Is this building OBVIOUSLY bad?

[Slimmons]

Anything new with this?

Yeah,
1. I went to a lawyer and talked to them about my options. We're on a razor thin line on whether or not suing this guy would make any sense. He has some resources, but he also has some other lawsuits (shocked face), and it looks like he could easily file bankruptcy. Lawyer recommended that I go to the builder and ask him what he's willing to do.
2. I went to the builder and he's been working heavily with me on the water leaking (as expected). He's been very apologetic about it, and I think he's pretty sincere. I have no doubt that he'll figure out a way to fix the water leak (my smallest problem)
3. I talked to him about the structural issues. He looked at me like I was crazy (as did his entire team). If anything he seems to think this is overbuilt (I was shocked). We talked for about 5 hours about my structural concerns. He showed me all sorts of papers about benefits of grade 33 steel, and how using the type of purlins he uses, and using 26 gauge steel on the outside make everything so much stronger than is actually needed. After talking to him for that amount of time, it was pretty clear to me that he's in complete denial. He's been building for 25 years, and has been building like this for that long and "never had a building with any issues". I got absolutely nowhere on him helping me out with the structure.

Even if I wanted to sue (which I dread), I can't get a structural engineer, and I am not willing to take the risk to spend ~$30k on structural engineers, and lawyers, just for the chance that he'd file for bankruptcy. I haven't completely ruled out a lawsuit, but I think our path forward will be that we'll build this as strong as we can on the inside with wood. I'll built the inside as if it were a stand alone structure.

*Most Importantly* I won't be using this as our house. We're going to transition this into a VERY large garage and guest house. We're going to build another home higher up on my hill. As poorly built as this metal building is, I don't believe this tube steel could possibly fall and break through a strong wooden structure on the inside. I'm going to work with someone who has experience building wooden pole barns to make the inside structurally sound. I also got some really good advice from @readhead (unrelated to everything I've said so far) on how he would make the building more structurally sound. Depending on what my pole barn builder says, there's a good chance we'll add more metal diagonal supports, extra trusses (sister trusses, probably out of bar joist). There's a few other ideas, but I'm not going to waste the time and money to go after this guy. I'm going to let him do what he'll do to help, and just build the building how I was planning on, but add extra supports where I can.
Further advice is welcome, but unless I can find a local structural engineer fairy, who is willing to work on this with me for nearly free, I'd rather just make this a giant garage. If it falls, I have insurance.

 

[gsmith22]

Yeah,
1. I went to a lawyer and talked to them about my options. We're on a razor thin line on whether or not suing this guy would make any sense. He has some resources, but he also has some other lawsuits (shocked face), and it looks like he could easily file bankruptcy. Lawyer recommended that I go to the builder and ask him what he's willing to do.
2. I went to the builder and he's been working heavily with me on the water leaking (as expected). He's been very apologetic about it, and I think he's pretty sincere. I have no doubt that he'll figure out a way to fix the water leak (my smallest problem)
3. I talked to him about the structural issues. He looked at me like I was crazy (as did his entire team). If anything he seems to think this is overbuilt (I was shocked). We talked for about 5 hours about my structural concerns. He showed me all sorts of papers about benefits of grade 33 steel, and how using the type of purlins he uses, and using 26 gauge steel on the outside make everything so much stronger than is actually needed. After talking to him for that amount of time, it was pretty clear to me that he's in complete denial. He's been building for 25 years, and has been building like this for that long and "never had a building with any issues". I got absolutely nowhere on him helping me out with the structure.

Even if I wanted to sue (which I dread), I can't get a structural engineer, and I am not willing to take the risk to spend ~$30k on structural engineers, and lawyers, just for the chance that he'd file for bankruptcy. I haven't completely ruled out a lawsuit, but I think our path forward will be that we'll build this as strong as we can on the inside with wood. I'll built the inside as if it were a stand alone structure.

*Most Importantly* I won't be using this as our house. We're going to transition this into a VERY large garage and guest house. We're going to build another home higher up on my hill. As poorly built as this metal building is, I don't believe this tube steel could possibly fall and break through a strong wooden structure on the inside. I'm going to work with someone who has experience building wooden pole barns to make the inside structurally sound. I also got some really good advice from @readhead (unrelated to everything I've said so far) on how he would make the building more structurally sound. Depending on what my pole barn builder says, there's a good chance we'll add more metal diagonal supports, extra trusses (sister trusses, probably out of bar joist). There's a few other ideas, but I'm not going to waste the time and money to go after this guy. I'm going to let him do what he'll do to help, and just build the building how I was planning on, but add extra supports where I can.
Further advice is welcome, but unless I can find a local structural engineer fairy, who is willing to work on this with me for nearly free, I'd rather just make this a giant garage. If it falls, I have insurance.

1.your lawyer sounds competent so that is good.
2.your project but the person that put me in that position wouldn't be stepping foot on my property again.
3. none of your structrual issues are related to either the strength of the steel (grade 33) nor the thickness of the material (26ga) that was used. the structrual issues are about how that material was geometrically configured and arranged. I could take card board and arrange it to support a sherman tank. I would just point out that both the grade and thickness are as minimal as possible - there is nothing unique about them and you would be hard pressed to find lower strength and/or thinner steel in structural members.

I think your foremost issue is to get the structure re-supported and I am not sure how you do that without hiring an engineer to evaluate what you have. so wether you sue or not, i sill think you need an engineer to direct where to put members to get this supported. Otherwise you will be throwing materail at it without necesserily putting that material in the right places. maybe a builder helping you with this has an engineer but i don't think a builder alone will be sufficient.

I would be remiss to point out that if this were to fail (assuming no one is hurt), any insurance investigation is giong to look at how it was constructed. Not being constructed in accordance with the building code (or any basic standard of care) could very well result in a denial of coverage. you do not want a situation where this fails.

 

[mikedodge]

You said he does a lot of builds so he has money coming in. I'd still be tempted to sue the guy for any chance of getting something out of him. Maybe try to find others that have the same issues to get together with on it. It would greatly help to have something from a structural engineer but if there is any indication that the drawings you received are what he was supposed to be built that's also a good starting point because it shows he ignored plans and did his own thing. Letting it go is what's keeping him doing it.

 

[readhead]

Sounds easy. Busy doesn't necessarily mean he has money or assets. This is a tough one and the OP may just have to walk away. I know it doesn't sound right but in this case the lawyers are the only ones guaranteed to make money.

 

[Slimmons]

Sounds easy. Busy doesn't necessarily mean he has money or assets. This is a tough one and the OP may just have to walk away. I know it doesn't sound right but in this case the lawyers are the only ones guaranteed to make money.

Yeah, if I "followed my heart". I would hire a structural engineer (which I can't find), and sue. But, that gets me 2-4 years of pain in the ***, with no guarantee of anything other than a loss of roughly $30k from structural engineer and lawyer fees. This guy should be sued, and I should do it, but I don't have the time, energy, or money. I'm still not 100% sure that I won't sue, but I'm heavily leaning towards not.

 

[NDJ]

Aren't lawyers great ? they will happily take all your money with no guarantees.
Whereas you cant find an engineer willing to help you for any sum it seems.

 

[jonesg]

Yeah, if I "followed my heart". I would hire a structural engineer (which I can't find), and sue. But, that gets me 2-4 years of pain in the ***, with no guarantee of anything other than a loss of roughly $30k from structural engineer and lawyer fees. This guy should be sued, and I should do it, but I don't have the time, energy, or money. I'm still not 100% sure that I won't sue, but I'm heavily leaning towards not.

think with your head not your heart.
I would have my lawyer send a letter of intent to start the legal discovery process.
He has 3 options, make a deal, pay a lawyer to defend or melt away into obscurity.
Do this with no intention of pursuing any further legal action .
Sit back , relax and get on with your own plans.

 

[Slimmons]

think with your head not your heart.
I would have my lawyer send a letter of intent to start the legal discovery process.
He has 3 options, make a deal, pay a lawyer to defend or melt away into obscurity.
Do this with no intention of pursuing any further legal action .
Sit back , relax and get on with your own plans.

That seems like a pretty good option. I'll think about this a bit more. Thank you.

 

[jonesg]

That seems like a pretty good option. I'll think about this a bit more. Thank you.

it has worked for me in the past.

 

[PCustoms]

Are contractors required to be licensed/registered where this happened?

 

[Slimmons]

Are contractors required to be licensed/registered where this happened?

Yes, they are.

 

[Slimmons]

Aren't lawyers great ? they will happily take all your money with no guarantees.
Whereas you cant find an engineer willing to help you for any sum it seems.

Yeah, I did find an engineer willing to come up here, but it was $12k......no thanks. Pretty sure he just didn't want to do it, just like everyone else. He was just the only one willing to give me a price. The other's I've contacted haven't even given a price. Just said no. I did have one say they normally did it between $6k, and $8k, but wouldn't take it either.

 

[DennisK59]

Maybe reach out to local college/university to the engineering program for a hands-on student structural engineering project.

 

[acer66]

Maybe reach out to local college/university to the engineering program for a hands-on student structural engineering project.

Has anyone done that successfully?

After just reading through the whole thing I only wish the OP the best.

 

[bluedog225]

I tried. Got a snotty reply from a professor. Apparently folks knock on that door too often.

 

[mikedodge]

Yeah, I did find an engineer willing to come up here, but it was $12k......no thanks. Pretty sure he just didn't want to do it, just like everyone else. He was just the only one willing to give me a price. The other's I've contacted haven't even given a price. Just said no. I did have one say they normally did it between $6k, and $8k, but wouldn't take it either.

Did you ever get a quote from someone else to fix it properly? If the engineer can tell from pictures ahead of time that yes it doesn't look right it might be worth it to spend the money. Especially if they can make a plan on how to correct it at the same time. You'd loose a lot more then that if the building comes down on itself and could risk being sued if it happens when someone is in there. Reinforcing what's already there could very well be more cost effective then building a building within it that needs to both support the weight of itself and this outer shell that's already there.

 

[gsmith22]

Yeah, I did find an engineer willing to come up here, but it was $12k......no thanks. Pretty sure he just didn't want to do it, just like everyone else. He was just the only one willing to give me a price. The other's I've contacted haven't even given a price. Just said no. I did have one say they normally did it between $6k, and $8k, but wouldn't take it either.

you have gotten a bunch of free advice from me and there are probably other engineers on here too. $12k sounds way too low to me and I would never give a lump sum number for a job like this. its a one off job where there is no design or documentation of the construction. the structure is buried in foam that has to all be removed even to just assess what is there (wait till you try to remove that spray foam). I would invoice my time hourly on something like this with a retainer before I even started. you probably have a months worth of time from an engineer when its all finally done at a rate of something like $200 to $300/hr. and 50 to 75% of that due in a retainer up front. if that is unplatable, i suggest brining in the bulldozer now because things aren't going to get cheaper

 

[Slimmons]

you have gotten a bunch of free advice from me and there are probably other engineers on here too. $12k sounds way too low to me and I would never give a lump sum number for a job like this. its a one off job where there is no design or documentation of the construction. the structure is buried in foam that has to all be removed even to just assess what is there (wait till you try to remove that spray foam). I would invoice my time hourly on something like this with a retainer before I even started. you probably have a months worth of time from an engineer when its all finally done at a rate of something like $200 to $300/hr. and 50 to 75% of that due in a retainer up front. if that is unplatable, i suggest brining in the bulldozer now because things aren't going to get cheaper

That's good to know. Thanks.

 

[davejo]

What was the final layout of the interior? 1/2 open space great room and the other half stick built rooms on 2 levels? Exposed frame and insulation?

Yours is built with standard 2x3 sticks like an erector set. Plenty of opportunity to stiffen this up with more metal sticks and plate gussets. Turn your 10 foot centers into 5 foot centers. Or do it with a wooden stick built endoskeleton like you mentioned. Starting with your footers, is there enough room to bolt additional sill plate to it?

Add a robust pergola outside the front of the house that stiffens the tall wall etc etc

 

[rjacobs]

Aren't lawyers great ? they will happily take all your money with no guarantees.

If I talked to a lawyer that GUARANTEED me an outcome for XXXXX amount of cash... I would quickly vacate their office and find a different lawyer.

 

[acer66]

 

[Viper98912]

First off, thanks for posting this. It's a learning experience for all of us, but unfortunately at your expense. But at least we all know what to look out for in the future.

As to the problem, have you considered asking them for a full refund? Tell him you've had a few people to come out to look at what was built, and there's the potential for major structural concerns, to the point where this building could potentially fail during a strong storm and cause a loss of life. And no civil or structural company ever wants to have a loss of life on their hands because of what they made.

This building appears to be built without any approved engineering drawings, and while many people build things without these, we're not exactly talking about a 2x4 shed with some plywood here. You have evidence that this building was not built as designed, and more than likely, was just frankly built "in-house" with what they thought was their good-enough experience. This is frankly shocking, as while they know materials and have been in business for many years, we are talking about something that could cause a loss of life. Real engineers who work in this field need to be involved.

Start throwing around the estimated numbers you're about to start spending - $12k for the engineers, $xk for the the reinforcement or bulldozing of he building, $xk of what you spent on foam, +30-40% for the lawyer fees, plus their own lawyer fees, etc. Tell them you'll find a lawyer and judge who will gladly continue to pursue all of their interests, including personal, regardless of however many LLC's and holding companies and shell companies they have. People like to think that LLC's are iron-clad, but they're not always when you get the right judge who realizes how they're trying to screw people and it could endanger someone's life.

Give them 90 days to give you a 100% refund, and both of you walk away in different directions. If they are building 3-4 buildings a month like they said, then they should have enough intermittent cash flow to use other projects' money and not pay suppliers for an extra amount of time to make the cash work. Sign some documents that say if they give you 100% back of what you paid them, you won't go after them for more or slander their name, etc. You both walk away.

Take your 100% refund, and bulldoze the structure as we previously recommended above. It's not worth trying to band-aid it, and at least for me, I'd always have the fear in my mind that the building could come down on top of me, my family, kids, grandkids, etc. When bulldozing, see if the wrecking company is willing to sell the steel to offset their costs and you both come away with a free-ish bulldozing. Go find one of those "cheaper" red iron companies and get one of their engineered buildings. In the end, this is going to cost you more money than you started out spending. But, it's the safer thing to do. And if you get into a lawsuit, it'll drag on for years, cost you way more time, effort, and money than you want, and in the end you still don't have a shop. And you're out even more money. My sympathies for you getting screwed on this.

 

[Slimmons]

What was the final layout of the interior? 1/2 open space great room and the other half stick built rooms on 2 levels? Exposed frame and insulation?

Yours is built with standard 2x3 sticks like an erector set. Plenty of opportunity to stiffen this up with more metal sticks and plate gussets. Turn your 10 foot centers into 5 foot centers. Or do it with a wooden stick built endoskeleton like you mentioned. Starting with your footers, is there enough room to bolt additional sill plate to it?

Add a robust pergola outside the front of the house that stiffens the tall wall etc etc

The final plan is as you stated. Half the building or 30x40 is two story and will be attached to the metal studs. The walls are 2x6, and it's built very sturdily. I'm going to get better metal plates to attach everything, and I still haven't built the 2nd story, but that will have supports for the ceiling joists.
The other half of the room (another 30x40) Is really my only "safety concern" and "money concern". The half that's 2 story, I'm really not spending much more money to make it more sturdy. More brackets, and slightly thicker walls than I was planning, isn't going to kill me. The open space, as you said, will need a full endoskeleton, and currently the plan (without any engineer or even the builder giving me real plans) is to build essentially a pole barn. 6x6 wood posts every 5ft, with maybe a bar joist going across the top. THAT is what I wanted the metal building guy to provide for me if he did anything. If he could pay for that, I'd basically be "fine". As many have said, it's not ideal, but it may be the best I can get.

 

[bluedog225]

Does your doctor guarantee you will get better?

 

[NDJ]

think with your head not your heart.
I would have my lawyer send a letter of intent to start the legal discovery process.
He has 3 options, make a deal, pay a lawyer to defend or melt away into obscurity.
Do this with no intention of pursuing any further legal action .
Sit back , relax and get on with your own plans.

Aren't you the guy who claims he has a lawyer who will write a letter for $75 ? We're still waiting for that guys contact info. If he exists.
Actually there is another option besides the 3 you state. He can have a good laugh at the threat to "start the legal discovery process" and then throw the letter in the garbage. The "process" does not start that way.

Lots of free legal advice here. Worth exactly what it costs.

 

[Zeke]

@Viper98912, not bad ideas to threaten the builder with potential serious lawsuits. But to have a real libelous lawsuit one must show damages and neglect leading to the loss.

@Slimmons, how in the world can you set poles inside a structure? I take it these are posts, not poles. Or are you planning to remove sections of roof? Endoskeleton, I like that.

​

 

[PugetDude]

It wouldn't be that difficult to build a wooden structure inside that building, especially if you can live with a couple of posts; just treat the roof and walls as a skin.
Solving the leaking windows is another issue altogether.

 

[Zeke]

"Solving the leaking windows is another issue altogether."

Ain't that the truth?

 

[Slimmons]

@Viper98912, not bad ideas to threaten the builder with potential serious lawsuits. But to have a real libelous lawsuit one must show damages and neglect leading to the loss.

@Slimmons, how in the world can you set poles inside a structure? I take it these are posts, not poles. Or are you planning to remove sections of roof? Endoskeleton, I like that.

​

I'm using the words post and pole interchangeably probably. I was using the word pole because where I'm at, the type of structure I'm going to build on the inside is typically called pole barn.

 

[Boogerman]

A row of posts down the middle holding up each of the roof rafters will automatically take the stress on them down to 1/4 of what it is now. You'll still have to deal with the too wide of spacing between rafters, beefing up the purlins might be enough, but might need to add a rafter in between each. Really need someone competent to calculate and specify that. No good way to guess. I'd put a ridge beam between the rafters and the posts, and use post caps to attach to the beam. Also, make brackets to attach the rafters to the beam; and restrain them from lateral movement in relation to the beam. The row of posts should be diagonal cross braced, or sheathed and shear nailed with osb/plywood. How much of them needs to be shear walled would need to be calculated. If the wall was sheetrocked, only the upper 4 feet and the outside 4 feet would need shear walled.

You also need to reinforce the structure over just being blown over sideways; it is a house of cards on stilts right now in regards to wind resistance from being blown over. I'd hazard a GUESS that two internal walls parallel to the rafters would do that if you build them as shear walls; that would take a wall floor to ceiling at each exterior wall and fastened securely to the outside wall post; and 8 feet of 1/2" plywood or osb sheathing both sides of the wall; fire blocking/bracing every 4 feet between the studs of the wall; and the plywood glued and shear nailed (#12 common 3" o.c. on all studs and on perimeter; all joints to be on the solid blocking). Adding in some diagonal bracing between the exterior posts like was shown in the drawings that weren't used would be helpful also.

 

[andyvh1959]

Wow, sorry for that mess the original contractor stuck you with. My 1st impression of the pictures was "whoa, that is some sketchy design and construction." Sure, being where you are you get little snow, but you do get ice storms and high wind storms. Too me that structure looks like it would easily twist and fail in high winds, especially given the height of the side walls and the apparent minimal structure at the top sills to the roof. Too much liability in that structure for any structural engineer to offer a report, as that report itself is a liability to themselves if your situation goes to court.

To me, stick build a post/beam structure inside the metal exterior. At least then you can support that roof as it should be. Any Amish construction crews in your area? Perhaps hire them to build a proper structure inside the metal, spend the money on something that will hold the loads and be done with it.

 

[NDJ]

Carefully located and tensioned "X" bracing with solid round bar steel would help alot with the shear loads.

 

[acer66]

Carefully located and tensioned "X" bracing with solid round bar steel would help alot with the shear loads.

And if you can not hide make them a feature.

 

[Zeke]

Carefully located and tensioned "X" bracing with solid round bar steel would help alot with the shear loads.

I see these in metal warehouses at the Port of Long Beach.

I just reread this whole thread. Kind of a cool looking building inside and out. The inside aesthetics were ruined by the foam. The more I see this stuff the less I like it exposed.

So it looks like an interior structure properly built using the existing as a non structural shell is the going forward answer. Save any money to be spent on engineers for what was done, and attorneys to put towards the solution. The solution may end up costing as much as the original building save for maybe windows and a percentage of roof and siding.

Building this 'endoskeleton' inside to me is the best answer. Back a few pages someone suggested a large beam or 3 perpendicular to the rafters essentially making them purlins has a good thought. IDK much about metal buildings but new trusses on new posts set in between the skinny ones might solve the roof aspect and add back some aesthetics.

That and some additional wall bracing might save this.

Out here in the West having commercial space with all the mechanicals exposed has been popular for at least 2 decades. Conduits of electrical, HVAC, sprinklers and other plumbing all exposed against a black background above and liberal use of sheet metal products on the walls like corrugated galvy steel or even decorated chain link. Murals on vinyl and things like that.

Then with lighting focused downward the above stuff just blends into some kind of infrastructure. Actually, a lot of planning goes into the lighting. I see this turning out quite nice if done right.

 

[Hank11]

Having rescued a few ancient barns, it is certainly possible to build inside and keep the whole thing from falling down. You can even make the building pretty great and strong. But that won’t fix the leaks and the leaks will eventually kill the insides. If you can’t fix the leaky windows and doors, cut your losses, tear it down and start over.

 

[Racer_X]

The solution may end up costing as much as the original building save for maybe windows and a percentage of roof and siding.

If that turned out to be the case, I think I would demo the building and start over.

 

[Joemctag]

Having rescued a few ancient barns, it is certainly possible to build inside and keep the whole thing from falling down. You can even make the building pretty great and strong. But that won’t fix the leaks and the leaks will eventually kill the insides. If you can’t fix the leaky windows and doors, cut your losses, tear it down and start over.

I’d be quite concerned about the roof leaking, also. OP said there were leaks, before foam, I guess, and the contractor fixed them.
I’m seeing 9” spacing on ribs of sheets, on walls and roof, which means “AG” panels. Big, beefy, 12 gauge +\- hat sections on 2’ centers and spanning 10’ truss-to-truss. The contractor told the OP that all panels were 26 gauge, not the usual 29 gauge for AG panels. Found out the 26 gauge is available in some places, some colors.
I question whether the roof panels are considered leak-proof at the stated 2:12 roof slope.
Readhead: please weigh in.
Especially with the foam making leaks hard to find, I think I’d build out any interior rooms with definite “roof” slope , so that you could coat with acrylic or something and future leaks would drain away safely. I might also leave 3’ or so between my build-outs and the metal building envolope. For inspection, access with ladders, scaffold planks if needed.
I think Boogerman’s truss-support ideas are good. Maybe end-wall trusses won’t need the same support as the five interior frames. Also wonder whether the trusses’ supporting columns should be beefed up. And braced to the trusses.
I don’t blame OP at all; lots of us have said, “I’ll have a nice steel shell erected and build it out as time and money allow. I wish him success and would love to be able to go up there and help out at some time.

 

[Fixr]

An off the top of the head thought from a retired mechanic who has never been involved in metal building construction:

If tearing the whole thing down and starting over from the slab can provide a proper building for maybe 50% more than the whole endoskeleton idea, and the OP has the money: Demolish it and put up something entirely new and suitable.

The existing "building" is essentially nothing but a series of question marks and warning flags. Sagging single slope roof that maybe already had leaks before foam was sprayed that will cover any further leaks, for a while. Window leaks. Leaks where the walls meet the slab. Very apparently inadequate shear strength. Fasteners left out of the sheathing. And on, and on, and on. Looks to me like a giant cheap metal carport built by methheads who got laid off from the RV factory.

Like restomodding a car, retrofitting a building inside a building can make sense when the first building has historical value. But doing so in this case will inevitably lead to endless unforeseen complications and very difficult patching and repairs. Kinda like restomodding a Yugo. Sometimes, the smart thing to do is cut your losses and move on, and quit smearing lipstick on the pig.

But whadda I know?

 

[Slimmons]

An off the top of the head thought from a retired mechanic who has never been involved in metal building construction:

If tearing the whole thing down and starting over from the slab can provide a proper building for maybe 50% more than the whole endoskeleton idea, and the OP has the money: Demolish it and put up something entirely new and suitable.

The existing "building" is essentially nothing but a series of question marks and warning flags. Sagging single slope roof that maybe already had leaks before foam was sprayed that will cover any further leaks, for a while. Window leaks. Leaks where the walls meet the slab. Very apparently inadequate shear strength. Fasteners left out of the sheathing. And on, and on, and on. Looks to me like a giant cheap metal carport built by methheads who got laid off from the RV factory.

Like restomodding a car, retrofitting a building inside a building can make sense when the first building has historical value. But doing so in this case will inevitably lead to endless unforeseen complications and very difficult patching and repairs. Kinda like restomodding a Yugo. Sometimes, the smart thing to do is cut your losses and move on, and quit smearing lipstick on the pig.

But whadda I know?

I think everything you said is completely valid. But, as you said "If the OP has the money". Unfortunately I do not. Tearing down the building would only happen if I were able to sue for the amount it costs. But, I think all of your observations are correct.

 

[Slimmons]

Having rescued a few ancient barns, it is certainly possible to build inside and keep the whole thing from falling down. You can even make the building pretty great and strong. But that won’t fix the leaks and the leaks will eventually kill the insides. If you can’t fix the leaky windows and doors, cut your losses, tear it down and start over.

As a few other people have said (I think), fixing the leaks is definitely possible, it's just really stupid that I have to. Odds are I will be putting in a drip edge over the back windows, AND building something around them to cover/help the J trim. The front and sides of the house, I'm much less worried about because I'm putting a wrap around porch on.
On the note of the wrap around porch, someone mentioned that I should make the wrap around porch a structural portion of the building. I'm talking to someone now who is much more reliable than my original contractor (low bar, I know). He's going to design, with an engineer, a wrap around porch that will stand on its own, and help bolster the existing building.