It might be a great day here in Orem! It would be more accurate to refer to it as an apprehensive day. We find out about the results from the lymph node removal surgery last Thursday. Our e-mail box was flooded with kind and loving words of strength and support. For this, we thank the many of you that sent them along. Shelly also has several beautiful plants and floral arrangements surrounding her bed side which is brightening her spirits. Our heartfelt thanks and appreciation for the outpouring of kind words. Thank you.
I must admit that I was not previously aware of how great a blessing the internet e-mail system can be. I now have a testimony of the great positive effect the e-mail system is. Shelly and I have received numerous expressions of love and encouragement that in yesteryears would not have been possible. Thank you so much for blessing our lives.
Today (Monday) at 4:30pm we will know the results of the lymph node biopsies. We have been going along in denial with the hopes that this is just an endurance period before we are notified that it was really nothing to worry about. We have tried not to dwell too much on the other extreme other than a few humorous quips about Dolly Parton wigs. Jessica said that we could get Mom different wigs for different occasions.... The "I just woke up" hairdo; the "I've just been cleaning the house all day" version and the "special night out" version.
I was also saddened to hear that Richard Grisham's wife, Betty, is also struggling with neck tumors. If I had not mentioned Shelly's plight, I am not sure that I would have learned about Betty's. I wish to thank Richard for his kind words and want him to know that our family will be mentioning her in our daily prayers. It has been nice to hear the strong use of prayer amongst those in our profession. I was tickled by the thoughts shared by a friend who wrote that even though he was not of the praying type, he had his fingers crossed for us! Religious or not, adversity has a way of pulling people together and if I have not mentioned it before, I have a strong love for each one of you and I wish you the best in your personal, business, and family struggles.
PLEASE NOTE: Today's MMM is a special edition that deals with some great topics submitted by fellow Inspector's Steve Bradley and Scott Merritt. It would be a great relief to me if you could take some time to respond to the different topics in this issue. Your responses would allow me to leave next week's edition in your hands and allow me to concentrate on home life. Thank you, Michael Leavitt.
Steve Bradley was kind enough to forward along a complaint letter from an irate Seller. I know that ALL seasoned Inspectors have received this type of correspondence and will relate with the feelings Steve felt as he read the objections to his report of their home. It is also interesting that the Sellers rarely refer to the report in its entirety. Instead, they tend to nit pick the report as they scour over every word to prove the Inspector's incompetence. These complaint letters are rarely accurate of what the true conditions of the home are, but in the case of Oregon Inspectors, the letters of complaint have to be dealt with. Dealing with the letters is not a PR attempt to save face or to protect your reputation with the Real Estate industry, but it is to retain your State Inspector license. This is one of the drawbacks of State Licensing. Steve operates his business in Oregon and the Sellers are usually privy to the inspection report due to a newer clause in the Oregon Real Estate Purchase Contract which entitles them to receive the findings (What a pain). This open report sharing and licensing allows the Seller to now become a thorn in your side as they have a State Board to complain to. Whether right or wrong, the Inspector now has to address the complaint to satisfy the Board, or his license may be revoked.
The following is the letter to Steve. The typos are the Sellers. Please read it and place yourself in Steve's shoes.... Then send me your responses.
Certified Property Inspection Services F.O. Box 2 Medford, OR 97501 Attn: Steve Bradley Re: Inspection # 01-0209
February 15, 2001
This letter is written in reference to the whole house inspection completed at 2178 XXXXXX St. on 2/9/01. First of all I'd like to mention the fact that both gates and the entrance to the crawl space under the house were left open. Fortunately this was discovered before our dog was let out. I would have appreciated a bit more thoroughness when leaving.
Many of the items listed in the report were inaccurate and incorrect. Due to this, we have lost the sale of our home and are starting over again with the selling process. I feel that it was incorrect reporting of our home that caused this to happen. The following is a list of things that were not correct in the assessment of this home.
On page 2 the age of the home is said to be 70 plus years. It was built in 1932. I realize this is a minor error, but the first of many.
On page 3 it is stated that the earth to wood clearance does not meet the recommended 4 to 6 'I current minimum standards. The house has either brick or cement skirting it at least 2 feet all the way around it. Much more than 4 to 6" from the earth. The garage doesn't have 4 -to 61', but that doesn't affect the house as it is unattached. On page 10, it is stated that the stem wall is concrete, block, possibly brick.
On page 4 the condition of the roof was questioned. The roof was treated and has never had a leak problem ill the 11 years we've been ill this house. The steep pitch of the roof allow snow and water to run off quickly .
On page 5 it was stated that the kitchen counters were cluttered. On the day of the inspection the counters were clear except for appliances which always sit on the counter. It was also stated that the top oven doesn't work. Both ovens work well. When we purchased the home, 2 knobs were missing. I change them over if I need to use both ovens. Admittedly , a bit inconvenient, but I don It need both ovens very often. This would be easy to fix. It was also stated that the condition on the cook -top is poor.
Accordjng to the definition of 'poor" stated in your report "does not appear durable of serviceable the component was not working and had no more useful life.11 The cooktop is working well and has much more useful life. It was stated that there was a possible dishwasher leak. The dishwasher is brand new and has not had a problem with leaking.
Also on page 5 it was stated that none of the outlets could be accessed or tested. There is an outlet at the base of the stairs which is clearly visible. It was also stated that no room heating was identified. There is a heating vent at the base of the stairs, also fully visible.
On page 7 it was stated that the condition of the floor in bathroom # 1 was poor. The entire floor was replaced in summer of 1999. All the old wood was removed down to the floor joints and a whole new sub floor and floor were put in and new linoleum. The toilet and vanity were also replaced at that time and are new. If an understructure inspection had been done on the house, it would have been obvious that the floor was new.
On page 12 it was stated that lithe electrical system is an older style that may be limiting for a modern lifestyle. If computers, microwaves and other high power drawing appliances are going to be used, then consideration should be given to a full electrical upgrade conversion". We currently have 2 computers in use, 2 televisions, 2 VCRs, 2 stereos, 4 portable CD players, a microwave, a washer and dryer, a refrigerator, a freezer, and other conventional appliances and have never had a problem with our electrical system.
The other things mentioned in the report were minor and in line with the fact that this house is 69 years old. It's not perfect, but it is a good, solid house and has served us well for 11 years. I wish we had had a more thorough inspector and a more honest one. I feel Steve Bradley was inaccurate and dishonest in his reporting of this property. A copy of this letter is being sent to the contractor1s board, John XXXXXXX real estate (with the hopes that Steve Bradley will be removed from their list of recommended home inspectors) and the XXXXXXXXX (I believe they have the right to know what was incorrect in this report).
Sincerely, Sharon R. XXXX
-- Homeowner 2178 XXXXXX St. XXXXXXX, OR 97XXX cc: Contractor's board, John XXXXXXX real estate, Doug and Karen XXXXXXXX.
,
Your Name:City: State:
Please include your name or I don't know who it is from...
I found this newspaper article that brings up an entirely new angle for preying litigation Lawyers to make money off of people. This does not look good for any of us involved in the real estate transaction, yet I don't know what we can do to protect ourselves.
RICH VOSEPKA Associated Press Writer on 3-26-2001
March 26 SALT LAKE CITY -- Once police shut down a methamphetamine lab, haul away the chemicals and lock up the suspects, a final concern lingers. The acids, solvents and other chemicals used to manufacture the drug may still impregnate walls, appliances and carpets, and they pose a danger to anyone who moves into the place afterward. But Utah, like many other states, has no standards for cleaning up former meth labs.
The state has no certification system for private companies that decontaminate the labs, and health officials have no data to accurately assess the health risk posed by residual meth-making waste. "There's a lot of uncertainty," said Kent Grey, director of environmental remediation and response for the Utah Department of Environmental Quality.
"How clean is clean?" For Lisa Stong, the answer was "not clean enough." Stong unwittingly rented a Riverton house to a methamphetamine cook. The meth cook used common decongestant tablets along with chemicals such as iodine, red phosphorous, freon and lye to make the powerful stimulant, leaving stains and contamination throughout the house and garage. In May, the federal Drug Enforcement Agency busted the lab. Since then, cleaning up the place has been a nightmare, Stong said.
There currently is no written policy on the matter, but when the Salt Lake Valley Health Department learns of a meth lab, health officials close the property, said Kevin Okleberry, an official with the environmental health department in Salt Lake County. The health department hands out a list of local cleanup contractors, and property owners must hire one of the contractors, or clean the property themselves, before health officials will allow people to move back in, he said.
Stong hired one of the companies on the list, Rocky Mountain Asbestos Abatement, and agreed to pay $1,800 for the work. But Stong said the cleanup amounted to nothing more than spraying the house with a paint impregnated with decontamination solution. When health inspectors came back, the house failed. "They came out and said they would not pass it. She said she could still smell the chemicals," Stong said. The problem, said Ron Samford, owner of Rocky Mountain Asbestos Abatement, is that Stong's house needed a much more thorough decontamination, and Stong didn't want to pay the $3,500 price tag.
Stained countertops, sinks and appliances usually are torn out and thrown away. The carpet almost always needs to be replaced, and heating and air conditioning ducts have to be scrubbed, Samford said. "There's no way it's going to pass with that stuff in there," Samford said. Samford also hauls contaminated materials to a hazardous waste site and uses chemical tests to assure a property is clean before seeking a health department inspection, he said. But nothing in Utah law or county health regulations requires him to do so.
A policy being considered by the Salt Lake Valley Health Department would set official cleanup standards. The unwritten policy currently followed by Salt Lake County health officials has some holes in it, one decontamination expert said. "They really don't have procedures that they follow. They don't go to every lab. It's really up to the inspector," said Mike Rowzee, owner of Certified Decontamination. "There are places that were not decontaminated correctly, or they were not closed" to occupancy. The proposal in Salt Lake County would add legal teeth to the procedure that health officials now follow, according to Okleberry.
The need for cleanup guidelines has grow as methamphetamine has proliferated. For the Drug Enforcement Agency, meth has become the top law enforcement priority in Utah, Barry Jamison, an agency spokesman, said. The DEA pays for the initial cleanup of meth labs, hauling off the bulk chemicals and equipment used in the "cooking" process, he said.
In 1997, the DEA cleaned up 129 labs in Utah. By 1999, the number had grown to 266. The number leveled off in 2000, at 210, but at about $3,000 each, cleaning up the labs is costly, he said. The danger from contaminates that still lurk in former meth labs may not reveal itself for many years, Samford said. For example, children who rub their hands on a wall contaminated with iodine or phosphorous and then lick their hands would not likely get sick right away, but kidney or liver damage could show up later. "It's not an immediate health risk. It might not show up for five or 10 years," Samford said.
Your Name: Please include your name or else I don't know who it is from.
I have just received a call from a Listing Agent friend who inquired about Crystal Meth Lab contamination (Utah is the leader in that field). He has listed a home that was previously a Meth Lab and then raided and foreclosed upon. The Health Department did a clean-up that included upgrading the floor coverings and repainting the interior. This brings up some interesting points:
This particular home is a 100-year-old, 2-story, above grade with a crawl space underneath the home. The heating unit is located on the main floor and not in the crawl space.
Do Meth Labs contaminate:
Could Pete Engle (Indoor Air Quality Specialist) get inside the home with his air quality monitor and mold testing equipment and actually find something in the air particulates?
I guess that the real question is if there are no accepted clean-up standards, then what prevents a buyer from moving into a home and later bringing a lawsuit against everybody involved in the transaction for negligence?? I know, I know, they can and will sue for anything........ Without a certain level of due diligence, then how can we protect ourselves from this type of litigation? The fact that the Meth Lab existed in the home will be fully disclosed to any potential buyers, but just saying that the Health Department did a clean-up does not seem like enough of a legal shield if there are not documented methodologies for clean-up (or are there???).
Michael Leavitt-- Orem, Utah
Name, City & State: Please include your name or else I don't know who it is from.
Can any of you boiler specialists offer any explanations to the expansion tanks or vent tanks on boiler systems???
The ones I have seen...and that is few...provide the expansion and breathing space for the boiler system water. The vent could just as well have gone straight up with a 180 Deg. termination above the roof. More information would be welcomed as I have not dealt with them locally. Some commercial systems still use the boilers. It is always "great stuff" to get the information ahead of an inspection. Jim Corbin - Bow, WA
At first, I would have said it looks like a Michael Leavitt event, based on the "different" life events revealed so far. But, alas, I don't know. Looks like a great time! Jim Corbin - Bow, WA
It's not me, Jim.... However, I do believe that this Inspector will be at the Mid-Year Convention in Portland at the end of the week. Look for an Oregon Inspector with the initials DB.
NEWS from CPSC * U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission * Office of Information and Public Affairs
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE * March 28, 2001 * CPSC Contact: Scott Wolfson Release # 01-116
Release # 01-116 * AC Recall Hotline: (866) 897-5612
WASHINGTON, D.C.- In cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), White Consolidated Industries Inc., of Cleveland, Ohio, is voluntarily recalling about 17,000 air conditioners. These air conditioners can short circuit posing a risk of fires, and shock and burn injuries to consumers.
White Consolidated Industries Inc. has received one report of a fire because of a short circuit resulting in $14,000 in damage. No injuries have been reported.
These are 240 volt air conditioners installed through the wall. They were sold under the following brands and model numbers: Frigidaire FAH096J2T1; White-Westinghouse WAH09EH2T1 and WAH096H2T1; Kenmore 253.79093990 and 253.70093000. The brand name is written on the front of the air conditioner under the control dial. The model number is written on a label inside the air conditioner, which can be viewed by lifting the filter in the front of the unit and reading the number through the slats.
Department, appliance, home and hardware stores, and independent contractors sold these air conditioners nationwide from November 1998 through November 2000 for about $300. Consumers should stop using these units, and contact the company toll- free at (866) 897-5612 anytime to arrange for a free repair.
The story behind the photo:
I showed up for the inspection to a 4-year-old manufactured home on acreage. It was vacant.
One of the questions I routinely ask of the Buyer(s) is, "Do you have any particular concerns that you want to bring to my attention right off the bat, before I get started?"
John the Buyer said, "Yes, we want you to explain what we see in the rear bedroom. There's a hole in the wall and what looks like mold on the wall."
I reply, "Fine, we'll be getting there eventually, but I like to keep to my routine to minimize the chance of missing anything . . blah, blah, blah . . ." and off I went to get the inspection underway.
On my way around the house I went under the deck and saw the two little bags sitting there. I didn't grab my camera or say anything about it at that time. My first thought was to be cautious until I got a better feel for the circumstances.
There was nothing remarkable about the house as I inspected, other than some stained carpets and poorly executed paint touch-ups on several of the walls.
When I finally got to the bedroom in question there was a mold-like stain on an area of about 3' x 3' on the upper third of the wall, as well as a dryer vent through the wall, (with the exterior hood removed).
John the Buyer asks, "Well, what do you think?"
I say, "I cannot think of a reasonable explanation other than something illegal went on here. I have inspected a handful of homes over the years that were previously used for manufacturing drugs, and while I do not know exactly how the process is done, I know that ventilation is a requirement. The mold could be due to humidity that results from the process if they had their lab set up against that wall." I did not say I saw the bags under the deck. (I was thinking I had just killed the deal, anyway, with my explanation).
To my relief, John the Buyer says, "That's exactly what we were thinking. I didn't want to tip off my thoughts until you had a chance to see it for yourself."
We then got into the conversation about possible toxics in and around the house, what was known about the seller, and then John the Buyer asks, "Oh, did you see the bags under the deck?"
From there, I led the conversation to the subject of the limits of my inspection in terms of knowing what actually went on there, and what to do or who to call to find out what to do about the potential toxics present. I said that I would not be reporting this to the authorities, and then turning to John the Buyer's Realtor I said, "Your agent can help with those decisions." With that, the agent and I both cracked up, because I knew, (but John the Buyer didn't), that the County District Attorney is the agents Father!
So that's how we left it. It wasn't until I was driving home that I thought about the "What if's" of this situation.
What if the house was occupied? How would I protect myself if the homeowner realized he'd left drugs under the deck I just crawled out from under? Would I be able to bluff my way through convincingly that I had seen nothing unusual so that I wouldn't tip him off? Would I continue with the full inspection or fake my way through quickly and get out of there? Would I make the phone call later to the Sheriff? If he knew I had seen the stuff and wanted to rub me out, would he allow me to write my family a good-bye letter first?
Or what if he was scared of my position and reaction, and asked me not to report him? Would I say, "Hey man, it's cool. I'm not a Narc. I'm here for a home inspection." Would I say, "Hey Scumbag, you deserve whatever you get. I hope they lose the key to your cell."
Anyway, I thought this was an interesting scenario that you could have some fun with, Michael. Scott Merritt
For more information E-MAIL Us