There is a concern in the plumbing industry concerning the reliability and use of polybutylene piping for residential water. There are many cases of homes being flooded and damaged due to leaks resulting in unwelcome plumbing bills to have piping replaced. Polybutylene pipes used in plumbing may show no outward signs of distress even when they are close to bursting. Found in as many as one in five homes built between built between 1978 and 1995, polybutylene piping can leak at joints and unions behind walls where they can cause mold.

SETTLEMENTS

There are many lawsuits in Canada and the United States which have been settle in favor of the plaintiffs, here are two examples: 1. The courts of Ontario, B.C. and Quebec approved a class action settlement between E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company and a class consisting of owners of properties containing polybutylene plumbing and/or heating systems. Justice Ian Nordheimer of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice had previously declined to certify the class proceeding, as against the other defendants, a decision currently under appeal. In approving the settlement, the judge rejected attempts by a non-settling defendant to object to the settlement and held that a non-settling defendant has no general right to involve itself in the approval of a settlement to which it is not a party.Justice Nordheimer approved the settlement on November 4, 2002. Thereafter, hearings were held in B.C. and Quebec, at which further objections were made by the non-settling defendant and rejected. Justice Donald Brenner of the B.C. Supreme Court approved the settlement on November 12, and Justice Rita Bédard of the Quebec Superior Court of Justice approved the settlement on March 27, 2003. The fees component of the settlement was not determined however, and remains to be determined.The litigation began in B.C. in 1996 and in Ontario in 1999, when representative plaintiffs initiated proposed class proceedings against E.I. du Pont, Shell Oil Company and Hoechst Celanese Corporation in connection with losses allegedly incurred as a result of defective polybutylene in plumbing and heating systems. In 2002, while admitting no liability, E.I. du Pont voluntarily entered into a settlement agreement pursuant to which a national class of members could make claims for compensation in accordance with the terms of the settlement. Pursuant to the settlement, which was subject to court approval, E.I. du Pont agreed to pay compensation of up to $30 million to qualifying class members, with provision for the amount to possibly increase if claims should exceed that sum.The settlement was approved despite opposition by E.I. du Pont’s co-defendant, Hoechst Celanese Corporation, which attempted to assert that as a non-settling defendant it had the right to make submissions regarding the adequacy of the settlement. Justice Nordheimer rejected these submissions, holding that non-settling defendants have “no general right to involve themselves in the approval of a settlement to which they are not parties”. The judge further noted that the court “ought to be wary of allowing parties, who are clearly adverse in interest to the plaintiffs, to weigh in on matters such as the settlement of claims involving other parties in the guise of “protecting” the plaintiff class”. Hoescht Celanese’s attempts to oppose the settlement were rejected and Hoescht Celanese and Shell, as E.I. du Pont’s co-defendants, were permitted only to make submissions with respect to the scope of the bar order.Justice Nordheimer found the settlement to be fair and reasonable, and approved a national class of plaintiffs. The judge also approved a bar order prohibiting cross-claims, third-party claims and claims for contribution or indemnity against E.I. du Pont relating to polybutylene plumbing and heating systems, which were or could have been brought in the class actions. 2. To be eligible for recovery under the Cox vs. Shell Oil, et al., class action lawsuit:

You must own or have previously owned a dwelling or other unit plumbed with a Polybutylene (PB) Plumbing System (conducts water to your sinks, showers, etc.), or a PB Yard Service Line (conducts water to your dwelling unit from the water company), or both. Boats and RV’s are not eligible. You can also see the definition of Class Member.

The PB Plumbing System or PB Yard Service Line must have been installed between 1/1/78 and 7/31/95.

The PB Plumbing System must have been installed using PB pipe and insert fittings. The PB Yard Service line must be PB pipe but may have any type of fittings.

Fixing Your Polybutylene Plumbing

If your seller or buyer finds polybutylene pipe, the following is recommended: The first thing to do if you discover polybutylene pipe in your house is to contact The Plumbing Claims Group at 800-356-3496. “This is the contact for the insurance settlement supplied by the manufacturers of polybutylene. There are limitations on payments. You must have experienced leaks and there are age limitations. If you qualify, the settlement seems generous, but limitations may exclude your home.”The only way to prevent damage that will come from this plumbing is to replace it. Specialists claim that they can replace a polybutylene system, in an average house, with copper for about the price of a re-carpet. They have developed methods to cause minimal damage during the remediation cutting costs and time requirements. Average remediation time is claimed to be one week.

PEX PIPE VS. POLYBUTYLENE

PEX was developed in the 1960s. PEX tubing has been in use in many European countries for plumbing, radiant heating and snow melt applications since that time. PEX was introduced in the United States in the 1980s, and has seen significant growth in market demand and production. What are recommended uses for PEX? PEX ’s flexibility and strength at temperatures ranging from below freezing up to 200 degrees Fahrenheit makes it an ideal piping material for hot and cold water plumbing systems, service lines, hydronic radiant heating systems, snow melting applications, ice rinks and refrigeration warehouses. Why is PEX an excellent piping material for plumbing? PEX is ideally suited for potable water plumbing applications. It is flexible, making it easy to install and service. PEX is able to withstand the high and low temperatures found in plumbing and heating applications, and is highly resistant to chemicals found in the plumbing environment.
Flexible systems are quieter than rigid piping. The smooth interior will not corrode which can affect other materials long term pipe flow characteristics. PEX is also very freeze- break resistant. PEX systems have fewer joints and are easier to install providing a lower cost installation over traditional plumbing materials. How can I be sure that PEX is a safe product for plumbing? PEX is manufactured and tested according to stringent national consensus standards: ASTM F 876, F 877, AWWA C904 and CSA B137.5. Both the product manufacturer and independent third party testing agencies conduct routine quality control and quality assurance evaluations to insure the product meets ASTM, ANSI/NSF International and CSA Standards. Compliance with the standards ensures the end user of safety and quality. Additionally, PEX is included in all of the major model plumbing codes used in the United States and Canada; NPC, UPC, IPC and NSPC, and approved by HUD for hot and cold potable water plumbing use. Having your home inspected by a Professional Home Inspector can save you thousands of dollars in unexpected plumbing cost or prevent your home from experiencing an unexpected flood due to faulty piping. As a potential home purchaser it is in your best interest to be as informed as possible about existing or potential problems in your home.

John Griffith of Plumbing Express sent me an email pointing out some lawsuits and potential problems that are ongoing with PEX plumbing. This involves some Zurn brass fittings, Kitec plumbing fittings IPEC pipe with Kitec fittings. Further info can be found at plumbingdefectnm.com , plumbingdefect.com and zurnclassaction.com A Big Thank you to John