Richard Moore

[?] I usually know what you are talking about Mike, but you've got me there. [?] Ahhh...OK...you mean Phyllophaga, Scarab or June Beetles. Could be I guess, but then why would they be at an inside window sill? From what I just read about them, they feed on vegetation at all stages of life..

They do work a bit better WITH electricity!

Tough to say for absolute certain without seeing the size of the emergence holes, but they sure look a lot like Anobiids (Deathwatch Beetles). There could be some very serious damage with structural wood reduced to little but a shell. You can read a bit about them here... http://cru.cahe.wsu.edu/CEPublications/ ... b1577e.pdf Note that the original infestation could have been 5 or 6 or more years ago and the larvae have been happily munching away the interior of wood since then.

It looks like all we are talking about is inconvenient layouts...and only then if the bedrooms are normally occupied. I don't think there would be anything in the national codes that would cover either case...as long as there are no other safety or habitability issues. I had a new 3-story townhouse a little while back that had a small guest bedroom on the upper floor along with the master suite. The other guest bedroom and the only guest bathroom was on the lowest floor, with living/kitchen/powder room on the second. For anyone in that upper guest bedroom to take a shower, they either had to go through the master bedroom to get to that bathroom, or traipse down 2 floors to the lower level. We all agreed it was a "odd" design, but it fit their use as a older couple planning on using the room as an office. Most buyers will already be aware of inconvenient layouts, but I do still think it's good to point them out and/or discuss tarring and feathering the architect. Just not really a reportable "repair" item.

So this would be a no-no too in a crawl? I don't know what was originally packed in the stuff, but whatever it was, the homeowner got a lot of it. (I got the copper/steel connections) Click to Enlarge 70.47 KB

Actually, #4 aluminum is only allowed for up to 55 amps in this use. I don't think you will find a 55 amp breaker. As long as you use a breaker of 50-amps or less at the house panel, it is fine to leave the 100-amp breaker at the sub-panel. It will just be acting as a disconnect.

Hi Mike, I'm not sure if you are being serious or not(?), but I googled all over and couldn't find anything with a photo of the backside except for the Eco-Shakes you mentioned. Definitely not them. Based on some other stuff in the house, like 75% of the windows so fogged up you wouldn't need blinds, it would not surprise me to find that the homeowner (now deceased) went for a really cheap product. Whatever they are, I'll be quite happy to retire without seeing them again. I'm guessing that you did more testing and research on that single sample than whoever made these nasty things.

Here's a first for me. This is a 1981 home but this roofing was supposedly installed in 1998. Hard plastic, sort of hollow with ridges like some composite decking. All of the "shakes" were badly curled and had obviously also gotten brittle as indicated by many broken shakes, many of them snapped right at the overlay point. I made no attempt to walk this roof and I have to wonder how any roofer could repair the damage without breaking a whole bunch more. Client and I agreed that a new roof was called for. I don't have to actually write it, or anything else, up as this was a pre-offer inspection. The roof, and a bunch of other very poorly maintained issues, made him fall out of love with the place halfway through the inspection and we ended early. But, to satisfy my curiosity...anyone familiar with this product, the name, known problems or recalls, etc? Seems like a crap product if it's going to curl and get brittle. Maybe that's why I haven't seen it anywhere else? Click to Enlarge 81 KB Click to Enlarge 144.67 KB Click to Enlarge 89.76 KB

Scheduling Availability Scheduling Availability Scheduling Availability It wasn't always that way, but I'd guess that over 80% of the calls I now get start with... I need an inspection done by... or I'd like to schedule an inspection... or Are you available to do an inspection on... etc, etc. The vast majority of my clients had already decided they wanted to use me before the first contact so I don't find myself having to go through the other stuff very much...which is good...I hate selling myself. I often have to bring up the fee myself at the end of the booking. I rarely end up booking an inspection when the first question is cost. I know I'm supposed to go into some spiel about how great I am, etc, etc, but I normally just point them to my website and tell them that there's more info there. It's not an approach I'd recommend if you want to grab as many inspections as possible, but it works for me. I married well! []

I used CorelDraw for the diagram. I used to use it a lot for my woodworking/cabinetry stuff, laying out kitchens, etc, etc. My version is OLD but still works. Kind of like me!

You and Jim K are probably right. I start seeing and/or imagining weird stuff in the middle of the night. [:-bigeyes

Rob says they are flexible and the lighting pattern when blown up would suggest some type of armored flex rather than threaded rod. WAG: I wonder if it might be PEX inside the flex for a hydronic radiant heat system for the slab that was totally screwed up in the planning stage?

All suggestions appreciated. Bill's might have worked with my LG as the step-ladder and the telesteps in the crawl. But the shelf was a wierd problem. Brandon is obviously a bit younger than I am. I haven't done a handstand for many years. Mike's...I'm sorry, I'm not "walking" down a ladder head first at my age. It's just not dignified. [:-eyebrow Jim's...I actually considered something like that. The problem is that my LG has splayed feet almost 28" wide and wouldn't fit the hole even diagonally (I was being generous with the 24 x 24) and I wouldn't have much faith in the Telesteps as a plank. It would also, for sure, have broken the stupid shelf. The crawl was only maybe 15' x 12' at the most and, fortunately, had a couple of good sized gaps in the barrier, one directly beneath the access. I say fortunately as I was able to get a good look at the soil which was bone dry. I had a very good and clear view of the rest and was also able to check the mudsill and anchoring near the access. I will be reporting it as only inspected from the hatch and recommending the gaps get covered, but I'm not actually horribly concerned I missed anything in this particular case. Had it been an older home, a more complex crawl, or had any "indicators", and I was a lot, lot younger, I might have tried a run at a small trampoline and a flying Superman entry.

2006 home today. Built on a sloped lot with two full stories and a daylight basement at the rear half. Garage was on the main level and that left just a quarter of the footprint having a crawl space. So...nice 24x24 wall hatch to the crawl, about 7 feet of headroom in the crawl, and I couldn't figure a way to get into the damn thing! Because the wall between the basemnt and crawl was mostly concrete, they had the hatch almost flush with the finished basemnt ceiling with the bottom of the hatch opening about 6' off the floor. On the crawl side the soil was about 5' from the bottom of the hatch. There was also a one-by "shelf" attached to the bottom of the crawl opening sticking about 12" into the crawl, and with no support. I have no idea what that was for but it was obvious it would fail or snap under any weight. My problem is that, because the hatch was hard against the ceiling, I could not figure a way to get off my ladder into the access hole anything but head first, which would have me doing a handstand on the other side (assuming I didn't break my neck attempting that). Even if I managed that, and took a ladder in with me for my exit, I would then have the same issue getting out, but with an extra foot or two drop. See diagram (I forgot to take a photo of the dumb arrangement)... Click to Enlarge 18.33 KB I'll squeeze my way into some odd places but I'm not a circus act!

It looks like I'm going against the grain, but I use 10 pt Arial for the body. I also have squeezed the space between lines, but not between paragraphs. My photos are also tightly cropped and smaller than most sample reports I've seen. My average report would probably be 5 or 6 pages longer if I used 12 pt with normal spacing and even more with larger photos. I would lose in a "my report is bigger than yours" pissing contest. I've never had anyone complain about the readability and, as I always mail a hard copy in addition to the PDF link, I have probably saved a tree or two by now.

LOL...I went off on a google trip and found myself over at the HVAC site where you were asking the same question. It's the only real hit I came up with. Their answer, "probably the original in a 30's home" sounds good to me. They made those dinosaurs to last and it's not too likely you are looking at a newer "replacement".

I think I'm seeing a pattern. I would suggest that all of Mr. Stone's future columns could be be reduced to to the following two lines... Q: Dear Barry, without going into details, should I sue my home inspector? A: Without those bothersome details, or the annoying inconvenience of any real investigation on my part, it's my uninformed opinion that you should.

I went through this a month or so ago with a master bathroom in new construction. As pointed out, the IRC does not consider bathrooms "habitable" spaces. In my case, I was going to call it, code or no code, as it was just stupid for a full bathroom. As it turns out (thanks again Randy), Seattle had made specific code changes requiring heat in bathrooms, so I was able to provide the client with that "ammunition". As for powder rooms, even with the local code, I would have a hard time getting excited about one with no heat unless it was on an outside wall with a large window. It's not like people use these things naked, for a lengthy time. If you spend more than 5 minutes in the small room you probably need more fiber in your diet. Plus, my guess is that in 9 of 10 cases the doors are left open when not occupied. Someone asked about a heat lamp. I don't know what good that would do for your butt in a powder room unless you turned it on for a few minutes before entering. You would be better off with a heated toilet seat!

"Are you looking at getting a home inspection done, but you are worried that you could fail it?" That first line alone is nonsense as it seems to imply that the seller is ordering the inspection the transaction will be based on. And it goes rapidly downhill from there. My favorite is... "Shingles need to be secured and make sure that all of them were properly installed. This can lead to major leaks when it rains and it will damage the structure of the home." Don't want any of them secured and properly installed shingles! [:-banghea

I think we've reached a consensus! Whatever works for you seems to be the way to go.

LOL...they're not army boots! All of my inspection shoes are the slip on type with the elastic gussets...no laces. Snug enough but I can slip my feet in and out of them on without even bending down. Quicker than covers. Being the fashion plate that I am (not) I usually shop for shoes at Big5. Whatever is on sale!

Well...if the place is just plain gross, a fixer, etc I just keep my shoes on, the same as the agent and clients. Those ones are pretty obvious. Otherwise it's socks for me too. Besides my roof shoes I also keep another pair of clean slip-on shoes to use in the attics for when my original shoes have picked up any mud or dirt. Oh, and I do put shoes (clean ones) on for the panel if it's in a finished room. I also can't stand the bootie covers. For some reason they make me feel like I should be shuffling around with my butt hanging out of a hospital gown. No one wants to see that!

Coal chute? Was there a corresponding opening into the basement? (Weak WAG...but all I've got!) [:-idea] I just noticed you said at the side of the porch...so I've got something even weaker: It's where someone stored their canoe. OK...this one I'm sure of: I really don't have a clue!

Hey! It's what he had on hand. Now, if he'd only had some pipe dope as well!

That has to be wrong. In the "Prescriptive Residential Deck Construction Guide" put out by www.awc.org that Chris posted earlier, is the following..."Each segment of decking must bear on a minimum of 4 joists." That makes sense as even 3 could pose a problem. Imagine end rot where the deck board is about to fail at its 3/4" bearing on the joist. With just a little rot at the other end of the deck board I could see the nails or screws failing there and the center joist simply acting as a fulcrum as the unlucky homeowner puts his foot through the deck. At least with 4 joists you stand a good chance of the middle of the board still being good wood and the middle two joists providing enough resistance to prevent complete failure. Hopefully, the homeowner would notice the springiness and take corrective action before his nuts meet the deck.