987. There is a hole in the surface and cracks around the windows. I scanned it with my moisture meter and even used the probes in the hole and found no evidence of moisture. As of right now Iââ¬â¢m just going to explain the known problems with EIFS, that the hole and cracks will let water in but not out and that significant damage could occur, but I found no evidence of damage, and they should have a certified EIFS inspector look at it. Thoughts? Image Insert: 36.94 KB Image Insert: 38.91 KB Image Insert: 46.28 KB Image Insert: 45.78 KB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les Posted July 14, 2008 Report Share Posted July 14, 2008 Mark, sure looks like a crappy job, so I think I would just refer to EIFS person and forget about reporting negatives. "I have have serious concerns about the EIFS portion of the house. Please see attached photos. Strongly recommend evaluation and inspection by Certified ---------." I am sure others will have another opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt Posted July 15, 2008 Report Share Posted July 15, 2008 I'd tell them they have EIFS, what EIFS is, why it sucks as a sidewall cladding, how there are very few, if any, installations that conform with recommended installation guidelines, how some nationally recognized experts (Joe L.) think that all EIFS installations are subject to problems. Tell them this has gaping cracks that let moisture in. I'd hit them with all sorts of negatives. Why let an EIFS guy have all the fun? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenT Posted July 15, 2008 Report Share Posted July 15, 2008 The mesh looks like it was never touched with the basecoat, let alone be embedded in it. It really is a crappy job. It looks like it's over cmu's , is it? If so, they could patch it, or seal it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Moore Posted July 15, 2008 Report Share Posted July 15, 2008 I've never seen EIFS with that rough a texture. Are you sure it's not just a "decorative" stucco job over the original brick using fiberglass mesh as the backer? It's still really crappy work that needs fixing, but it just doesn't look like the EIFS I see around here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hausdok Posted July 15, 2008 Report Share Posted July 15, 2008 Hi, I was thinking exactly the same thing as Richard. To me, it looks like concrete backer board with a layer of mortar troweled onto the face. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark P Posted July 15, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 15, 2008 Originally posted by hausdok Hi, I was thinking exactly the same thing as Richard. To me, it looks like concrete backer board with a layer of mortar troweled onto the face. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike Well, I just don't know. When I stuck my moisture meter probes into the hole it went in an inch or more and then hit a backing. I thought I was pushing it through the sytrofoam behind the coating, but it could have just been the resistance from the mesh. It sounded hollow when I tapped on it. I figured EIFS because of the decorative work between the upper and lower windows. I sure would hate to make a big deal out of the poor EIFS installation and it turn out not to be EIFS. Without being destructive how I can I be sure? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les Posted July 15, 2008 Report Share Posted July 15, 2008 I guess t hat is what I was trying to say - the wall covering is suspect, defective and let another do the evaluation. I agree you should list some of the defects, but not in the context of it being a real deal EIFS job. Wall covering has problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt Posted July 15, 2008 Report Share Posted July 15, 2008 That texture is very common on the EIFS around here. There was another iteration of the stuff called "insulcrete", or something like that. Insulcrete used mesh over the foam. If you could push your probe in an inch, that'd be about right for EIFS. The foam is usually 3/4"-1" thick. I'd be sneaky and find out what it is. Sneaky is as sneaky does....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenT Posted July 16, 2008 Report Share Posted July 16, 2008 The texture could be EIFS and the basecoat/finish could be the same material used with EIFS (polymer based or modified). If it is installed directly on CMU's, regardless of the mesh, basecoat or finnish, it is not EIFS. It would also require the eps or xps board (stryrofoam). If your were able to stick your probes in an inch and it sounds hollow, it is EIFS. The reason I stated in my original post that it looks like it is installed directly on CMU's, is because when looking at the picture of the window sill, I believe I see the "hollows" of the blocks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark P Posted July 16, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 16, 2008 Thank You Les, Kurt, Steven and everyone for your input. I always appreciate your help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.