[Michael Leavitt's Home Page | Back Issues of the MMM | Current Issue of the MMM]

MONDAY MORNING MESSENGER

Message Prepared For Home Inspectors and Especially for Members of the

American Institute of Inspectors®

December 27, 1999

GOOOOOD MORNING, A.I.I.™

It's another great day here in Northern Utah. The last Christmas of the millennium is complete and we are now heading straight into the home stretch for the Millennial Gala. This past week we also enjoyed the winter solstice and the full moon from the comfort of the 106 degree hot tub..... Luckily there were no storm clouds to block our view. December 31st will mark the fourth year birthday for our little Haily...... Haily is soooo excited and really wants a Jessie cowgirl outfit modeled after Jessie in the new Toy Story 2 (those with little kids know exactly who I am referring to). Thanks to the built-in family celebration, the Leavitts will be safe at home celebrating with cake and ice cream as the midnight hour passes. I hope that all of you will also be safe and that the end of the century comes and goes without any major tragedies..... Better yet, maybe the New Year will bring back the normal flow of the residential housing market.

ULTIMATE SWING By Steve Bradley

While performing an inspection recently in an area of extreme, high-end homes, I had the pleasure of observing the gigantic swing in the attached picture. It reminded me of the tree swings that we used as boys to launch ourselves into the local river.

To put the photo into perspective, I was 60 steps from the base of the swing and the exposed length of the swing post was calculated at 50 feet. I had to dust off my old algebra for the length.

The owner was present during the inspection so I asked him about the history of this "hazard". He told me the post came from our local utility company and it had been used for high voltage transmission distribution in its past life. He installed the swing about 5 years ago. He also indicated the base of the post was encased in concrete starting about 3 feet below grade level. He did not know the amount of concrete used.

Well, I'm no engineer, but a used utility post with various holes through the body, encased in concrete below grade level with a large movement of deflection, and, of course, a permit was never issued for this swing, told me the new potential owner would look way beyond my E/O Insurance if left un- or under- reported and someone was injured.

I listed this swing in my report as follows: "A single beam/post swing installed in the front yard area is a severe potential hazard. Recommend a Licensed Structural Engineer approve
existing installation. Or as an alternative remove the swing by a Licensed Contractor."

When I went over the report with the perspective buyer the following day and we discussed this swing I asked him to sign and date my copy of the inspection in the margin of the swing recommendation. He gladly signed and I knew I would sleep a little better. By the way, this client is a local attorney specializing in injury litigation.

This Saturday I received a call from the Seller who was not in a pleasant frame of mind and he told me the swing has now been removed. This was the only contingency to the sale. He had his handyman use a chain saw. He also stressed that I almost killed the sale by making a big deal out of the swing. I wouldn't do anything different and I can now rest easier.

Steve Bradley - OR.

Thanks so much for sharing the experience, Steve. I am surprised that there wasn't more testing of the component to determine if it really was a Reportable Condition worth warning the clients about. I know that whenever I encounter the odd component that looks like it could possibly be a lot of fun, I have to rigorously test it out first. I know that this kind of testing can be construed as in-depth or even destructive discovery, but it helps me make very accurate determinations while also having a great time.

I can remember the zip line that ran 100 feet across the jungle type yard.... That was a blast. Holding on until a safe height off the ground was attained so that letting go would not break a bone. I also enjoyed the fireman pole that ran from a loft playroom down into the bedroom below. That one took 8 or 9 tries to figure it out. I was having a hard time getting the proper momentum to continuously spin around the pole as I descended. At first I determined that it was a HAZARD because I ran straight at the pole and came into direct contact with a tender portion of my mid torso and slid straight down to the lower level of the home. In a very high voice I continued to try it until I developed the proper technique. I reflected back on many youthful hours watching the professionals on Emergency descend with grace and style.

Looking at the swing it looks like it would be a bear to try to get any height and sustain the momentum. I would think that it would be a 2 person adventure. Steve could mount the seat and hold on while Bubba drags him out there 50 feet with an extra rope before letting go. I think I saw the larger version at the MGM in Las Vegas. It was $25 in Vegas, and free in the backyard of Steve's inspection. It is a shame that such a historic Northern California amusement park had to fall to the handyman wielding a chain saw...... Such is progress!

WEBSITE QUESTIONS

Many AII™ Home Inspectors are venturing into the world of the internet by creating their own company websites. I think that this is a great idea and have personally been working on my site for 2 1/2 years. One aspect of a website that you may not have considered are the various people who will visit your site as a result of the internet search engines. The readership may respond to the sites content in the form of technical questions.

Receiving internet questions can be a good thing, but in most instances the person asking it is somebody who lives several States away and will never be a direct client. That means that you could ignore the question and your business would very likely never be affected. Every now and then I receive them from people in Utah as well. I regularly receive inquiries from people who have read various pages on my site. Here is an e-mail that I received right before Christmas:

LEDGER CAPACITY

I am considering attaching a 12 foot long, 2 by 6 inch ledger to the concrete foundation of my home to be used as a support for one side of a 8 by 10 shed which I plan on constructing; i.e. in the same manner as installing a ledger for a deck. I plan on attaching the ledger by drilling about 8- 5/8" holes 3 inches deep in the concrete for inserting metal anchors & 3" lag screws.
My concern is that the downward pressure of the shed & its contents may be such that the lag screws would be sheared off. I think the ledger would be adequate to support the shed, but I'm not sure. Is there a published source I can refer to which would give me a better idea whether the ledger is adequate to support the shed? Thank you for your response. xxxxxswbell.net

Ector xxxx - Kansas City, MO - 816-xxx-xxxx

I somehow became the "Answer Man" for Ector in Kansas City because of information on my site. By the brevity of the message I have no idea what Ector was reading on my site, and I have no idea why he felt that I was qualified to answer engineering questions. What intrigues me even more is what he must have typed into a search engine to find my site and what search engine he was using.

With the question comes the responsibility of responding. I suppose that I could just send back a response like.... "Go find an Engineer." but that would be less than helpful. I tend to try and give some information and get them pointed in the right direction. Knowing the contents of my website, I can only assume that he was reading the deck failure information contained in my Buyers Section. Here is how I responded to Ector's question......

Ector: Your best source for bolt size vs. load would be your local building department or a Structural Engineer. It sounds as though your load will be minimal when compared to an actual deck because, if I remember correctly, Kansas City rarely has heavy snow loads (Over 2 feet). It also sounds as though you will not have items stored on it or human beings BBQing up on top. The best recommendation would be to add two or more 4x4 support posts on the foundation side to support the downward load. With perimeter supports that are sized and positioned correctly and then attaching the ledger to the home, the deck should be secure. Correctly erected freestanding decks are by far the best bet to prevent deck failure, but builders prefer to save money on the extra supports and continue to use ledger boards only.

Your description for the shed is very brief, but you say that you are going to construct it by attaching it to the home. If you were to do that here in Orem, then it is considered a permanent structure and requires building permits. Being permanent, they also need foundations and slabs which add to the cost of the project. Most homeowners here opt to construct their 8x10 storage sheds without attaching them to the home and then they are considered temporary structures and need no permits.

Good Luck with your project and send me a photo when you get it done.

Merry Christmas - Michael Leavitt

I may get some flack for offering advice from the readership, but I share this with you so that you can contemplate what you will do when questions start coming your way. The design of your site and the content contained therein will either invite or negate the temptation for readers to "Ask the Professional." An Inspector page that is nothing more than a company billboard will rarely get responses. I think that because I include newspaper articles and "E-mail Me" invitations throughout my site I am viewed as an "Answer Man" type. I enjoy fielding the questions and marvel that somebody from across the country can ask the question fully expecting an intelligent response.

I received this response in return.....

Thank you for your response to my question regarding "ledger capacity". I hope to send you a picture of my shed project, but do no expect to complete it until late spring 2000.

Merry Christmas & Happy New Year, Ector #$#@!

So how would you have responded to Ector??? E-MAIL Us your Responses

LAST WEEK'S EXTRA CREDIT

If you recall last week's MMM issued a simple math word problem. I would like to declare the winner as Nathan Buckley, but I can't because then I would have to give away big prizes. He was the first, but was tied with Jon Gudnason because I picked up their e-mails at the same time. The funniest of the group were Ron Cloyd and Sylvan Stenge who had me slaving away in the cold for the mid $500's. They were about $800 off the mark and felt much better about my efforts when they learned the real number. Thanks again to all of those who participated.... We owe Nathan a new car (or stick of gum)=:->