Water Damage Destroys Home from Break in Overhead Plumbing Line

For one homeowner, this Christmas was almost too much for her to bear. Her name is Mary and she lived just off of Scotts Valley with a city view. While she might have considered returning to her lovely home, recent events have made that trip impossible. This is a cautionary story, not so much about Mary but a warning to all Sun City homeowners who would prefer to avoid the distress that Mary was forced to endure.

That distress occurred when Mary was informed that her home was no longer livable. The ceiling had collapsed from the accumulation of water in the attic; water had destroyed much of the home’s drywall and had warped every door in the home. Her furniture was ruined and quickly growing mold was everywhere you looked. Mary’s landscaper first noticed the presence of water leaking under the front door. To put the damage in some perspective, over a 24-hour period a break in a ¾” water line can produce 30,000 gallons of water, the equivalent of a nice size swimming pool. [Photo is illustrative only of flood damage and is not intended to reflect specific damage in Mary's home.]

As with many Sun City homeowners, Mary was away from home visiting with family. Some folks are gone from their home for a day or two, as we did this past summer for our daughter’s marriage or for a short trip to view the splendour of nearby Zion National Park, while others travel more extensively. Still other residents periodically return to their former roots to escape from the Las Vegas heat or the cold, or merely to visit with family and friends. For many, getting away seems to be part of our active adult lifestyle. Still others may be living here or away while they leave their home or second Sun City property in the hands of a realtor to manage. Whatever the reason, your home is not occupied for a period of time. As Mary learned, an unoccupied home can pose a risk, one which we thought we did not have to think about as a result of having an overhead plumbing system. What these homeowners have in common is that they typically fail to shut the source of water off to the house while they are away from home. Under ordinary circumstances, that should not present a problem.

A Brief History.

Like all Phase 1 homeowners, Mary was faced with the decision of how best to replumb her home when Pulte informed us about the KITEC problem. Phase 2 homeowners relied on Pulte to make that replumb decision for them in homes with overhead REHAU or WIRSBO plumbing systems that also had dezincification issues. In Phase 1 homes, the adopted solution to the KITEC problem entailed the rerouting of our household water lines from under the concrete slab to the attic and down through the walls to the various water fixtures located throughout the home. The only homeowner decision was how best to address the problem with available resources. There were a number of overhead options to consider, including all copper; some type of flexible PEX or cross-linked polyethylene piping, like Wirsbo and Vanguard, along with plastic or copper fittings; and CPVC or chlorinated poly vinyl chloride piping, which is a rigid piping system. Most homeowners, relying on Pulte’s recommendation, adopted one of the PEX plumbing systems. As a general rule, the choice of the piping system determined which fittings would be used. A fitting allows tubes of the same or different materials to be joined. The choice of which fitting to adopt was typically made by the contractor, unless the homeowner dictated the use of a preferred or different fitting, like the use of Wirsbo’s C314 bronze fittings available by mid-2007.

Money, Money, Money.

For most homeowners, cost was a real factor in deciding which plumbing system to adopt. That decision came in play when comparing the cost of an all copper soldered installation to the use of a PEX installation, with an all copper system running more than twice the cost of PEX system. Pulte’s settlement offer of $7,800 was based on the homeowner’s use of the lower cost PEX system. For the first six or so months in 2007, Pulte’s recommended contractor, American Leak Detection, was using WIRSBO and whatever fitting technology that was available at the time. Other plumbing contractors were also present, using fittings that they were most familiar with or deemed appropriate to accomplish the job, without any consideration of our special needs to mitigate the effects of dezincification. Only later, in the case of WIRSBO, did most plumbers adopt the more costly all bronze ½” C314 fittings. However, although the preferred bronze fittings were available, some homeowners were deterred from using the more expensive fittings since some contractors, at least initially, were charging a hefty premium for their use and Pulte's settlement was insufficient to cover the increased costs. While homeowners were free to apply Pulte’s settlement amount to any plumbing system, most opted for some type of PEX system, like WIRSBO or VANGUARD.

The only remaining question was the relative safety of running the home’s water supply overhead in the attic. Since Pulte was already using an overhead plumbing system in the 3,000+ Phase 2 homes, Phase 1 homeowners had no reason to question or doubt the safety of an overhead attic plumbing system, as long as it was properly installed.

No Cause Determined.

Until further information is available on a likely cause of this failure, it would be premature to speculate on a single cause. What is known is that Mary's home was re-piped early on with WIRSBO and by an unknown contractor. While a cause has yet to be determined, possible causes range from a break in the pipe, considered unlikely, to the type of fitting adopted and, or the failure of the installer to exercise proper procedures to assure an effective fitting. Clearly, there is the possibility that this event was the result of unique set of circumstances and will never happen again.

Due to the presence of mold in the home, access to the home to ascertain the cause of the water line break is restricted.

Can This Happen to You?

Most homeowners are practical and are willing if not eager to discount the likelihood of an accident occurring, e.g., driving a car is a good example despite the well known incidence of deaths and injuries that result from driving, even though good and safe drivers may drive defensibly. Realistically, though, since there is a very small chance of anything like this happening to any given homeowner, the idea of taking some precautions to prevent possible water damage seems too remote for many homeowners to worry about. Then again, we are not discussing a little leak that is readily fixable, but water filling the attic and flooding the home while the homeowner is staying away for a while. On the other hand, precautions, for whatever eventuality, can be inconvenient and sometime burdensome. Each homeowner will have to evaluate the pros and cons of doing something or nothing to mitigate against this event happening in their home when they are staying away on vacation.

What Can a Homeowner Do?

For additional information on what a homeowner can do to to address this potential issue, click here. This additional information is a newly revised and updated version from what had been originally published on 1 January.

Ron Johnson, 1 January 2010