Supplier gets nailed for millions in Chinese drywall trial

Families in Virginia and the Gulf Coast have been dealing with a dangerous problem in the form of Chinese drywall. Like many, Armin and Lisa Seifart discovered that their home was built using the defective product and decided to remove it and investigate their legal options. They took their Miami based drywall supplier to court and won $2.4 million.

The high hydrogen sulfide content of Chinese drywall has terrible consequences for the health of homeowners and a corrosive effect on metal objects. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) recommend that homes with Chinese drywall be gutted because the gas emitted by the drywall can stick to metal. Items that need to be removed include gas lines, electrical wiring, sprinkler systems, smoke alarms, and many appliances.

Shortly after Armin and Lisa Seifart moved into their new home in February of 2008, they smelled something was up. Literally. They detected the distinctive odor of sulfur and noticed that their appliances were having problems. When tests found that their Miami home was full of Chinese drywall, they gathered their children and
moved out within twenty four hours.

The Seifarts sought a judgement of $4.3 million against Banner Supply, that company that supplied the drywall for their home. They claimed that Banner knew that the drywall was dangerous and should cover the fees to repair the home and some additional expenses.

The crux of the Seifarts’ case was an agreement made in 2007 between Banner Supply and Knauf Plasterboard Tianjin, the drywall manufacturer. The document states that Banner would not sell 2.3 million square feet of the defective drywall and offer a US made product instead. The problem is, Banner Supply didn’t follow through with the plan.

Banner Supply’s agreement with Knauf Plasterboard Tianjin was made in 2007 while the Seifart family moved into their home in 2008. So, how did they end up with Chinese drywall? Banner Supply peddled it to any builder that wanted the product. They only replaced the Chinese drywall if the buyer complained about the stinky smell.

A jury found Banner Supply, Knauf Plasterboard Tianjin, and Knauf’s parent company liable in the case even though the manufacturer wasn’t named as a plaintiff.

The legal aspects of the Chinese drywall debacle are doing a important task, namely educating the public. Prospective homebuyers will certainly ask about furnace maintenance, property tax rates, or even ask for a soil test for a home that has a well. Chinese drywall is more akin to radon; it isn’t mentioned on the Uniform Residential Appraisal Report (URAR) used by real estate appraisers and may not be on the radar of many home inspectors. Brokers and agents should be prepared for a lot more questions at their next showing.