Okay, here's the thing-- much as I disagree with it, both Schluter and Laticrete will warrantee their systems over drywall. If it's NOT a surface applied waterproofing system, though, greenboard has been outlawed since around 2000 in the IRC, and both TCNA and ANSI have followed suit.

This is greenboard with the tile on top of it. No membrane, just thinset and the tile.

Nobody membranes the walls here--I insisted on in in my bathrooms, with cement board.

That's one of the arguments they used against us that the IRC quote we had was from 2006. It was "out of date". Believe me, they are trying to talk down every piece of data provided to them.

ARE THEY NUMB???? Then ask them to show you the updated spec.

If they can't show you an updated spec, then that IRC spec takes precedence. Do you have a TCNA Handbook?

once there is A plumbing leak behind the greenboard its game over and a complete tearout $$$ and laticrete/schluter will be happy to sell you more tile shower materials again and again. Its a corporate sales thing and believe you me I love Laticrete. l wish the once GREAT Laticrete would change their game. The orange stuff? Junk IMPO

We don't have construction literature. Although we both have design backgrounds neither of us are in the business.

"Then ask them to show you the updated spec."

My SO, the buyers' agent said that: "Show me the spec that says this is acceptable"

Answer: "We don't have to show you anything. You are the one with the problem with it. You have to show us that we can't do it."

It's been very fun.

Considering they've already admitted that the spec you're quoting exists, they need to show you why they think there's a spec that contradicts it, and more importantly, over rides it. Meanwhile, I'm going to see if I can find it in my TCNA handbook.

Obviously the inspectors don't see these bathrooms in any interim stage at all, I am thinking.

That's about as up to date as you can get. If they still argue with you about it, I'd strongly recommend that you cease business relations with them, being they don't give a crap about the client.

here-- this may be a little clearer pic for you. Give me a minute and I'll post pics directly from TCNA

What city is this? Do you have a link to their current codes? TCNA only = "should" to most jurisdictions, while IRC or local codes = "SHALL"

Doesn' matter, because both say the same thing.

NO. The words are and have been definitely different. In some years, you would have to look up and buy the various ANSI and ASTM standards just to understand what the IRC was referring to. Nor, is the TCNA a complete prescriptive approach to building, meaning that it is possible to follow every point in the TCNA manual, and still not comply with all the building/plumbing codes necessary to pass a legitimate inspection.

I think to some extent its not a matter of whether the requirement is in place, because essentially it is. It's sort of a matter of compliance to it, and whether the city enforces it or not and to me it seems as if they don't, because this is not a case of it happening in bath remodels, (probably the majority of which have no permits in this city) this is a case of it happening in numerous, permitted, inspected, new-construction houses.

If they are indeed not to local codes and they were indeed inspected, do owners have recourse against the city? Consumers often count on the inspection to insure at least minimum quality. Shower remediation might be a good business to start in your area. Or are these green board showers holding up?

"I think to some extent its not a matter of whether the requirement is in place, because essentially it is." Not if your municipality is still using the 2000 or 2003 IRC. Even the change that finally came in the 2006 IRC reference is so obscure that most inspectors would probably not understand the change until someone pointed it out and explained it.

Greenboard showers will NOT hold up, unless you'e real lucky.

In my area green board is not allowed in wet areas. But the inspector looked at my shower construction and floor before signing off for tile. I feel horrible for the buyers in an area with weak inspection procedures.

Nobody is saying it should be used, or will even hold up, just that you can not force the builder to comply with TCNA, and that some local building codes may still be in the dark ages.

But, according to most tile "pros" around here, as long as you don't call the entrance to the shower compartment a curb or threshold, you do not need to follow any of the other provisions of the code anyway.

And that' why I said Above-- If they still argue with you about it, I'd strongly recommend that you cease business relations with them, being they don't give a crap about the client.

"I'd strongly recommend that you cease business relations with them"

"My SO is a realtor..... We were doing a walk through with buyers..."

So, the realtor now has no houses to sell, and the advertising pitch is "Hire me because I will only show you 10% of the available housing in the area, because I disagree with the state code and building officials who's job it is to inspect the houses for code compliance". It would be a better idea to just get a different job rather than die slowly.

I'm sorry, but you can't tell me that every house in that area has been built to shabby specs like this! This is just what I know enough to speak about. God knows what the rest of the house is like! I'm not a realtor. I'm a tile contractor. And yes, I've turned down work because I knew what kind of quality (or lack thereof) the builder was known for. I don't want that kind of reputation.

My SO is not the sellers' agent, he is the buyer's agent. I think in this case it will be a decision of paying them to redo the bathrooms, or walking away from this house, or buying the house and seeing what happens. The firm that SO works for does not have a business relationship with any developers of new construction of this sort.

Apparently they are forwarding a copy of the original builder's specs filed with the city that indicate greenboard as the substrate for the shower wall. In which case it means the city approved it. Whether they approved it purposely or by omission, who knows.

Bill I am assuming that many of the houses built in that area have been built to this spec because they are one of a group of nearly indistinguishable builders who are building new construction in redeveloping neighborhoods. As I mentioned above, someone we spoke to found plain drywall in their showers. And that was one in a group of $800K-$1M houses.

"The firm that SO works for does not have a business relationship with any developers of new construction of this sort."

Showing a buyer a house by one of these builders is still a business relationship of which both the builder and realtor are involved, even if it is not via a signed contract between the two parties.

My point is not to say anything against your SO, but to show that it is not as easy as just not having anything to do with these builders or their houses. They can effect the entire local industry.

Yes, I understand: by not showing any houses constructed by this firm or other firms whose standard spec is greenboard in the shower essentially removes an entire redeveloping area (a relatively large one) and a particular price point from the houses that can be shown to any clients. And to some degree that further wipes out a particular demographic of client as well because these houses appeal to a buyer within a certain age group with a particular budget--or severely limits what buyers in that group can be shown.

Job security

It's not really about any of the parties being able to pay for it. It's a disagreement of who should have to pay for it. And some builders will cut $100 corners no matter the price point of the house. Both are arguing as a matter of principle. Personally I would pay for the fix --which would be $1000s now as a redo. Or I'd forfeit the deposit and start over.

And it's not the $100 difference that is knocking anyone out of the market. It's that these builders and another builder have cornered the market in this particular area for the $300-400K houses, which is entry level. If you go with a different builder you are in a $500-600K range.

Stop showing anything built by X or Y that probably has greenboard in the showers and you don't have anything to show there for the $400K buyer. Unless you are in at the start of the build and upgrade. And ethically my SO doesn't want to knowingly show properties that have greenboard in the showers.

Each builder has their formula and price point.

I'm not sure price matters. 2 of the 6 $2M houses down my block have major water infiltration problems and one has been vacated by the owner who is suing the builder.

I would still like to look up the actual code for that area, but I do not know where it is. The wording (multi person shower) you gave earlier is not really from any standard copy of the IRC, maybe from an east coast plumbing code? The problem, more often, is that the inspectors have never bothered to look up what an ASTM C1278 actual is, or more importantly, is NOT. They do not actually call it green board in the codes, nor do they prohibit all gypsum panels. To make it more confusing, they have changed the names/numbers of the standards for greenboard at least once since 2000.

@Creative, "job security", :). We get that. Way too many failed showers out there. Just looked at one last week for a NEW homeowner (not new house but not old). It's a painful realization for them that they must now invest a good amount of money to tear out and re-do correctly. And while we were able to provide a consult, we do not have time in our schedule to actually do the job. Yes, there are still some real tile Pros out here but their services are in high demand. And honestly, we enjoy working on the projects where the client wants to do it right the first time. Tear out and re-dos are not fun and they are kind of a downer as it is sad for the industry and for the homeowner. That being said, we will take them on occasionally when we can fit them in. Scheduling is an issue. And think about it - who plans and schedules a shower re-do as result of failure in advance?

It's more than a "downer". When I first got started in my area, NO ONE wanted tile showers because the shower bases "ALWAYS" leaked. People don't want to take a chance once they've had a failure. Fiberglass is cheaper and not as much chance of problems. But I've been in this area now for about 17 years, and just in the next month I've got 7 showers in 4 homes. Once people get it in their head that tile showers leak, it's tough to get rid of that fallacy. that's the whole reason I got started here at Gardenweb years ago-- trying to turn some of this around. It's interesting how points of view change. When I first got started in the trade, Bob Vila was still on Public Broadcast tv. I used to look forward to his doing shows on installing tile, because I knew that within a couple of weeks, I'd start getting calls for sidework to fix the abortions people had gotten into because of following his direction. Now it just bothers me the black eye, that the industry gets. Between contractors without scruples, and DIY shows that don't show proper methods, it's turned alot of people off to tile as a possibility for their homes. So if I sound a little belligerent about stuff like this, this is why.

Well, the tile work in my bathrooms is pretty exceptional. 1) I think, because I designed the bathrooms around the tile layouts, and 2) because the contractor is a craftsman.

The flip side of this is that is that he works on Time + Materials, (although he does not upcharge for materials), not a fixed price contract. It costs more, and it takes more time and honestly he's not enriching himself either.

(I did however, go with a custom solid Corian shower base rather than tile, but there is a lot of tile in the bathrooms overall.

Palimpsest, I didn't mean to infer you were anything less than top notch. I've known you here for at least a decade, and you can tell when someone takes pride in their work by how they talk about it. You can also tell who knows what they're doing and who doesn't, and you're definitely the former. Please excuse me if I came across in any other way.

No, I did not take your comments that way. I was commenting that to get what I wanted I had to go with a non fixed price job.

Greenboard in a shower.

If IRC applies, see which year applies to your area. Basic MR/Greenboard has not been allowed as a tile backer board in wet areas like shower and tub surrounds since the 2006 IRC rewrite.

Because things evolve and because outside agencies often evolve their installation guidelines more frequently than the building code is rewritten, code often refers to outside agencies for guidance and for more specific and detailed language regarding material installation. ANSI may not specifically be code. TCNA? The same. But if IRC says follow ANSI or TCNA guidelines? Then there you go. To comply with code you may have to comply with TCNA or ANSI.

Often times IRC, or ANSI, or TCNA also say to refer to the manufacturer's guidance for installing their own products. To comply with code you have to comply with the manufacturer's product limitations or installation recommendations.

So there is an informational layering to this, so to speak.

The out take below is from the 2015 IRC, 2012 is pretty much the same except for formatting. 2012 does not have the table, but instead includes the information in the table in text format:

So, does R702.4.2 specifically prohibit MR/Greenboard? R702.4.2 does not say what you CAN'T use. It says what you CAN use. If the backer board that the builder used fails to fall under one of the four allowable "Material" criteria in the table above, and fails to meet the ASTM "Standard" for that material? Then it is not allowed as a tile backer board in a wet area.

You do NOT have to prove that what was used is not allowed. When asked, it's the builder that has to show documentation that it IS allowed, that the product used meets one of the criteria in the above table. It's the builder's responsibility to comply with code. It's the AHJ's responsibility to enforce that code.

In the photo above, R704.2.2 also states that the backer board should be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. Here's a clip from USG's basic informational sheet for one of their "green board" products. You can reference the sheet for the specific material used in the shower and see if the language is similar:

#6 above says don't use basic green board as a tile substrate in a shower or tub surround and #7 above says to refer to ANSI and TCNA.

Bill posted the TCNA information in his previous post.

Going back to the first photo of IRC, IRC 702.4.1 also states that the tile should be installed according to certain ANSI standards. It's up to the builder/installer to comply with those standards in order to comply with code.

It further becomes A joke when one compares what simple cement board ( !! upgrade :):) would cost there is almost no savings. Lastly I would just about bet if they are a bad enough builder to attempt unnaproved drywall they very likely have some amount of also UNAPPROVED Joint compound in the mix.

TCNA and ANSI 118 are exactly the same. ANSI copies their tile specs verbatum.

The good news is that the shower greenboard was replaced with cement board and some pictures were taken of the process, which met with the approval of the buyer's relative who has construction experience.

Mongo explains it fairly well. The problem is that we do not know the actual wording of the code for your area. By Mongo's explanation, which is substantially correct, cement board was not specifically allowed by the IRC before 2006, although unlike palimpsest's area, my area has been using cement board by almost every single contractor for 30+ years regardless of what the IRC said at the time.

Here is the IRC history. (Green board is color coded green)