Follow us!

    Re: Mold Prevention coatings applied during new construction

    Posted by John L. . on 11/17/04

    On 11/05/04, John L. wrote:
    > On 11/03/04, Robert wrote:
    >> On 11/03/04, Gilligan wrote:
    >>> On 11/02/04, Robert wrote:
    >>>> EPA registration is important only if you are actually applying a
    >>>> pesticide. The EPA regulates pesticides. Most of the mold
    >>>> prevention products do not contain pesticides. All the mold Killers
    >>>> contain pesticides.
    >>>> Paint products have all kinds of additives added to them and they do
    >>>> not require EPA approval. The new mold prevention products are under
    >>>> the same requirements. Those of you, who do not understand the
    >>>> guidelines of the Gov't and what they are for are mislead
    >>>> individuals.
    >>>> I have been a builder for years and understand water intrusions and
    >>>> mold. To prevent is better than to react.
    >>>> Several of the products on the market are designed to kill existing
    >>>> mold on the product surface. This is good, but they do not last
    >>>> (check the warranty claims) they also can be washed off by a water
    >>>> intrusion over time. (once again not good because mold needs moisture
    >>>> to grow).
    >>>> Once you actually check out the facts you all will see that you should
    >>>> prevent mold growth over the long term, see your states home owners
    >>>> warranty (most are 10 years and then some).
    >>>> Be very careful of fast talking salesmen that try to scare you away
    >>>> from products or into using product. These guys are no good. Check
    >>>> the facts warranties are very important, and it doesn't really matter
    >>>> what state the parent company resides in. If the manufacturer doesn't
    >>>> warrant the product then don't trust them. Chevy and Ford stand
    >>>> behind their products so do several companies out there.
    >>>> On 11/01/04, concerned wrote:
    >>>>> I looked up the St Jude Case. I was told the John Barry and Lenny
    >>>>> Abbott owned PCG. I did not see anything about either of them. I
    >>>>> have been approached by PCG to sell their product instead of the
    >>>>> Aegis product in Florida. Everyone at the CIA Group has been very
    >>>>> forward with their product and its ability to fight mold. I do
    >>>> agree
    >>>>> that EPA registration is important. Who else is protecting us?
    >>>>> PCG is nothing but an opportunistic fraud
    >>>>>> taking advantage of a vunerable Florida market. They mislead you
    >>>>>> by making illegal claims and getting their users in trouble for a
    >>>>>> quick buck, (see EPA treated Article Exemption PR notice
    >>>>>>, their so called technology officer is named in a
    >>>>>> lawsuit involving St.Jude where he developed a product that - see
    >>>>>> for yourself, its sickening: ( a
    >>>>>> cohort real estate scam artist with other lawsuits on file in
    >>>>>> kansas and indiana. BUYER BEWARE.
    >>>>>>It sounds to me like someone has a bit of product envy! I also
    >>> checked out your us courts website, and there was nothing there.
    > Aren’t we really asking ourselves “Is an Ounce of Prevention Worth the Cost
    > for Homebuilders?”
    > If so then the real question for homebuilders should be, “Is it worth it to
    > know that I have done everything possible to prevent a future outbreak of
    > mold in the homes that I build?”
    > “Is it worth it to potentially minimize my personal injury claims that might
    > be brought against me because of an unforeseen water intrusion event?”
    > Are you willing to make a nominal investment to enhance your current risk
    > management strategy?
    > Builders have successfully developed new building techniques and continually
    > improved upon the design, function, and efficiency of the homes we live in.
    > As these progressive builders improve upon the design and efficiency of our
    > homes they seem to be ignoring the fact that the building envelopes are so
    > tight that they no longer allow the home to breathe.
    > As our homes are built with tighter building envelopes we must now address
    > the question, “What happens to the moldy lumber once it is covered up by the
    > drywall?”
    > Wooden building members with mold on them have the potential to create health
    > related concerns after they are enclosed in wall and ceiling cavities, even
    > though the mold is dormant or inactive, high relative humidity or moisture
    > intrusion via a pipe leak or condensation can turn it into active mold
    > growth.
    > There are many excellent examples of risk management pretreatments. Applying
    > mold prevention practices to building members at the time of construction can
    > greatly reduce the risk of health and financial threats posed by mold and
    > mildew
    > Treatment of moldy building members prior to drywall greatly reduces the
    > potential for costly mold remediation and/or litigation should water
    > intrusion or high relative humidity cause mold growth.
    > Dealing with homeowner concerns about mold has become a significant issue for
    > builders as publicity increases consumer awareness and anxiety. The Pro-
    > Active Builders are addressing these concerns prior to "close-in," that is,
    > before sheetrock and finishing components are added.
    > Today, a select number of builders are taking certain steps to minimize their
    > mold liability risk. These builders are using new building envelope designs
    > that improve interior moister control and are using building materials that
    > don’t support mold growth. Additionally, these builders are using microbial
    > pretreatment on all vulnerable surfaces that could support mold growth under
    > the right conditions. The cost of treatment, which ever it may be, far out
    > weighs the risk associated with a future mold liability law suite.
    > I was asked to look over this chat board. Read what some have said about the
    > pretreatment services available.
    > I am happy with what I have read in most part, but agree that it would appear
    > the site is being used to direct sales and not raise awareness of the
    > developing options available to builders in response to the overwhelming
    > onslaught of mold litigation.
    > I hope we can all agree that we are in a position to improve the builders
    > position while providing an improved indoor environment for the home buyer.
    > John L.
    > President
    > MicroShield

    Posts on this thread, including this one

  Site Map:  Home Chatboards Legal Jobs Classified Ads Search Contacts Advertise
  © 1996 - 2013. All Rights Reserved. Please review our Terms of Use, Mission Statement, and Privacy Policy.