What's your take on asbestos

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Spin Doctor

I doubt the laws in the states or by the feds will change in the next 10 years. It would guarantee their loss in the next election. I've seen estimates of 30 to 50% of buildings contain asbestos. That's a lot of voters who would be hit with large financial burdens that I doubt would forget anytime soon... It's kinda like the argument that the government needs to drive down house prices so the youngins can afford to buy one. There'd be milllions of off home owners and investors just waiting to vote them out at the first chance.

---

10 years ago I would have agreed with you, but now I'm not so sure. We currently live in a society that is driven by social media, and where relatively small pressure groups can have huge influence. Such groups are not interested in the truth, they simply push their agenda using whatever methods are available, and very few people know (or possibly even care) of the validity of any claims they make. If it's on the internet "it must be true". When that is added to a situation where politicians are desperate for votes, it's not hard for things to be pushed further than they (possibly) deserve. Case in point, I'm a farmer and I use quad-bikes. They are one of the most useful things ever invented. Unfortunately many people don't understand the inherent dangers of a short/narrow/tall machine, so there are rollovers and people get squashed. A few years ago a company started selling rollover bars for quads, and pushed to have them made compulsory (for those of us who ride "sensibly" they add more danger than they remove, by the way!). They pushed and pushed to have the use of these bars mandated, until finally the big manufacturers simply stopped selling quads in Australia.....

A few idiots with TwitFace accounts can change the world, unfortunately!

I would think that every house built up until the 1970's would have asbestos in it and most built prior to and after the WW2 were totally clad in the stuff with no serious affect on the population in general. I am not defending its use just observing how many houses would have to be basically demolished to get rid of it and the enormity of the task. It had zero effect on the sale price of my parent's home but that might have been because of the water front position and no one demanded a building report that I know of.

Following on from Woodpixel’s post, my home is in an area that was ‘serviced’ By Mr Fluffy. I got a letter in the mail to say my house had to be inspected. It could not be sold until inspected and found free of asbestos. If asbestos was found in the roof, the house would be demolished and the land cleaned. If that was the case, I had the choice of a) being bought out b) being paid a sum to rebuild on the land after it was cleaned.
The inspection was extremely thorough, samples taken to labs and examined, then a detailed report sent to me.

Also, being involved in the automotive trade, every job I’ve been interviewed for has involved lung X-rays and/or lung function tests,

If I had a choice I would not buy a house knowing it had asbestos, as it has been pointed out, there’s every chance you could drill into it etc, when renovating,

The question as to if asbestos would effect the properties value I think would depend on the area you live. If fibro clad homes are commonplace in your area I think it will have little or no impact but may put some people off if is not a common occurrence

It is hard to say what the sentiment will be in years to come but there is now a focus on mould and if the property has been used as an ice lab in the past. In NZ you have to get a clearance certificate for the bank to finance the property so who knows what could develop

The price you have been quoted to remove the asbestos sounds a bit crazy, at those sort of numbers you would have to consider a knock down rebuild. Complete demolition would typically be way more than half that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warb

10 years ago I would have agreed with you, but now I'm not so sure. We currently live in a society that is driven by social media, and where relatively small pressure groups can have huge influence. Such groups are not interested in the truth, they simply push their agenda using whatever methods are available, and very few people know (or possibly even care) of the validity of any claims they make. If it's on the internet "it must be true". When that is added to a situation where politicians are desperate for votes, it's not hard for things to be pushed further than they (possibly) deserve. Case in point, I'm a farmer and I use quad-bikes. They are one of the most useful things ever invented. Unfortunately many people don't understand the inherent dangers of a short/narrow/tall machine, so there are rollovers and people get squashed. A few years ago a company started selling rollover bars for quads, and pushed to have them made compulsory (for those of us who ride "sensibly" they add more danger than they remove, by the way!). They pushed and pushed to have the use of these bars mandated, until finally the big manufacturers simply stopped selling quads in Australia.....

A few idiots with TwitFace accounts can change the world, unfortunately!

---

I think it would be a numbers game. From what I've been able to gleen from various publications, houses with asbostos in them accounts for between 30 and 50% of current stock. Anything built in the 90s or older is assumed to have at least a bathroom/toilet sheeted with asbestos. If you as a pollie tried to force a $15,000 bill onto 30-50% of all the home owners across the country, you might find yourself and your family needing 24 hour protection for the rest of your life. And considering a survey some years back found about 95% of federal pollies owned rental properties I doubt they would be interested in handing themselves a bill.

You on the other hand are quad bike riding farmer and make up a pitence of the population. In other words, you don't matter to a pollie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Spin Doctor

I think it would be a numbers game. From what I've been able to gleen from various publications, houses with asbostos in them accounts for between 30 and 50% of current stock. Anything built in the 90s or older is assumed to have at least a bathroom/toilet sheeted with asbestos. If you as a pollie tried to force a $15,000 bill onto 30-50% of all the home owners across the country, you might find yourself and your family needing 24 hour protection for the rest of your life. And considering a survey some years back found about 95% of federal pollies owned rental properties I doubt they would be interested in handing themselves a bill.

You on the other hand are quad bike riding farmer and make up a pitence of the population. In other words, you don't matter to a pollie.

---

Indeed, except that such a move would only apply to people who wanted to sell a house, and a decent scare campaign could convince homebuyers that it was necessary for their health. Even in this thread you'll have seen people who say they wouldn't buy a house with asbestos in it, and asbestos hasn't been front and centre in the news for ages.

Honestly, I can't see it happening either, I just mentioned it as a possibility to consider, but you and I are working from a position of logic whilst politicians and (it often seems to me) the majority of people on social media, frequently don't!!

Some observations first, and make of them what you will:
1. Being realistic, hard (sheet) asbestos is not dangerous until it is turned into powder by a power tool or a 'kenidiot. So boarding over it (which is what we have done in part here) is totally ok as long as you don't hit into it with power tools later. However, all subsequent potential tool users or renovators need to know that there is asbestos that has been covered over.

2. I have only just been through a removal of asbestos from under the kitchen floor covering 2 months ago. That process involved too many 'kenidiots. Frankly, the whole process was a bloody nightmare, and it took six weeks to replace the vinyl floor covering in a 7-8 m² kitchen floor. The first "ticketed" mob were a bunch of knuckle dragging cowboys who were shooed away before they created mayhem. Next guy (a couple of weeks later) appeared to be good, and appeared to know what he was doing. (and a shout out to BobL - thanks to him I knew significantly more about invisible dust than this "ticketed professional".)

Until he left, and 30 minutes later I discovered this throughout every surface in the kitchen:
Attachment 484869

That's the top of the microwave oven which was wiped clean before he started. Apparently his "$3000" vac wasn't in quite the condition he thought. And yes, the dust was grey, and it had taken about 60-90 minutes to settle like that (he informed me that it was a normal amount of normal dust settling in an hour or so due to the house's 100 year age - PFFFFFT - that's about three months worth in the most habituated place - my desk!)

3. The roof here is made from 1 square foot shingles - nice asbestos ones to replace the original slate ones. Absolutely no problem at all.... until we get a massive hail storm, which is becoming increasing likely with climate change. Oh, and no Solar Panel installers will come anywhere near the job, so that rules that out.

4. Knowingly selling a property with boarded over asbestos, without disclosing this fact, would be an act of complete bastardry and will probably become illegal in due course. Note that I am not suggesting that anyone is considering doing that - just saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Spin Doctor

I was wondering whether people find asbestos to be a deal breaker.

---

I wouldn't knowingly buy a property with asbestos in it - you never know how costly it might be to eradicate it - because you probably don't know how extensive it really is, or what has happened before (power tools).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Spin Doctor

I also have two ways to approach it: Board over it or remove it. Removal is about 80k plus reboard, so about 110k. Board over is about 30k. I have to ask myself the question: Will I get a return on investment if I go the removal route though. Or, are people in general not that fussed about it, and won't mind if I entomb it behind 10mm of gyprock or vj panel instead.

---

It will depend on the particular buyers down the track, but certainly you will squeeze down you potential market from what it might be, and any savvy buyer will not pay what you probably want, so you may suffer a double whammy - less potential market, and at a reduced price.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Spin Doctor

...or just dying in the place.

---

Have you got a timeline in mind? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woodPixel

There was an insulation installer called Mr Fluffy that literally pumped that crap into the roof cavities of peoples houses.

---

That's the REALLY dangerous friable form of asbestos. The hard sheets are ok until turned into powder by power tools or similar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris Parks

That house was only demolished last year and none of the new residents show any health effects so far but never say never.

---

No, but it does take 20-30 years for the illness to show up, if it is going to.




The bottom line is whether or not you would get you money back if you cough up the extra $50k. You may be better off dying there, as you suggest, and letting others worry about after that. Just mind you don't hasten the process!