Today's issue of the Monday Morning Messenger is a sure fire hit. With the help of incredible reader responses this is an edition for the archives. I spent so much time reformatting the responses that I did not get a chance to add my own two cents, but after reviewing the content it was not needed. I do hope that all is well for the readership.
This past week has been a hard one emotionally for me personally. I have watched my wife Shelly struggling with her illness and I learned that a fellow Inspector has been identified with a class four cancer of an unknown origin that is ravaging his body and the prognosis is dim. All of this wears on the soul and I find myself feeling numb inside. I encourage the continuation of remembering those that sick amongst us in our prayers. Now on with today's great inspecting information.
Fellow Inspector and friend Walter Jowers has authored another winning article. Those of you that aren't familiar with Walter have been missing out. He currently resides in Nashville, TN and he is a vocal force within our industry. Walter's main focus is in improving the way Inspectors report their findings. He disdains "Checklist Totin' Bucketheads" as well as those who over verbalize with "Inspector Speak." You know the type of verbiage.... "There appears to be a source of moisture that looks to be on the ground underneath the item that seems to be responsible for warming the water in the home. I was unable to completely determine the water source, but you might want to consider having the appropriate licensed professional further evaluate the apparent inappropriate moisture gathering, or what looks to be moisture."....... This is "Inspector Speak" and Walter Jowers would like to see this type of communication stopped. He is a firm believer that we need to speak in plain correct English in terms that our clients can understand. Walter would probably have reported..... "Your water heater is currently leaking and it should be repaired or replaced to prevent flooding or other moisture damage."
Walter is also the master of putting inspection situations into real life terms. Please remember that he operates in Nashville, so when a client asks him how much longer the water heater will last he replies, "About the life of a dog!" When the puzzled look comes over the client's face he continues.... "It could live a long time, or it could run out in the street tomorrow and get hit by a car." This effectively gets the point across that Walter has no idea and that he does have the ability to predict the future.
Walter writes a weekly newspaper article for the alternative newspaper called the Nashville Scene and his column is titled Helter Skelter. I encourage all of you to check out his previous award winning works. He is also a past editor for the Old House Journal and the Journal of Light Home Construction. He knows his stuff and best of all he writes FUNNY! With his permission I am sharing his most recent Helter Skelter article...........
Years ago, when I was just getting started in the home inspection business, an unhappy homeowner asked me to figure out why he kept getting water under his brand-new house.
As soon as I turned onto this poor soul's street, I could see that his house was sitting at the bottom of a little basin. After I crawled under the house, and documented puddles of water, rotten floor framing and damp insulation, I explained it to the guy this way: "You know how people take a spoon and make a dent in the top of their mashed potatoes, so they'll hold gravy?" He nodded. "Well," I said, "all this land around you is the mashed potatoes, and you're living at the bottom of the dent."
Armed with my report, the man called the builder and demanded satisfaction. A couple of weeks later, I went back to check out the work. I found that the builder had sent one bubba, driving one little earth mover, to mound up dirt, in a circle, about ten feet from the house. Bless his heart, the bubba had built a moat. All it needed was a drawbridge. Last I heard, the unhappy homeowner was lawyering up.
Since then, I've seen the new-house-on-a-wet-lot problem dozens of times. I even have a pet name for it: I call it the sucker lot.
Just about every new development has at least one sucker lot. It's big enough for a house, but with impossible drainage problems. The developer has two options: Leave the lot empty, or build a house on it and sell it to somebody. More often than not, the developer chooses the latter.
From what we've seen, the sucker lot usually goes to a trusting soul who drives into the model home on a Sunday, sits down among the plaques and trophies that the developer has won, then enjoys some cookies and coffee with the nice sales folks there at the model.
Naive buyers just can't believe that those sweet people at the model home would mislead them. Y'all need to understand: Those sales folk are professional deal closers, not geotech engineers. "Site drainage is off their radar."
Now you might be thinking, "How about the codes inspectors? They catch all the big problems, right?" Well, no. For the most part, they just plain don't have the time or resources to find everything wrong with the houses they inspect. Still, I can't figure out how a full-grown codes inspector misses a lot that slopes toward a house on three or four sides. Shoot, a basset hound knows a steep hill when he sees one. Anyhow, for whatever reasons, codes inspectors give the final OK to houses built on sucker lots all the time. Otherwise, I'd never see a house on a sucker lot, would I?
If you're hot for a new house, this thought might pop into your head: "The house comes with a warranty. I'm covered." Well, let me suggest that you read the warranty very closely. I've read a lot of new-house warranties. From what I've seen, the warranty doesn't kick in until your house suffers a real enough failure. That means a mini-collapse, or a crack you could throw a cat through, or some ugly combination of conditions that makes the house uninhabitable. Under the warranties I've read, if your house cracks, the builder isn't necessarily obligated to make it right. Usually, he's just obligated to fill up the crack. He could use Play-Doh, and still meet the warranty terms.
Just so you'll know: Houses built in low spots develop all kinds of problems, including foundation cracks and rotten framing. They also are home to all kinds of water-loving fungi and molds that eat wood and make people sick. And if that's not bad enough, termites like nothing better than damp places near a lot of wood.
You springtime homebuyers, listen to me. I'm going to tell you how to avoid the sucker lot.
Your Name:City: State:
Please include your name or else I don't know who it is from.
Last week Richard Grisham asked for feedback on a situation that he found himself in the middle of. You know the routine.... We have recommended repairs by a licensed professional and then our clients call us for guidance after the repairs have been completed. Sometimes they want us to come back and re-inspect, while other times they ask for our advice on the quality of the repairs. It is a wasp nests that we generally dread getting drawn back into, but this is where Richard found himself and he asked for our advice.
An electrical permit is required for this elec connection, you could contact the local building department to see if a permit was taken out and if there was an inspection done. Dan McLeary - Ashland, Oregon
Richard did his inspection report properly. Sub panel should be reviewed by a licensed electrician and corrections be made. Is it the responsibility of the inspector to make sure the person doing the corrections is licensed? I don't think so. We are home inspectors, not regulators. The buyer needs to be satisfied that the work was completed as recommended by the inspector. The receipt from Frontier Electric would appear to satisfy this request. A licensed electrician in Oregon has a license number and is registered with the CBB. What goes on in Nevada? It seems the buyer could easily check on how legitimate the electrician is. Should we as inspectors get involved to this degree? I don't think so. It seems we get carried away sometimes trying to be all things to all people. Doing the inspection and providing a good report is the goal. Richard did just that. You can't go wrong reporting what you see. Tom Burnham - Ashland, OR
Are you concerned because you are going to do a re-inspection? Maybe it is a non licenced company that did the job. Was it a requirement on the seller to have the job completed by a licenced electrician? It is not a requirement to have a company listed in the PHONE book. I don't understand why your involed in the who did what and are they qualified? Ken Jones - Redding, CA
It is well within the buyer's right to request complete documentation of what repairs were done and by whom (company, electrician's name, address, phone number, contractors license number), particularly when a safety item like electrical work is involved. I think the agent should tell the seller that the "receipt" he sent her provides no useful information, and that it doesn't satify the buyer. She should request that the seller provide clear written documentation about the work that was done. and who did it. Any competent contractor should be willing and able to provide this information. Gary Holzbauer - Junction City, Oregon
I think your response should be the facts as you have presented here. If your agent has a desire for getting to the bottom issues, then the presented facts should do just that, without an opinion of what the seller appears to have done. I had a similar event concerning a comment that a check for a building permit on an attached shed to a garage should be done. The addition had conditions that were not standard. Since the owner was a "builder", he got his dander up. The facts were simply stated after checking was made by the agent. I still have business from the agent. Good luck. Jim Corbin - Bow, WA
Bill Ball shared some feedback from some recent issues of the MMM. If you remeber back to Jon Larson's plight in Ephraim, Utah where a Buyer changed his summary in order to get out of buying the home, Bill shared......
Michael: I hope it is not too late to comment on this....Regarding the buyer changing Jon Larson's report.....
I had this happen to me years ago, (about 1985). At that time I xeroxed copies of the report and delivered or mailed them. In my case, the AGENT, changed the report by improving many of my "fair" or "poor" evaluations and sent it along to the buyer.
The buyer bought, and later sent a letter of complaint to me. It was only after I visited the buyer's home, (something I've learned to do promptly when a complaint arrives), that I saw the report he had. When I noted the changes and allowed him to compare it to my origional, the gig was up. The broker paid for the needed repairs and the agent went looking for another profession. Bill Ball - Las Vegas, NV
Bill Ball also gave a classic response to Steve Bradley's Seller complaint letter a couple of week's back.....
Thank you for your letter. I am sorry that you feel my report was inaccurate. You should know that I performed my evaluation to the Standards of Practice of the American Institute of Inspectors(r), a national nonprofit trade association with which I am a Certified Member. I have reviewed the report and compared it to your letter, and I have no revisions to or amendments to make. Sincerely, Bill Ball, Certified Home Inspector - Las Vegas, NV
I love Bill's response because it took far less time compose and addresses the issue and clearly states his position. I never think this clearly when I am under the gun. Instead, I tend to want to disect every issue as well as lash back. Thanks for taking the time to respond to the past issues Bill. I know that many of you are so busy that you don't get the chance to read weekly. Instead, you digest the issues every other week or once a month. We always appreciate the feedback and the sharing of perspectives helps each of us handle the commonly encountered situations better.
Does anyone know what this is (see attachments). I don't remember seeing any Calcium Carbonate crystallizing in this fashion, maybe it isn't CaCO3 or other mineral crystal form? Mold? If so were is the sugar or other carbohydrates? It was observed on the basement walls of a home I inspected this morning. I reported it as mineral crystallization. (water percolates through concrete block wall, leaches CaCO3 and other minerals, and deposits minerals on inside of wall in various forms as the water evaporates) I don't see to many basements in this part of the country. Let me know if I am way off on this one (or even just slightly off.) Thank You All. Peter Barten - Bay City, OR.
Peter, I have seen white fur like this several times in concrete block basemsents. I think you have all the chemistry straight. I just called it efflorescence, and explained that it is evidence of slow moisture seepage through the wall, which may or may not need sealing, or more radical treatment such as a French drain. It depends of whether the moisture is a concern. If it is in workshop space, or similar, then it may be of little or no consequence to the buyers. If it is in a room that may get enclosed with a strud-frame wall and converted to living space at some time in the future, then----it probably needs corrections. I would inform the buyer and then let him decide if it affects his intended use of the space. The inspectors job is to inform. That is my take on the situation. Steve Jordan in Lincoln City, OR
Peter: You couldn't be more correct. My explanation of efflorescence to my clients is almost identical to yours! as water diffuses (percolates) through concrete (the more porous the faster it diffuses, and hollow concrete block is the most porous), it encounters siliceous rock like material as well as the much more soluble salt like materials, which dissolve and are carried along with the water in a solution: calcium carbonate, calcium bicarbonate, calcium chloride (fluoride, bromide, iodide, etc.), calcium sulfate (sulfide, etc.), calcium phosphate, (pyrophosphate, etc.), and many more that are all water soluble to some degree. The most soluble, then are carried through from one side where the water comes in to the other side (inside the basement walls), where the water evaporates and leaves the salts behind in a somewhat crystalline form. It is almost definitely not mold. Mold and mildew needs carbohydrates to furnish food for their survival and reproduction. A "somewhat" crystalline, because each one of the minerals I mentioned above crystallizes in a definite crystal "habit." Different mineral salts have different habits and when these coalesce together, you don't get only one type of crystal (isometric (face centered cubic, body centered cubic), hexagonal, tetragonal, orthorhombic, monoclinic, triclinic, etc.), but a mixture of different crystals. They are different crystals, but are recognizable only under a PLM (polarizing light microscope) or a DIC (Differential Interference Contrast) microscope. I digress, anyway, it's efflorescence, NOT mold and you are correct! Richard Grisham - Las Vegas, NV
Richard: Thank you for taking the extra keystrokes to add a few words which I too could understand...... Your brain has an incredible hard drive full of information that I never even want to begin to comprehend. Thanks for sharing your knowledge. And thanks for thinking of my limited mental capacities as you explained down to my level...... By the way, how is your wife doing??? I hope that she is convalescing well. Michael Leavitt - Orem, Utah
Hi Richard, Thank you for your great explanation. I remember some of this from Engineering classes loooong ago, but have not the memory bank you have. I appreciate your time in explaining the process. I have few basements up her in the northwest, but most have not been treated and have some crystalline formations. I will save your words. Peter, good and clear photo. Thank you. Jim Corbin - Bow, WA
Richard, Thank you for your response it was very informative. By the way I was just wondering how on earth you have all the crystal systems memorized. It just so happens that my Manual of Mineralogy; Klien and Hurlbut Jr. has them listed in the exact, but inverted, order as you stated them. You are a walking encyclopedia. Once again I am amazed at the depth of knowledge that this association has. Thank you everyone, Peter Barten - Bay City, OR
Last week I asked for feedback about your digital camera experiences. I also told you that my newest Sony was about to arrive. Here are some great feedback responses that you should archive when it comes time to pry the money out of your fist to make your camera purchase...
My first camera was a Sony Mavica. I replaced it with the Nikon Coolpix 990 (for all of the reasons stated by Michael above)and I am SO happy I did. Nikon is 3.34 megapixels. Yes, the battery life sucks. However, I knew this going in and purchased 16 AA Nicad rechargeable with a charger. These batteries can be recharged up to 1,000,000 times before replacement is needed. I can go all day without dealing with the batteries. Cost: Camera $1,000.00 (I think they are down to $900.00). Batteries w/charger $50.00 +/-. I never run out of batteries and have never had a bad camera day. The strong points for this camera is its picture quality. Currently, for the money, 3.34 megapixels is the way to go. But, the biggest strong point is the camera's lens. It rotates to any and all angles. This allows you to always SEE what your camera sees without having to lay on your back, side or stomach, to get that needed shot. So, great pictures and ease of shooting is its strong points. I certainly would not allow the battery issue to keep me from buying this camera again. Steve Dansby - Portola, CA
I have the Olympus D360L I recently upgraded from the D340L, I also have the D460Z. I would not trade my Olympus for any other. I started with a Casio- not worth the picture, that was when they were new about 5 years ago. My 340L was about 3 years old when I upgraded to the 360. This camera can take punishment and keep on ticking. I average about 40 pics per home inspection, or about 300 pics a week. This camera has never failed. *BATTERIES!* Well if you do not use the LCD screen batteries last a looong time. These cameras have been dropped, drop kicked (in attempt to break there fall), used in rain and still keep on ticking. I dream of no other. Easy to use, compact, simple, fair priced, good support,........All my inspectors use them. John Rebenstorff - Orangeville, CA
Sometimes I think I'm nuts for using images and incorporating them into our HI reports. Few others do it because it adds time and cost. Some skeptics worry about the items that you did not take pictures of. However the images add quality, extended documented value for the buyer that someday will sell the property, and the ability to defend your written statements. But digital images are not for everyone in this business. If making a lot of money is your goal and you only desire to meet the minimum standards of conducting home inspections - digital images will slow you down.
I have been using a Olympus D-320L for over 3 years - its a great no brainer for shooting in dark spaces, daylight or whatever. The images can easily be tweaked when downloaded through the serial port of the computer. Olympus bottom line is now a D-360L model ($299) which is fancier that the old D320L ( I find fancy is not good - more opportunity to mess up the image comes with fancy cameras. The Batteries I have evolved to are: 4 AA rechargeable (Energizer Hi- energy nickel-metal hydride) and the appropriate flexible charger have worked for 9 months (recharged daily) without a problem. Batteries are about $2.50 each and the charger is under $20. This camera/battery system works for shooting up to 100 images a day and downloading the images before needing to be recharged. I have my second 320 at Olympus being rebuilt (repaired) now which will cost $120 and be good for another 2 year or so.
I tried an older Sony Mavica ($699)and trashed it within 6 months with crawl space dirt and typical inspector type abuse. All of what is said about great images and long battery life for the Sonys is true. Luckily the (Best Buy)service contract replaced all the parts including the lens - now it is a reserve camera.
For Home Inspecting, I am a believer in keeping it simple to use and reduce the opportunities to screw up. Believe me, I have made all the mistakes and that is what most of my experience is based on. Before I obtained my first digital camera for home inspecting, I researched some Inspector Forums similar to MMM to help with my decisions, it saved me lots of downtime, heartache and money. Michael thanks for the opportunity to participate.
PS - I use a neck strap and have the Olympus hanging on my chest from the time I leave home. It is always there when I need it. A picture is worth a thousand words - so taking notes is greatly reduced with review of the images that can be taken during the inspection. Roger Ball - Toledo Ohio
I purchased an Olympus D-450 Zoom last year. It does "ok" for my minimal photos. I should take more, but I am having a frustrating time with the file size of the photos. I haven't got the technique down...yet. Others seem to have it so that photos can be conveniently recorded and sent. The size of the Olympus is convenient; about the size of a conventional point and shoot. The battery life is ok but it must be watched. I got stuck once and now carry a spare set of AA batteries if I forget to watch the meter. Jim Corbin - Bow, WA
The Sony DSC-P1 is the current camera in use. I purchased a DSC-S50 to replace my AGFA 1280 that finally gave up the ghost. I used the "50" on 1 inspection and took many photos of Dorothy's shades but the quality was less than acceptable. Soooo I returned to the store and continued shopping, this time taking photos with different cameras to try and see what worked better than the one I had just purchased. This "P1" is neat, 9 oz., long battery life, sharp pictures.
Now the only challenge is working with the camera as a separate drive on the computer. I had to download new drivers from Sony for the Microsoft operating system "ME" to allow the computer to recognize the camera. The current challenge is determining what program to use to save these downloaded photos in for the best reproduction results. The software MGI that came with the camera will not capture the photos. I have to leave the camera connected to the USB port to edit and or modify the photos. Help, I need assistance in making this current MGI software to work properly or another software program that will work properly. Steve Bradley - Medford, OR
For Immediate Release Contact: Ken Giles April 17, 2001 (301) 504-0580 Ext. 1184 Release # 01-125
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is launching a "recall round-up" to rid homes of fire hazards. CPSC is organizing a nationwide campaign to discard hazardous consumer products such as old disposable lighters, frayed extension cords, and recalled products that could lead to a deadly fire. The products on the "recall round-up" list have been recalled in the past or were made safer when new safety standards were put into place.
Each year, more than 3,000 people die and 16,000 are injured because of fires that start in homes. These fires result in property losses of about $4 billion. Children are particularly vulnerable. Each year, about 800 children under the age of 15 die of fire-related causes and about 500 of these deaths are to children under the age of 5 years. In fact, children under age 5 have a fire death rate more than twice the national average.
CPSC standards and compliance activities have contributed to a decline in fires and fire deaths over the past several years. For example, CPSC's standard for child-resistant lighters has helped reduce fire deaths from children playing with lighters by 43 percent since 1994. Other CPSC standards include general wearing apparel, children's sleepwear, mattresses, and carpets and rugs. CPSC staff is working on standard proposals for upholstered furniture and for heating and cooking equipment. Recalls have been announced for battery-operated children's vehicles, non-child-resistant lighters, halogen lamps, dishwashers, extension cords, toasters, and other products.
To help conduct this year's recall round-up, CPSC has enlisted the help of fire marshals, fire departments, state and local officials, and national and state health and safety organizations, including the Congressional Fire Caucus. Nearly 2,000 fire stations across the country will serve as collection sites for hazardous products such as old disposable cigarette lighters and frayed extension cords. Governors, state health officials, and grassroots organizations will help publicize the safety campaign and distribute information about the hazardous products.
"CPSC's safety standards and recalls have helped save hundreds of lives but many pre-standard and recalled products remain in people's homes," said CPSC Chairman Ann Brown. "That's why people should do some spring cleaning and check their homes and 'knick-knack' drawers for old disposable lighters, frayed extension cords, and other products that could be hazardous."
Chairman Brown pointed out, "We can get dangerous products off store shelves, but the real challenge is to get them out of families' homes."
Today, CPSC is launching the recall round-up with a news conference and release of a "Recall List" of products. Speaking at today's news conference, U.S. Representative Steny Hoyer (D-Md), co- chair of the Congressional Fire Caucus, said, "The government does its part by setting safety standards and negotiating recalls. Now, through CPSC's recall round-up, people can do their part to get hazardous products out of their homes."
Some of the hazardous products that might be in consumers' homes are:
"CPSC sometimes learns of deaths or serious injuries caused by previously recalled products. We want to prevent these needless tragedies," said Brown. "We urge people to get CPSC's list of recalls and check for old products that could be hazardous."
CPSC's toll-free telephone hotline and web site provide information about recalled products and information on what to look for when buying products. Consumers can reach the hotline at 800-638-2772 or visit the web site at www.cpsc.gov. To get a list of major recalls, consumers should send a postcard to "Recall List," CPSC, Washington, D.C. 20207, or visit our web site at http://www.cpsc.gov/roundup/rndupl01.html
Are those casting flaws that allowed moisture penetration and eventual freeze pops? Reggie Ayres - Medford, OR
The picture is not very clear on my computer, Michael, but it looks to me like this chimney has had a fire.... Bill Ball - Las Vegas, NV
I'll take a wild guess: Looks to me like water has penetrated from above down into the chimney blocks. I can't see the grout cap around the flue tile enough to know if it is cracked or not. Question: Is this chimney in a climate where it freezes in the winter? A repeating freeze-thaw cycle can spall the faces of brickwork or chimney blocks like these---if there is water penetrating into the material. Question: Why are some blocks whiter than others?? Could there be a grout coating or cement in contact with the inside of the blocks, and it is leaching through the blocks giving efflorescence on the outside? Will be glad to see what ideas others have. Steve Jordan, CORI. (Crusty Old Retired Inspector) - Lincoln City, OR
Looks to me like there's too many SUV type vehicles in this area. Acid rain I'd say. Randy Whitlock - Grass Valley, CA
I would say that excess moisture entry without adequate drying. The cold comes and the surface fractures. Sometimes the spalling is caused by inadequate mix or the block was coated and the coating spalled. No chimney beetles up here, though. Jim Corbin - Bow, WA
Mark Daughtry was kind enough to pass along a little more information on the chimney in the picture....
The cement chimney cap is only 1-2" thick on this South facing chimney in the Redmond, WA. Lack of sealant to the brick and cap (to thin) allows the brick to absorb and retain the water. Then when the temperature goes below 32 degrees the brick spalls. I had not seen one quite this deteriorated for its age of 18 years. The chimney/brick mason I talked to also said that this type of brick was " not the best" Cheaper and more porous brick. Also, the cement chimney cap should be a min. of 4" thick and corbled out so it forms a drip line, which prevents water from running down the brick. Mark Daughtry - Redmond, WA
I turned to the well respected Chimney Sweep Bob Priesing from Havelock, NC for help. Bob responded...... It looks like either freeze/thaw damage (spalling) or sub-florescence. In other words, water is being absorbed by the brick. Either it's freezing and popping off the faces of the brick, or it's evaporating and the salts coming to the surface are popping off the faces of the brick. Or, it's chimney beetles... Bob Priesing - Havelock's Chimney Sweep, Inc. Havelock, NC www.havelockschimneysweep.com
Then came the surprise response from Walter Jowers in Nashville, TN..... Y'know, that ain't brick. That's terra cotta block. I've seen whole houses built of it. Some stuccoed. Typically 1920s-30s. The worn-out holes into the channels give it away. Walter Jowers
That's a new one on me..... I can't wait to learn more about this terra cotta block.... Stay tuned.
Please include your name or I don't know who it is from...
Jim Corbin Said "Cover yourselves in your service agreement by statements of what you do not do. This is the best defense." I disagree. Do I need to put in my service agreement that I don't carry a jack hammer as one of my inspecting tools? The example is silly but you get the point. There is no end to what we do not do. The important thing is to be sure your contract states what you DO do. Namely that you perform your inspection to the standards of ???, A.I.I., Oregon State, other association. Getting the client to agree to the scope of the inspection as a written Standards of Practice is the important thing. Jon Gudnason - Placerville, CA
I'm glad that my service agreement stipulates that I am NOT evaluating HazMat issues. Bill Ball - Las Vegas, NV
I don't have any idea what to look for, smell for or what hardware is required for a meth lab. If we are running into this sort of thing, possibly a presentation from an expert at our Winter meeting would help us all. I am interested. To my knowledge I have not encountered such a home. Thoughts from anyone? Jim Corbin - Bow, WA
Scott Merritt sent along another winner of a classic photo that we all need to become more familiar with. The correct identification could mean the difference to our own good health and our own demise.........
For more information E-MAIL Us