It's a great day here in Orem, Utah! As for my personal health, the flu has just caught me by the head and I am sounding like that old commercial with the large, stuffed-up nose. I am groggy and in no mood to perform the two inspections that are awaiting me. Old homes are fine when you have good health, but I can only hope that my Thera-flu will carry me through. I hope that this finds you all healthy..... If you start to feel down this week, just think of Betty Buckley lounging in the Mexican sun.
Last week I shared with you the dreaded letter and asked for your feedback. The responses were fantastic and good reading for all of us.....
Michael, Did the clients contact their homeowner insurance carrier? I am sure that they would be covered for the repair of wind damaged shingles. They wouldn't get a new cover but at least they could get it repaired. If it were to happen again the insurer would have to honor their policy again. It may not be the best remedy but it is better than nothing.
I understand your clients frustration in buying a defective roof on a newer home, especially in light of having an inspection done. Had there been no snow cover, the defect would likely have been found. That particular situation of improperly nailed shingles is one that any inspector could easily miss. How many of us ALWAYS check nailing patterns on roof shingles? Be HONEST now! If you haven't already suggested homeowner insurance to the clients, you might do so. A letter to the local building inspector might be in order as well. I see a lot of improper construction items here in my area that get by the building inspectors. If they were liable as we are in our work, I think they would do a better job. It never has made sense to me that they are not liable yet WE are, even though they have a much simpler task of inspecting. Just think how great it would be if we had the same immunity against unhappy homebuyers.
Can't blame the buyers for their dissatisfaction and you can't blame yourself for the snow cover that hid the problem. The true culprit is the original installer then the builder and ultimately the building inspector. Did you know that in my area the building codes do not cover exterior siding? Isn't that crazy in light of the composite sidings and EIFS application related problems?
Be thankful that letter was not a demand notice from an attorney. Good luck. Reggie Ayres
Dear Roof Problem:
I am very sorry to hear about your roofing mishap and subsequent unexpected expense.
Incorrect nailing of roofing is a problem, since there are roofers out there who are misinformed as to the correct installation process and procedures, including over-exposing the shingle design, incorrectly overlapping of the starter shingles at the drip edges, and improperly and incompletely nailing of the shingles, including misplacing the actual nail in relationship to the shingle design and incorrectly numbering the installation nails per shingle, particularly on steep roofs, which requires an additional nail per shingle piece.
Both the over-exposed shingles and the incorrect overlap at the drip edge can normally be addressed as part of a pre-purchase inspection. But, even this was not possible due to the snow cover.
However, the real issue is not the exposure or overlap, but rather the nailing process, which is a much more difficult item to identify and seldom addressed as part of a visual pre-purchase inspection. This problem requires an invasive inspection, not a visual inspection. Invasive inspections are generally not performed by a pre-purchase inspection, unless serious deficiencies are expected before hand and are thus executed to confirm a prior suspicion, and only after prior written permission has been secured from the seller, which seldom happens. In the case of newer homes, that suspicion is rarely raised.
To perform an invasive inspection of the roof shingle nailing process, a person must utilize a hammer and crow bar to first, break the seals on the three-foot self-sealing shingle tabs, and on several sporadic shingle locations, an extremely liable action on the part of an inspector, and one which I do not perform, nor do any of my colleagues.
To further compound an invasive inspection of this nature, the time of year has a serious impact on that practice, since the cold weather (even aside from the snow cover) makes the shingle material brittle and very likely to sustain, real, physical damage, causing immediate leakage, even under the best of circumstances and intentions to avoid it, and therefore is never recommended during a visual inspection of the type you contracted.
I would suggest contacting the local building inspector's office to secure the name of the roofer and ask that the building inspector, who has clout, contact the roofer about his deficient workmanship.
As a further suggestion, while pointing out your roofing deficiencies, you may also want to inform him about a new roofing layout system by THOR Systems, Inc. that eliminates the over-exposed shingles and incorrectly overlapped shingles at the eaves. This company manufactures a roofing layout tape, which can be seen at http://www.thortools.com for further reference.
If it becomes necessary to install a new roof, I strongly recommend the use of this new THOR tool.
I hope this has been of some help and guidance to you, and I will help and support you with any back-up information I can.
Respectfully yours, Michael Leavitt
Hi Mike...
I know this suggested response to your problem sounds like a very self-indulgent commercial, but please read the following links, in the order posted, before jumping to that conclusion, all of which occurred in 1995:
http://www.thortools.com/old/creepern.html http://www.thortools.com/testimonials/abc.html http://www.thortools.com/endorsements/piekutoski.html Ron Hungarter
Michael---this letter does not smell like a lawsuit---yet. I would call the buyer, tell him how badly you feel about his problem and make an appointment to go to the house and look at it. I would not argue with him about anything, if you can avoid it. I would not admit financial responsibility. Show the buyer a copy of the Service Agreement he signed, and explain why you are not responsible (concealed conditions you could not have seen). I would try to be the peacemaker and concerned friend. All of this will be for naught if the buyer has a change of heart and decides to get a shyster attorney and sue your sox off---but---it is definitely worth an hour of your time.
Steve Jordan, in Sue City (Not Sioux City) Oregon. Been there too many times.
This letter reads like it comes from a person who does not want you to write a check, but is unhappy enough to express their disappointment. I once heard a speaker at an inspection seminar talk about the gap between what the clients expectations are versus what we home inspectors can deliver. Your letter is a great example of this, as well as supporting evidence that there will always be people who take on the victim role.
My response to these people would be a phone call. I would thank them for the letter, explain the limitations of the visual nature of our inspections, temper their concern about needing to replace the whole roof based upon 2 roofers opinions (given in the slow season), and thank them for the information about the faulty installations in the neighborhood because that is very useful information for you.
It is too easy to get into a defensive posture when you stand in the glare of a charge of incompetence. To make conciliatory offers is a natural response that I think has to be resisted because you did the best job you could under the circumstances. Does it matter how much snow was on the roof? No, it was not visible, period. Would it have been unsafe to attempt access? It sure would have been. Could you have determined the shingles were nailed incorrectly? I think you would break a frozen shingle by lifting the tabs to check for nailing patterns. Was there any visual clue that would lead you to think this installation was substandard? Not then, but perhaps your future reports in this neighborhood will have stronger language, (and you can verify the roofer's statement by checking for this condition when the roofs are accessible.
There's a development in my area that has incorrectly installed furnaces in their attics and garden windows in the kitchens that tend to leak. I know when I get a call to this area that I'll be reporting the furnace condition and looking for the leaky window repair. Over the years I have gained a huge collection of similar local knowledge for other areas of my marketplace. So that is the silver lining in receiving this letter - it arms you with another nugget of information to use with your future inspections. Scott Merritt - Grass Valley, CA
I would not write a letter at all. I would use the telephone for a much more personal contact. It seems as though this client knows that it is not your fault and is only expressing frustration. To help him with his challenge, I would suggest that he contact the original builder and his roofing sub. Hopefully their integrity would lead them to remedy the condition. Failing that, a complaint to the state contractor licensing authority could be helpful. Sylvan Stenge - CA
Michael, A remark that we have started inserting into the remarks section of the report states: "We will be happy to return to inspect the roof when the snow has cleared and the roof has dried for a nominal fee." This lets them know that they have an option, but it is up to them to initiate it. I believe this would have prevented this letter. Remember the roofers they called still have a vested interest in the outcome of their roof inspection.
Betty Buckley - OR
They said it themselves "We would have gladly paid more for a second visit IF... we would have known that the condition existed". Well, no crap! Wouldn't we all? How is it that we are expected to uproot shingles in the area of nailing to see if proper practices were used? This would be a TECHNICALLY EXHAUSTIVE INSPECTION! and a much more exhausting fee. It doesn't sound like they want their money back or to sue you, however people change fast after they speak to contractors or Lawyers that say you should have seen this concern. Consider reimbursing them and have them sign a release from anything further. What do your standards of practice say we you are required to inspect? IF we can be held liable for not going beyond this, then what the heck good are they??? Chris Burkhart - UT
Dear Sir, Even if we had observed the roof cover from on top of the roof (providing no snow cover) we would have not lifted any of the shingles to observe the type or frequency of the shingle attachment devices. A pre purchase home inspection is a visual inspection only of the material, not an engineering report,destructive discovery report and or an installation compliance report based on the manufacturer's guidelines at that time. When shingles are lifted, the factory seal tab is damaged as well as the shingle. This type of inspection is in violation of our industry standards of practice. Please keep in mind, roofing contractors are salespeople for new roof covering!!!!!
If you feel that you want to pursue a case against the responsible party, we can be of assistance by performing specialty inspections and services which go beyond the scope of normal home inspections and are billed at our hourly rate.
We can:
Sincerely, Brent B. Foster
This is a tough one. It's one thing to report on a condition that you can see, and recommend further evaluation by a qualified professional. It's quite another to mention the "possible" existence of something you can't see that has only a very small chance of existing in a house, but could potentially be very nasty and costly. Gary Holzbauer - OR
Your Name: Please include your name or else I don't know who it is from.
What warnings do you include in your reports???
The addition of Carbon Monoxide detectors would be a logical improvement. I put this in twice, once in the interior section and once in the heating section. Chris Burkhart - UT
Carbon Monoxide is a odorless, invisible gas, that is a serious health threat if present in a house. We strongly recommend the installation of a digital readout - Carbon Monoxide detector be placed outside the sleeping area if only 1 detector is to be purchased. Self cleaning ovens (electric or gas) and attached garages are the most frequent sources of carbon monoxide poisoning in the home. Roger Ball (The Brickkicker) Toledo Ohio
Addition items section to read "No unit was found, but they are recommended on each living floor in homes with gas appliances and/or attached garages" Ron Cloyd - OR
Here in Oregon, the Standards of Practice mandated for all Home Inspectors states that we are "not required to determine the presence or absence of any suspected adverse environmental condition or hazardous substance, including but not limited to toxins, carcinogens, noise or contaminants in the building or soil, water and air." I think that covers the issue clearly for us. Gary Holzbauer - Junction City, OR
So does that mean that you do not include a special disclaimer in your reports to let your clients know of the limitations??? Is there a reason why you don't push for them to add the word "mold" into the State's mandated Standards of Practice? Does that mean that if you see MOLD you are not responsible to document its presence in your report? I find it hard to believe that if you were inspecting the Bill Schwahn condo mentioned in the MMM a few moths back and you did not alert the homeowner that you would be immune to the pains of the legal process because of the above-mentioned clause in your State of Oregon Standards of Practice. And since many of the Oregon Home Inspectors also do Wood Destroying Organism inspections doesn't that immediately open up the liability Pandora's box for you all over again???
Name, City & State: Please include your name or else I don't know who it is from.
Ola' I'm off to Mexico in a few hours, but I had a few things I wanted to let you know about before I go. We are moving to a new office next week and have just discovered that the phone company has gotten a jump on things and already switched the A.I.I. phone line over. I wondered what you all were doing when I didn't get any calls for two days.
Thank you to a persistent potential new member in Idaho who did not give up on trying to reach our office, we discovered this technology boo-boo. I have never known the phone company to move ahead of schedule. The telephone number and address will remain the same for now.
All of the new 2001 Membership Rosters went in the mail this morning. I have discovered the mail going south from here takes a horribly long time. If you don't receive a roster by the time I return from vacation next week let me know. The information for the 2001 Spring Conference is with the graphic designer being formatted and tweaked. All classes are confirmed with the exception of one. So here is a heads up on the scoop; April 7th & 8th at the Holiday Inn - Portland Airport.
Room rates are $69.00 + tax if booked by March 23rd. For reservations call 503-256-5000. We have some great seminar speakers lined up;
I hope I've piqued your interest enough to mark those days off your calendars and start searching for the air fare specials.
Have a great week- I know I will! Sincerely, Betty Buckley - Executive Director
Your Name:City: State:
Please include your name or I don't know who it is from...
A couple of weeks back I shared with you the beating of an LDS missionary of whom I had previously taught and worked with in the Boy Scouts. I was touched this week by an e-mail from Kent Duke who filled me in on the most recent news of Elder Burke Jensen's miraculous recovery. I encourage you to go to the link that Kent provided to read the newstory.
Michael, I read the article in the Dallas News, http://www.dallasnews.com/metro/266948_mormon_20met.A.html about Elder Jensen. I know you are glad to see he is better. I know I am. Sure makes you wonder about people and surely makes me think about sending my sons out.
Take care and my family and we will keep Elder Jensen in our prayers. Kent Duke
If money were no object and you were looking for the absolute greatest computer to perform home inspection on, what machine would I recommend??? The answer to this is simple..... The FUJITSU STYLISTIC LT C-500 is the easy answer. I was posed this question by long-time friend and well respected Home Inspector, Brent Foster. To put the myths to rest, I don't know of anybody in this industry who brings in more gross revenues for a one-man shop than Brent. He works 6 to 7 days a week with a minimum of 2 inspections a day along with the typical termite inspections, re-inspections, commercial and apartment inspections. Brent is a busy man and has little time to mess with the set-up woes of computerization.
Up till now, Brent has used the dead Newton platform running the Borealis software. Originally, Brent used the RAL software but he found it very limiting. Brent did not love the RAL or the Borealis software very much, but what he loved was the Newton. The size of the Newton and the pen driven information access into the unit. Brent has realized for 3 years now that he was eventually going to have to change platforms because they no longer make the Newton and the Newton salvage yards are becoming scarce with replacement parts. His last disaster came as he set his Newton down in a spot that his Buyer later decided they also wanted to sit upon....... You guessed it. The screen did not hold up under the weight of the left cheek.
Brent called and said that he was considering changing from the Newton to the Windows platform. He also said that his eyesight was going and he was afraid that the little CE machines were too small. I also know that Brent does not like to be a guinea pig in any way shape or form. Forget the experimental, Brent wants the proven path. Brent would also rather part with money and receive a working product. Whereas many Inspectors would rather save a buck (due to lack of inspections) and spend their downtime sitting around getting the systems to work. Brent knows that he can go out there and make a bundle inspecting while he pays someone else to overcome the normal headaches of getting the new system to work as a system. As a side note, if Brent were to be the one to set-up his system, the thing had better be able to sustain a throw against the wall as Brent is easily frustrated.
With this history, you can easily see why Brent called me for advice. I told Brent flat out that if he was not wanting to experiment a little that he should consider a full running windows system instead of the CE platform. Borealis was recommending that Brent try the Intermac CE machine which is a clamshell design and has a lot of promise. For now though, we want our main machines to do everything from inspection reports, PDF conversions, photo manipulation, and full e-mail and internet services. The CE platform is quickly getting there, but not quite yet unless you love the experimental. This logic was clear to Brent and he agreed that he should stay in the full windows platform.
Brent is not a lover of taking a full laptop from room to room because he has been spoiled by a Newton. Brent was looking for a fast running pen tablet machine that incorporated pen driven technology. With this in mind there is only one really supreme manufacturer of pen tablets..... Fujitsu. I know that there are tons of manufacturers on the market, but Fujitsu is the proven performer in our industry. They are not cheap however...... They do have models in the $1,800 range but the real performers are in the $3,000 range.
$3,000 is just the starting point in this marketplace, because the machine has nothing on board. You need a docking station, DC adaptor, carrying case, external floppy drive, external CD rom drive, USB hub, networking card (if you are going to communicate with a desktop), and yes, an external keyboard and mouse would be nice. All of those periphials are extra and really considered as necessary if you want a peak performing system. This easily brings you into the $4,000-$5,000 range.
Add to that the needed software. I will list off the ones that would need to be installed on Brent's dream machine.
The idea of the computer change was to establish a totally paperless office. This means that reports would be burned to a CD and the payment checks and signed service agreements would also be scanned and stored with the report file. All of this is possible since I am currently doing it. The dream will also be realized when the client can simply sign their name on the computer screen as accepting the terms of the Service Agreement.
You can see that the expense of Brent's goal was going to be a big hurdle because Brent also wanted his computerized report to be completely unique to him. This meant a new form design just for Brent Foster at General Property Inspection in Olympia, Washington. The dollar amounts for hardware, software, and man hours becomes quite excessive. The initial investment is much greater than just the $3,200 for the Fujitsu computer and this is why very few Inspectors make the investment. This is where the CE machine and the desktop computer fill most of the requests.
I laid this all out before Brent and he understood what it would require. My response to his question.... "Is it doable???" was that with enough money, all things are possible. Brent's next question was.... "If I buy all of this stuff, can I have it sent to your house and once you get it working you can send it to me?" Now that is a great question because I love to tinker with this stuff. But boy, is it ever time-consuming. I assured him that it was okay and was surprised when it showed up on my doorstep just 3 days later...... What a Dream Machine!!!...... More to come.
The set-up is simple.... This 1922 home had a new laundry installed. This is the backside view of the basement laundry hook-ups. The white box is one of the quick shut off all-in-one-boxes that has the supply hook-ups and the drain discharge. The piping is ABS drain and PEX supply..... So what is not right here.?.... I had to move a stored mattress to get a view of the situation. Sometimes it is worth it to exceed our standards. WHAT DO YOU SEE???
For more information E-MAIL Us