Dry Down Deep - Basement Waterproofing that Works

BRENDAN:

Well, welcome aboard everybody. Thank you very much for joining us today with MARKHAM’s latest online event, “Dry Down Deep: Basement waterproofing that works – design led, standards backed, built for the future“. With me today … I’m Brendan from the marketing team, and with me today is Hayden, Alex and Christine, who will introduce themselves as we go along. Hayden Prestidge and Christine Melville are based in our Napier office in New Zealand, and Alex [Portelli] is based in our Wollongong office in Australia.

We’re looking at five points today. This is the educational piece around the context of basement waterproofing.

• Design-Led Waterproofing: From Concept to Warranty.
• Built on BS 8102:2022 – The Proven International Standard.
• Early-Stage Integration Means Long-Term Performance.
• Smart, Fast, and High-Performance Installation.
• Leading the Shift to a Better Way of Building.

There is a Q&A button at the bottom of your screen. If you’d like to drop your questions in there as you go along, we’ll have a live Q&A session at the end and we’ll be very glad for your participation.

Just before we get too far into it, could you please give us a bit of an idea, in the comments section, of your job role. And also let me know if you’re not hearing this properly.

There should be a chat button there, if you’d like to drop your job roles and they would be very glad to see it. It will help us to tailor the event as we go along.

Thank you very much. We’ve got a main contractor, architect, quality manager, senior architects. Very much appreciate it! And keep the comments coming along as we go. We’ll do our best to tailor the event as to your individual needs.

Christine, we’d be very glad if you’d like to introduce yourself and take us away.

CHRISTINE:

Kia ora, everyone. I’m Christine, obviously, from the Napier Hawkes Bay head office of MARKHAM. I am the New Zealand side design and specification consultant. Cool to see some names I know in the chat, and also good to see a really wide spectrum of people involved in this scenario, because that’s really what we really want to start working on is getting everyone talking together and working to move the market.

And so I’m just going to go over this section here which is about being design-led; so, from concept to warranty – Why that matters? Who’s holding the responsibility from design to warranty? And how to avoid that finger pointing situation; or predicting it and avoiding it at the start.

If you want to flick through to the next one.

And so again, design-led waterproofing strategy. Obviously I’m going to be a strong proponent of that because that’s my area of involvement, but it is important for the whole project; and we do find often – I’ve got two examples in the last couple of weeks, one where I was phoning about a project and it was like, Hey, can you come back and talk to us because we’re just deciding how we’re going to build this. And what we’re proposing is that waterproofing is an integral part of making those decisions, and early engagement in terms of waterproofing can really help to avoid some of those potential defects later on.

There’s a lot of cost cutting; and things happening where some dollars are saved here, but we’re projecting to use them later on. There’s another example I’m thinking of where it’s like, Yes, the clients are… where it’s probably going to be a wet basement but we’ve added a budget for remediating that. And we’re thinking and we’re asking the question, Why? Why can’t we be involved earlier to help avoid those issues from the get-go?

Do you want to click over to the next one, Brendo?

So yes, in terms of British Standard 8102 and the 2022 version, this guiding document, that Hayden’s going to be talking a little bit more about, helps eliminate some of those issues. It asks you to engage a waterproofing specialist. And it takes you step-by-step through designing through the warranty, to help get a successful result for everybody. A waterproofing specialist can work through all of the phases and and also predict and tailor solutions for that particular structure in that particular area.

Next one, Hayden?

And what we what we really want to do is eliminate that finger pointing situation; where, at the end of the project something goes wrong and then the installer is pointing to the manufacturing fault, or the way that they constructed it; or the contractors saying, Oh, we just paid these guys to do it. But there’s no through line running from end to end. So we really want to see more of that single source solution in the industry, to avoid unattractive basements, costly mistakes and a lot of headaches for asset owners, and every party involved, really.

And then in terms of BS8102, Hayden’s going to take us through a brief overview of how that impacts on Aussie and New Zealand.

HAYDEN:

Cheers, Christine. And yes, welcome, everybody; it’s Hayden Prestidge based out of Napier. I’ve been working with projects for MARKHAM for 10-odd years. I’m out of the construction industry. So very passionate about this subject, because we’re spending so much on remedials on the back-end type projects. And let’s take a look at what’s needed. I think there is awareness of what’s, you know, more awareness about what’s needed upfront, but like Christine is saying is, Who’s taking that core responsibility? Who in our teams? Who of our strategic partners? – to take that core responsibility of waterproofing; and right from concept, through to maintenance, essentially. And having that as a partner of a build rather than an afterthought that gets tacked on.

So, the crazy thing is, New Zealand and Australia, we don’t have a code, as all you will be aware of, for below-grade structures and how to build, and how to get the best performance. So that has led to more of a reliance on the British Standard, BS8102. And while it’s not the be-all and end-all, it is a very good guide for where we need to play, and where we need to focus; from concept, right from the start, right from when we’re thinking about a project. Because all those risk mitigations are thought about then. What’s the land, you know, what’s all the risks? What’s the long-term risk? What’s the future-proofing, etc? That’s all done in a big desktop study-type survey, right through to monitoring the construction, monitoring the installations, right through to warranty. So it’s a lot more… if we can, it’s a very good guide of what’s needed on each phase, including what’s needed for what levels of risk.

So I think it is something we can’t ignore. We do say it doesn’t relate to our construction; and, you know, we hear these type of messages. But it is a very good code and very well thought out from ones that have been building basements for a long, long time. So whether we can just think about that, and make it make it so it’s a… It leads into what Christine was just saying about being design-led, but taking that accountability. It’s not just a product now. We’re accountable to a system of getting the right outcomes. So that’s really what BS8102 is about. It’s leading a system of accountability, is what I’d like to refer to it as. Many of you will be familiar with it. So if we can just jump into that a little bit.

There’s really no guidelines, like we’ve said before. And even into concrete standards etc, there’s no real recognition for Type B or admixture-type systems. Yes, there’s membrane systems, they’ve all got sort of some sort of certification, but really to pull it all together, is what we’re missing, and this is what we should be guided by; and just having that recognition through there. If that makes sense.

Thanks for people that are still joining. Sorry, we’ve gotten into it, but please use the Q&A, down the bottom right of the screen. There should be a questions tab, just bang things in there and we’ll pump through them at the end. But I love the questions because it gets down to the real thoughts and what the market’s at.

So if you can jump to the next slide, Brendan. I suppose what we need to think about is, three things, sort of thinking what BS8102 is. You need a robust outcome; and you need the risks mitigated. And then are we building it future-proof, or are we future-ready, so to speak? And that’s why we need to be guided by a system. Does that makes sense? Any other comments in there, Christine, Alex?

ALEX:

No, it probably leads into this this sort of next stage, this early integration; if I could take over from there, Hayden.

Hello everybody. Alex here from the Australian MARKHAM team. I head up the business development over here and have a really keen focus and a passion for this early integration, and working with design teams, engineers, specifiers etc, across the board, to really promote what we can do at that early stage; and work to prevention, as prevention being better than a cure in most cases.

So what I’ll just touch on here… and really touching on Hayden’s points around the BS8102 and why it’s important to have that integration early for long-term performance, is better outcomes and how we can lower the risks. As well as looking at sort of the cost implications of bringing in waterproofing solutions once it’s already kicked off, or in some form of building sequence already. So if you could go to the next slide, please, Brendan.

So based on our experience in the market, you know, being around structures and utilising systems for the past 27 years; our experience around prioritising the waterproofing from the beginning of the construction process really ensures seamless integration, making sure that the design is working towards enhancing durability, you know, efficiencies, long-term performance, you know, while preventing water damage to the actual structure; which reduces repair costs and also can improve things like indoor air quality, as well as actually increasing property value. You know, if you’ve got an asset that isn’t looked upon as deteriorating, etc, or, you know, if you don’t have constant complaints to strata from a leaky basin or somebody’s storage cage and their things are continually getting wet, which is a common sort of construction process based on apartment buildings etc, you are increasing that property value.

That’s definitely something that’s, you know, close to us by being able to implement systems at the beginning, and looking at reducing that overall maintenance cost as the building progresses in its life cycle. Next slide please, Brendan.

This brings us to, Why we should continue looking at them early and not implement systems at a late stage of that waterproofing decision-making. Delaying the waterproofing during construction can be costly and postponing critical steps often leads to expensive retrofitting. I mean, if you can implement systems upfront while it’s being constructed versus having to, you know, fix a leak or chase a leak around based on not putting something forward. That really differentiates what we can do here.

Labour is obviously increased, not to mention the significant risk to the structural deterioration and, you know, implementing or allowing mould infestation to begin, which can be quite dangerous not only to health, for the people using those spaces, but obviously deteriorating the building as a whole.

These don’t just disrupt project timelines. It’s probably, you know, really a key factor here: deteriorating and diminishing property values, you know, for the client or the asset-holder, is paramount.

Integrating waterproofing in the early construction process does safeguard against future damages. It can increase energy efficiencies, ensures durability long-term. Being proactive is the best strategic approach, especially for longevity on a project, you know, moving forward.

That’s pretty much what I’ve got to say on those. So next slide.

So this one here, we’ll get Hayden to jump back in, but looking at that smart, fast and performance approach to installation. Haydo, what have you got to say around that?

HAYDEN:

Cheers, yes. That early integration is so key. And I was thinking when you were talking; like, it’s still very much a mindset in our industry. We design the building, we do the concept up, work out what it’s going to be doing. We almost do the structure design. Then we think, How do we waterproof this? And it often results in a change. It often means methodologies, you know… things have moved on. Otherwise we send out a set of plans and get it at D&C, and then we have to almost start over again. So there’s a lot of rework and back and forwards, by not getting heads together. That’s why I referenced that sort of strategic partner, getting those heads together early and making that point. So it’s just something about, everyone out there, is how early are you thinking about waterproofing, and can you go a step before that, to get someone on board. I’m not saying it’s a contractual step by any means and it shouldn’t be, it should be a discussion around a table so we get it clear from the outset.

So probably something that we’ve seen, as well, as moving into this sort of smart, fast and high performance, we call it. But modern construction is different. And what has happened in the past, different ways of building, the materials being used, timelines etc. That does change; and have we changed our waterproofing methodology to suit that? You even look at the way buildings are built; sacrificial formworks, all those type of things. Timelines are really pressing, you know. Look at these education-type builds, very tight in programme time. Cost is a driver, but it shouldn’t be at the expense of quality and outcomes, and it doesn’t need to be. There’s very sort of heavy-type waterproofing systems out there that are, you know, very labour intensive to manage etc. So probably why we have opted to go with a system that works on site. It’s quck, lightweight, easy to install, almost foolproof.

But we’re not trying to just pedal our product as such here, but more to put the thought into everybody’s heads, Is the system that we are selecting or operating with the right for our type of build? Some are very slow to install as you would have seen; and is that just because of a good job of a salesperson? Or is that actually suiting our programme and our build? We’ve had instances where some of this traditional type waterproofing built, you know; the products underneath… all the steel reinforcing, you get a lot of weather, you get a lot of rain, and that the membrane etc becomes null and void. So a lot of rework, a lot of time, a lot of programmes.

So just think about things like that. It should be easy, it should benefit your programme, should benefit your design and methodology. So it’s just some things to think about, but ultimately a better outcome, more cost effective.

I didn’t really have a lot more thoughts on that. It’s really that pointer there as well, that the pace, I suppose, is important now. Time is money, everyone wants to build quickly, but you can’t do it with sacrificing quality, and we shouldn’t be trying. Often we’ll be, you know, trying to bring in these older or traditional systems try and speed them up, and we simply can’t.

Whether anyone’s got any comments on that, Christine or Alex?

ALEX:

Yes, just touching on that. You know, that pace, obviously cutting corners, and that allows you to pay for it later, effectively. Doing it right from the first outset is always the best way, I think.

HAYDEN:

I think quality control comes into this as well.

ALEX:

Definitely

HAYDEN:

Get a system that has a quality control or QA system that is as fast as installation. Sometimes we see, you know, these projects and then you’ll go into a waiting phase or holding phase where it needs to be QA’d and ticked off, and things like that. So have something that’s mirroring your programme, have something that’s mirroring your speed that you want to run at; and make sure that’s thought about as you’re in design. You might talk about the product being rolled out under a slab or something, but then what’s the next steps? Try and get that whole picture, and make sure that… we don’t want to be waiting a day and miss the window of pouring concrete or whatever it is?

ALEX:

100%.

CHRISTINE:

Is that back to me?

HAYDEN:

Yes, it was!

CHRISTINE:

You guys just muted and…

HAYDEN:

It was my intro to you too. 

CHRISTINE:

OK thanks, Hayden! So we’ve got the last little module of our presentation this morning, and we’ll talk about it more as a panel, this last section. But we really do want to see the construction industry and the basement waterproofing really moving forward, moving away from some of these issues that we’ve talked about.

And we’re doing our part to educate the market about this. We’re hearing a lot of chatter, but again, more raised awareness. But when it comes to crunch time, when it comes to decision time, we’re seeing decisions such as, Yes, we see what you’re saying, that that’s going to be a better outcome – but the client wants to go cheap and fast.

And so we’re pulling people in, we’re talking to the whole market and saying, How can we… obviously budgets are budgets – but how can we build better? And we’re recommending the employment of CSSW’s, Certified Surveyor in Structural Waterproofing. And we are pointing towards BS8102 as a proven way of getting successful outcomes. And yes, we want to be future-proofing and obviously we’re seeing a lot of weather events that then come into basements. That’s all part of the new update of BS8102. Do you want to flip to the next slide, Brendo?

And so yes, we want your feedback as well. How can we educate the market to shift towards these better outcomes? And Hayden, do you want to talk a bit about shotcrete in NZ and AU and how that impacts on us?

HAYDEN:

Love shotcrete, don’t we?

No, I’d love everyone to just take half a second, just bang into the chat all the questions. What… if you’d had your single most issue with waterproofing, what would that be right now? I know we’ve got a lot of designers on here, and main contractors as well, but I’d just love to see that: What’s the single most issue that you see?

Shotcrete! We use so much of it, don’t we? And it’s probably the hardest material… Everyone can debate this and there’ll be good debate on this call, but material…

CHRISTINE:

Please do!

HAYDEN:

…to get right, and that’s probably one thing we need to be real about. OK, it’s cost-effective, so to speak. But is it really in the long game? Is it really our best way to build? You get the soldier piles, etc. They move independently to a structure, and often – very often – resulting in that cracking or allowance of moisture ingress. You get all sorts of shotcrete contractors, some very, very good ones and some of the other.

So you get a lot of variance between quality, which obviously means a lot more porous, you get shadowing behind piles, etc. You don’t get bonding to membranes. All those type of things.

UK, it’s good to spend some time over there – a number of you would have seen what happens over there – but a lot more in-situ concrete being used. OK that’s quite a change for our market here. But it’s… whether we need to consider that if we’re really chasing some of the outcomes we’re after.

CHRISTINE:

I see Greg’s put in the chat there… yes, absolutely. The interface between the basement slab and piles. You’ve got engineers wanting spaces or connections and then… this is one of the scenarios that we do see come up. It’s all been decided and now it’s been sent to us to detail it. And we go, Neat – that’s an impossible situation! And so that’s another… again, just those early round-tables; which, you know, might have a lot of different opinions, but working it out together at the outset word. Then everybody’s seeing what everyone’s concerns are, and then you can discuss and move forward as a cohesive unit. Rather than going, Structural says this, architect wants this, waterproofing requires this – what do we do?

HAYDEN:

And Christine, to be clear on the grade of basement or grade of performance that you’re after, and talk about that at the start. Like, are you accepting some sort of ingress, or is everyone [expecting] just a purely Grade 3 dry basement? Because there’s so many variants of that in people’s minds; from a property owner, architect, engineer, to a builder, to a shotcrete contractor, whatever it is, everyone’s got a different view of that. So make sure we’re clear on that, when we’re looking at sort of interfaces between, you know, slab, wall, pile. It’s important.

ALEX:

I tend to touch on that quite early, in my discussion pieces across the board, project expectation and requirements. It’s… you know, they’re not the same thing. And you can get really unstuck when one party is expecting something, but it’s requiring something completely different, or vice versa, it can get mixed up, mixed signals and it can lead to, you know, issues down the track. So that’s definitely something that I try and bring up in my early discussions around these topics is, Hey guys, look, let’s get everybody in the same room, on the same page. What are we expecting, and what’s required? And let’s populate a system to suit moving forward.

HAYDEN:

100%. Including the installer of the product, because often and… probably if you’re on the call, often you get to that point, they pick up a set of plans. They’re stuck. They’ve got to install this without any input into how they could have gone. And that just makes it super, super hard. You’ve got some points on this one too, Christine.

CHRISTINE:

I was just seeing that, sorry, I was reading, Constantine Company’s message in the chat about shotcrete and how that compares to traditional cast-in-place. So if it’s all right I’ll go sideways and answer that. So shotcrete – it can be done well. Is this shotcreter in this place going to be doing it well? There is a few issues that happen. Sort of, bounce-back as it’s being fired at the wall can happen, and you can end up with voids behind there. In a scenario where you’ve got water stops installed sometimes that abrasive nature and the pressure of how that shotcrete pounding it essentially, can knock it out of place and cause issues. And in terms of getting… say in an in-situ wall that’s going to be vibrated correctly, you’re going to get a better place and better quality and less permeable concrete.

And we do have admixtures in our systems to create a Type B basement which is integral, and that can waterproof concrete porosities, but it can’t waterproof massive gaps and voids in the concrete. And so yes, in a typical concrete pour, the porosity is about 50 nanometres, but if you’re getting a void that you can see, no admixture is going to be able to bridge that.

HAYDEN:

Yes. In terms of one versus the other in the main, a poured in-situ or cast-in-place will always be a better outcome. You get a controlled environment, you get a controlled finish. I hope I’m not doing shotcreters out of the market! Because there’s many, many… like, tunnel type scenarios etc, underground things, that have done very well with shotcrete. But in terms of that question, as far as waterproofing goes, you’ve got to think about that. And then the long-term bond between, you know, piles, shotcrete or, you know, in between or… And then the other point I was going to make was when you cast-in-place, you get a better form on your, like your ends, your stop ends, etc. So you get a better joint and start again. Just a few things to think about. You get your steel placement better. With shotcrete, obviously you’ve blasted and you get your covers and things get variants. So there’s quite a few things to think about in that. But in the main probably as a… Great debate for concrete! We’re obviously in concrete. There’s massive fors and againsts. But I would probably say in the main you’ll get a better outcome from cast-in-place.

CHRISTINE:

And can I ask a question of all of our attendees, if you can, What would stop you from engaging – those of you who  would be responsible for engaging a waterproofing consultant, or somebody coming on board – what would be the, I guess, the hesitance to engage a waterproofing consultant or somebody in the waterproofing industry, early in those designs? Is there something that we’re not seeing that would then create a hesitance to engage someone at that stage? Is it just too many cooks in the kitchen, or are you nervous they’re going to push something that’s not right for the project? What’s the happenings?

HAYDEN:

Every comes down to cost somewhat too, but whether we factor in the cost of … but yes, good, good. But yes, pop the questions on the chat, that’s a good one. And Greg asked a question about CSSW in New Zealand. Great point. There’s only one. So we do a design, we partner with the UK company who have CSSW designers. And it is based out of the UK. But it really is the only system that qualifies you. But they are looking at… I know there’s discussion, and I don’t know when this will come in, some sort of global-type roll-out where we can get more involved. So we can point you to that person. No problem. Otherwise we have access to UK as well, which we get pretty good response from as well. Australia, I think, have 7 or 8 across all of Australia. So yes, it’s a limited number. And they’re good, very good people, they’re well trained in BS8102 and all the aspects of it.

Another question about remedial. This is a good question. Who wants to take this one? So basically, where there’s a failed basement, the membrane behind is failed. Now this is an interesting question that happens a lot well. You don’t get a good bond to the membrane. The water tracks in somewhere and it comes in somewhere where it’s not necessarily…

ALEX:

It’s not active in that area, is it?

HAYDEN:

Potentially. Well, it’s very hard to track and you can spend absolutely months chasing that – as no doubt many would have on this call, but good point. There is… we mentioned about colloidal silicas. We have seen that done successfully, where we’ve been able to treat areas, and it blocks porosity in the concrete and stops moisture migration through the concrete. Where is does get tricky is where it stems to a crack, or a moving crack, or a joint that’s not sealed properly. That would need some sort of injection or polyurethane or epoxy solutions. Alex, Christine, you got comments on that?

ALEX:

Yes look, water is always going to follow the path of least resistance. We all know that. What I’ve had experience with, when people have actually come to me about remediations in these situations and epoxies etc is the fact that it’s very costly, it’s time consuming, it’s unattractive to the eye, if you will. Effectively what happens is they’ll inject an epoxy-type resin into the crack and it’ll, you know, stop it there, but it effectively pushes it along the line and it’ll just pop out somewhere else, and then all of a sudden you’ve got this, you know, Whack-A-Mole game happening in the basement, where you’re just injecting random spots. And it’ll always pop out somewhere else. I mean, where that could have been prevented quite easily with a different style of design, or a different methodology, or something like that.

So it really is that prevention is better than a cure. Let’s put something in place early, stop that from happening. Because it’s not only a costly process, but it starts to really impact on the building itself. People aren’t able to use the basement. You know, they want to zone off areas while these guys are working etc, etc. It becomes a massive headache and it ends up costing a lot more to rectify than what it potentially would have to swap to an in-situ poured wall or something like that. The costs were absorbed, just in a different way.

HAYDEN:

Yes. Agree. There’s some really good comments in the chat. If we go through a couple of them. Christine, which was a … bouncing back to your question.

CHRISTINE:

Yes.

HAYDEN:

I’ll talk to the first one, the increase cost of basement systems, lead developers seeking cost cutting which… 100% we see that often. It’s really interesting to ask at that point what the budget is for remedial, as the number of you would. But often you’ll find quite a number that is accepted as being ongoing maintenance cost.

Future-proofing probably came up there a little bit and it relates to what’s on the slide now. And we talked about where, again it might have been a green-field site with plenty of room around it when we built it, but then 18 months down the track, we’ve got another big hole and the basement going beside it. Now that’s one thing that BS102 identifies and makes sure we go through, right through that. So we’re future-proofing right from the start. What could it be? What could the water table be? And making sure we are designing that right to get that outcome.

The cost is always a big one, but as it actually? Because if we’re prepared to spend  maintenance money, why don’t we spend that right…

ALEX:

From the outset, yes.

HAYDEN:

Time frame and cost, Christine?

CHRISTINE:

I was just looking through these other comments about why there might be a hesitancy and I’m wondering whether it’s ‘what we’ve always done’ scenario as well, because it’s not normal to bring a consultant in at that time. Greg’s talking about the passing of risk and things like that. So where that then becomes a contractor responsibility… and I guess what we’re wanting to say is those shared conversations early to eliminate that, Oh, I guess we’re going to have to figure out how to waterproof this.

HAYDEN:

Yes. That comment on the chat – thanks for these guys, by the way. They may hesitate to bring in a consultant because you think it’s premature. I would go as far as say it’s never premature. If someone came to us at concept stage, that’s fantastic. So I’m thinking about building this.

ALEX:

Yes.

HAYDEN:

There would there be no obligation; no fees attached, or whatever. That’s getting all our heads in the right space and doing it. But I think that point also is time frame. Waterproof consultants, etc, design people should be fast. We shouldn’t muck around for three weeks and come back with, you know, limited information. We’ve got to meet. And it goes back to what I was trying to say earlier, to fit the modern construction.

And one other point I was thinking, you mentioned about the risk and that has been a point. Who spoke about it earlier with the finger pointing? Where traditionally you’ve got a builder, you’ve got a designer of the waterproofing, you’ve got a product supplier, and an installer. So four parties; and the risk gets passed around, passed around, passed around. I suppose what we’re trying to do a little bit different in this scene, just to give you a bit of a picture, is take on that full risk right from concept design right through to a performance warranty. As in waterproofing the project in its installed state, not just the product warranty, not just the installation warranty. So some instances there.

CHRISTINE:

Yes. I mean in that early discussion phase as well, we, if involved, would be able to say OK, if you’re choosing that type of construction, you’re elevating this risk, or, here is the flow-on effect of choosing that for your waterproofing. And then making informed structural decisions and informed construction decisions and recognising how those things balance out. And being able to make a call early on, OK, well, this might save us some costs here, but it’s going to increase the risk there. You got a wet basement. Or, that there’s not going to be sufficient cover here for this, that or the other. When that’s going to make it impossible to install on site at the other end. Yes.

ALEX:

Flagging things early. Definitely that that is big with MARKHAM, our holistic approach, which is a part of our end-to-end service that we’ve been doing for quite some time now. You know, all the way from warehouse slabs up to, you know, rooftop waterproofing etc; is fact-finding, you know, putting forward suggestions. And then not only making comments on the design, but actually following them through, implementing them on site, making sure that they’re facilitated, QA’d, signed off. So it is that, it is a performance warranty. It’s not something that we get involved in and then go, Oh yes. Off you go. You know, here’s the stuff. See you later and hope for the best.

It’s really implemented through phases. And we’ve got key steps in each phase and key people within the company that make sure that that actually happens right the way through. So that end-to-end really can assist on a project, especially in waterproofing. Making sure all the T’s are crossed and the I’s are dotted so that there’s that performance at the back end of the project. And we’re trying to mitigate or remove that additional cost in remediation from the outset.

HAYDEN:

Yes, agree. And let’s be honest, this waterproofing market has created a great pathway for people to make a lot of money. And it’s probably because we’re not changing how we do things.

ALEX:

Yes.

HAYDEN:

So the comment on there about developers not see it as a necessary experience upfront, which I think is fair. But at that point, we believe it shouldn’t cost. It should be a service to get the industry right to get the project right…

ALEX:

Yes.

HAYDEN:

… at that point and it’s not a lot of input, it’s just some thoughts from another angle and run it past and say Yes, have you thought about this? Have you thought about this so? Probably just the mindset tweak where we need to change the industry there.

ALEX:

Yes, agreed.

HAYDEN:

That’s brilliant, guys. Any other questions or any other notes from the audience? Do we want to leave the chat box open for the moment? It’s good. Appreciate all that.

ALEX:

Samson’s just coming back with something else which is good.

HAYDEN:

100%. That’s a good comment. Some worry that additional expert opinions might slow the process. That’s why it needs to be, I think, approached from a construction mindset. If you know what I mean, it has to be a project focus. It’s not just someone else trying to make a buck out of it…

ALEX:

No.

HAYDEN:

And strut their stuff. It has to be a level thought-out approach. Agree.

BRENDAN:

Thank you very much everybody. We’re pressing close to the…

HAYDEN:

One more, Brendo, if we can take out.

BRENDAN:

One more!

ALEX:

How fast can you type?!

BRENDAN:

We will send out the contact details. We’ll send the slide deck out with the follow up email and we’d be very glad of your feedbacks on… There you go, Hayden, there’s your one more.

HAYDEN:

Thank you all! It’s a very good topic and we will be running a lot more of these where we dive into some of these points and more detail. We’ve sort of gone high level today, but stay with us and watch out for the invites because we’ll probably dive into each of these five points with a lot more detail and questions, answers, those sort of things and potentially some guest speakers to come on, especially around our… some of our CSSW guys and our… someone that knows BS8102 as well. So look forward to running that. Thank you very much.

ALEX:

Thanks guys. Appreciate your time.

CHRISTINE:

Yes. Thank you everyone.

BRENDAN:

Thank you all.