Been doing some back searching for housing related stuff. On more than one occasion I have read that some, not all, expats residing in various part believe that Canadian house building is worse/sub standard to that in the UK. Is this just a perspective or is it verifiable. Does one part with good money only to see the walls cave in and the roof tumble after a respectful standing period. From a laymans perspective I would have thought there must be regulations (presumably varying from PROVINCE to PROVINCE [I like the word] to govern builders. After all Canada has been erecting buildings for more than a couple of years now so .....

Anyones thoughts?

I like the look of Em!

I think its stems from different construction techniqus. Brits are used to solid bricks and mortar, but here its timber frame cos a: theres lots of timber, and b: its better suited to the climate, what with freeze thaw action that will spall bricks, and ground heaving that timber might cope with better. Timber frame need more maintainence, roofs need replacing due to the harsher environment, siding need to be redone now and then.

Another factor is canadians seem to love to build extensions etc when they run out of space rather than move, and there is always a temptation not to pay for a permit and building inspector, and then get dinged for higher property taxes too on top of that.

Buyer beware, get a good inspection by a reputable inspector whos references you have personally checked out. There are more cowboys inspecting buildings than you will find at the Calgary stampede.

been in construction for 25 yrs........20 of them in the states and most of the quality guys around these parts are french canadiens.......imo there are good and bad everywhere but I would say Canada is as good as anywhere......if contracting guys yourself I would recomend getting local knowledge from a lumber yard etc and asking who is the best this and that........normally the best charge a little more but it is worth it........if you go with the cheapest everthing then thats exactly what you will get........btw ask to see some work they have done

We have house built in BC. Our builder is portugese, used to live in Montreal,and reloctate some years previous. He was recommended by our realtor. He was also know by our lawyer, and well respected. Licensed and bonded.
We cannot praise him enough for the work he has done, much over and above what we had expected. Even more so was the regional building inspector, whom we met at the last visit. he was so thorough with his inspection.
We had 4 stages of the build process, each stage had to be checked by the resional inspector, and our own independent appraiser before we handed over the next instalment of money. I was amazed at the amount of rules and regs he had to abide by.

Things we did from beginning.
Had a good realtor who gave us local knowledge and recommended.
Had a good lawyer.
Agreed complete build costs from onset in writting,
Contract was some 9 pages long giving exact details sown to the type of roof, sidings, interior colour paint flooring , even bathroom fittings.
We had dates that the stage of the build was to be completed by and how much we would pay at each stage.
On completion we held back $17000 for 55 days to ensure we did not find additional things that needed done.
also he had to insure the property until we received the occupancy permit.
We have a 10 year house build warranty.
If our builder cocked up in any way, we would be able to claim.
Even our bank manager new him.

Our building inspector noted a door lock did not catch everytime , and orded that it had to be done properly, he made him put in a stair hand rail, siesmic belt on the water tank, raise a plug socket by about 6 inches, and a few other things that we would not consider problems. He was insistant or he would not issue permit!

Things that are regulation there which we had not heard of here, there had to be a certain amount of lights in the kitchen and a set distance apart.
There had to be an extractor fan above the cooker, they must install 2 smoke alarms. And the hand rail on the stairs.amogst a few. etc.

We had more interior sockets than i had ever seen in a UK house, and exterior ones all around, we also had security lights put in we had not asked for.

AS for the general build quality. yes it is timber, but new build houses are far superior than older timber ones. The standards are changing every year according to our builder.

We had a choice of roof quality lasting 15 or 20/25 years. The outside is all vinyl cladding, so it lasts rather than timber which need treating or replacing in time.
House prices are cheaper there, but you if you are buying a timber framed house, timber cladding etc. this requires maintenance, as will the roof in time.
Brick houses with clay tiled/slate roofs will stand the test of time, but cost more.

In our local paper a beach hut size of average garage has just gone on sale for £80,000 !!!!!!
Our Candian house 2000square foot cost £75000 to build........
Hut ? House? Hut ?House?
I think we'd invest our money in the house!!
Do reseach, get recommendations and see properties builder has already done. Is he registered?, if not dont use him.
Ours was and there is an awful lot of info they hold on the builder and require of him to register.
Draw up contract with lawyer / realtor. for complete build process payment etc. Other wise you could be hit with escalating costs.

Obviously it may vary from province to province but we were impressed with BC standards. Link covers all aras in Canada
see following.

http://www.hiringacontractor.com/En/...ou_live/BC.asp

I read somewhere that Canadian building methods are approved in Japan which is the quality pioneer.

Most of the new houses I saw being built in the UK before I left were simply a brick outer over a timber frame ... pretty much the same construction method as Canada ... very well suited to places with a dry climate like Alberta, not so good in BC.

Could this be because Japan has a sizeable number of earthquakes as does Canada. Most are not noticeable, but a report in 1999 says that BC is 19 years over due a big one! Speaking to our builder and inspector, new measures are always being brought in to ensure less damage is done to buildings if this should happen. We had to have this seismic belt on the water tank in case or a quake. We also pay additional for insurance to cover damage. Although if is it that big, my water tank will be least of my worries. I am right by the sea so Tsunami may be more of a worry. Oh well at least the tank will remain standing even if my house and me won't!
There was an earthquake in 1700 ( I know a long time ago) in SW canada / NW USA that they believe caused a Tsunami in Japan. Read on.........


"Few scientists took that threat in the Cascadia region seriously until 1996, when Japanese researchers, in a letter to the journal Nature, stunned their North American colleagues by linking a tsunami in Japan to geologic reports of an earthquake and tsunami at the Cascadia subduction zone.

From the tsunami’s arrival time in Japan, the Japanese researchers assigned the earthquake to the evening of Tuesday, January 26, 1700. In addition, from preliminary estimates of the tsunami’s height in Japan, they guessed that it was too large to explain by a Cascadia earthquake of less than magnitude 9.

That guess was on target, according to today’s report in the Journal of Geophysical Research-Solid Earth. The researchers begin by showing that the 1700 tsunami crested as much as five meters [15 feet high] in Japan. They then use recent findings about the Cascadia subduction zone to relate earthquake size to plausible areas of fault rupture and seafloor displacement. Finally, they employ computer simulations of trans-Pacific tsunamis to tune the estimates of earthquake size at Cascadia to the estimated tsunami heights in Japan.

The findings, said Atwater, justify precautions taken recently by engineers and emergency personnel. Under construction standards adopted since 1996, engineers have sought to design buildings to withstand giant earthquakes in the northwestern United States. At the same time, state and local officials have devised evacuation routes from areas believed subject to a tsunami from a Cascadia earthquake of magnitude 9. In Canada, buildings constructed in Vancouver and Victoria since 1985are designed to resist stronger shaking from local earthquakes than is expected from the next Cascadia earthquake. Canada’s 2005 building code will explicitly include the hazard from the subduction zone, said Wang.
Wang also noted that the giant fault responsible for this earthquake is currently "locked," accumulating energy for a future destructive event. "Scientists in the United States, Canada, and Japan are carefully monitoring the fault’s activities using seismological and geodetic methods and making comparisons with a similar fault in southwestern Japan," said Wang. "With a combination of a better understanding of the previous earthquake and modern observations, we hope to better define the potential rupture area of the future event."

read on here all who wish to buy in Canada!!
http://www.tv.cbc.ca/newsinreview/oc...y/warning.html

As somebody who worked his summers on many building sites when I was younger.

I would say that the plumbing and electrics are to a lower standard than would be allowed in the UK.. Insulation is better.. Overall quality of finish I would say it slightly lower.. Fixtures and fittings are as cheap as they can get away with

But having said that it is still safe, just not as neat..

It’s worth bearing in mind that a Canadian house has a much lower life expectancy than you would expect in Europe and they are built with this in mind..

And most Canadians see “upgrading� the house as part of life, which would explain the general lower quality , sockets, light fixtures and taps etc provided by the builders.. people tend to replace these quickly (as we have done).

Which is why I feel that along with the choice of timber frame, which is probably the best construction for the climate. (as solid brick would require much better and deeper foundations in the freeze thaw cycle.) You get what you pay for.

We have seen your aspect/views work just the same in the UK. Not only because we have lived in 6 houses all with varying levels of quality (stretch of the imagination most times) but we also have a clients that build houses. We get the insight into the cheaper end for those reasons that must not be repeated!

Probably not much different.

But what is the 'life expectancy' of a newly built house in Ontario for example?

Do I get another star soon?

I've heard about 20 to 30 years ... our house is fine after 24 years ... I've lived in houses in the UK that were a lot younger and were obviously showing the signs of wear ... and seriously bad workmanship.

As an example on a personal scale we brought a house from a leading builder. Not cheap either being what one would term an upper executive type (can you hear my toffy nose accent) and within 6 months the staircase (entire staircase) started to drop away from its suroundings. To cut a long story it cost the builder in excess of £30,000 to put right. I shamed them and the NHBC and they knew it but can you imagine the manner I had to take. They even had to replace all carpets - another £5,000. You might want to guess who the builders in the UK fund, kisses the arse of and generally sucks up to...

Litigation - not me your honour!

... I've also heard from various people that the quality of house building in Calgary has declined in the last few years ... having watched new houses being thrown up by builders, I can believe it ... it's the same bodged & botched construction quality that you see in the UK.

Who was the builder?

At this moment in time I would rather not say.