WHRS video shows the destructive nature of their testing

Simply put – the WHRS Investigation leaves a building highly stigmatised and damaged and many times prevents the building from being able to be adequately remediated with a targeted repair solution.

While this amount of damage is not important if an area is to be reclad anyway – but if this destructive process finds that the area investigated is acceptable and performing well, how is the owner to rectify this area permanently without full recladding in the area? There is no mention of this and the WHRS to this day still refuses to give owners a specific answer to this.

There are ways to reduce and minimise this issue – homeowners who put the Mdu Probe System into their homes BEFORE the WHRS Intrusive Investigations or DURING the investigation (as part of the WHRS Assessors’ budgeted works) are able to minimise damage as much as possible while still allowing Assessors to collect the information they need. ┬áThere are also ways to reduce the damage of a building so that repairs costs are minimised should no problem be found.

Also, an independent comparative analysis report between the efficacy between WHRS and the Mdu Probe System was commissioned in 2009 by the DBH showing that the Probes were highly effective in assessing the condition of a building compared to the standard process, and that when combined together as assessment methods (where the destructive WHRS investigations are directed by the information collected by the Mdu Probe System) the process was highly effective in achieving a very robust analysis of a building without unnecessary damage.

This entry was posted in Expert Assessment, WHRS. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *