Richard Moore

I'm with Mike on that. Any strange readings just mean you have to dig a little deeper or test a little further. Simply put...A line/load reversed GFCI provides NO protection whatever at the actual GFCI receptacle as the contacts are still hot even when the unit is tripped, but would still protect downstream receptacles. Newer GFCIs won't reset if reversed but the old one's will. If you only use the test button you should always check for current after tripping. I always test both ways. In my experience, it is fairly rare for a GFCI to trip with the test button but not with the Suretest...but it happens. I also had one once that would consistantly take 4500ms (4½ secs) to trip. Honestly...I won't pretend to know exactly what "failing" the Suretest GFCI test indicates other than a GFCI that is not reacting normally. That's enough for me to recommend replacement for safety. We are only talking about a $15-$20 part. I'll eat that if I get it wrong.

Good point, Fritz...and correct. The Suretest would be applying the ground fault on the line, or wrong side of the circuitry and it wouldn't trip.

Assuming Steven has one of the newer units (61-164 or 61-165) that isn't true. The new ones don't "talk" to you like the older ones but instead display an LED version of the the 3-light tester, albeit with some differences...flashing lights in some cases and a false-ground indicator. It's not as obvious, especially if your attention was on using the new gizmo to test the GFCI. I like the better contrast, but miss the words. I've heard of, and personally had, other problems with Suretests, but I've not heard of the GFCI test being bad before. At the risk of repeating myself...Steven should try it out on some good or new GFCIs before assuming it's the tester.

The tester won't work if you have an open ground (test button) will. Also, the newer units require you hit the GFCI button twice...you did that? If you are seeing 6500ms (6½ seconds) as the result, then the tester is saying it didn't trip. Have you tried it at home?

I have to say that finding an actual bootleg or false ground is rare, and not to be expected at all on newer homes, but, on those very few occasions, like this one last week, it makes the Suretest worthwhile. This was a 1925 home and all VISIBLE wiring had been "upgraded" (if you like floating J-boxes in the attic). No 2-prong outlets and every other receptacle tested OK. I found this one in the middle of the house. I guess they couldn't figure a way to snake the new wiring to it. I have had problems in the past with false "false" readings and so I pull the cover plates, and receptacle if need be, anytime I find one unless it's right next to the panel. Image Insert: 101.25 KB

[:-bonc01][:-bouncy][8D][:-smile_g[][:-spin] Thanks Bill...I chuckled out loud!

Ahhh, that's what you mean by "streaking". Not what I was imagining at all. So Jeepers...the ends of each 3-tab section are notched so that when butted together they have a similar gap to the two between the tabs. That's the theory. I'm guessing that the end-notches on these particulat shingles are slightly oversized and the result is a noticable difference every third "gap" as they stagger up the roof. It's purely cosmetic, but I have to agree it's pretty damn ugly. I don't know that that will go away! Send the photo to the manufacturer and ask them if this is "normal".

I just looked at 25 year Tamko online and they look like very "plain Jane" 3-tab shingles. http://www.tamko.com/ProductDisplayPage ... fault.aspx Regular "diagonal steaking" sounds like something that must have occured during the manufacturing process. So, the question is "Is it permanent or will it wash off in the first rain?" I think I speak for most here when I say "I haven't a clue!" given the limited information. If there's a professional roofer involved then, of course, he would be your first choice for info (and satisfaction). If this is a DIY job, then I recommend you contact Tamko at 800-641-4691 or, perhaps, the dealer.

Mike, I agree with you in principle, but to defend the line "All accessible receptacles were tested and showed proper polarity and grounding."; the emphasis is on the word "accessible". Just trying to report what I didn't do as well. I should point out that I grabbed the sample from my new (empty) house template. A more typical report would read... "All (other*) accessible receptacles were tested and showed proper polarity and grounding. I do not move furniture or appliances or unplug any electronic devices and therefore some receptacles may be untested." (*"other" used when I have previously reported a receptacle problem)

Randy, The attached is a "standard" electrical page, assuming no issues. Generally, if I test or inspect a component, appliance or area I'm going to say something about it, but that might simply be "No concerns were discovered" depending on the object. I can't say I'm crazy about all the "look good"s. Does that mean they are simply attractive or are they actually functional? How about "All visible roof penetrations have been flashed in an appropriate manner" or "The gutters are in good condition and reasonably clean"? One way of improving the wording might be to imagine what you would actually say to the client if they were standing there at the end of a component inspection. Download Attachment: ElectricalNoIssues.pdf 110.15 KB

Love the masking tape. Talking about inappropriate materials, I had this yesterday in a house full of amateur quirks. I guess they couldn't make up their mind whether duct or electrical tape was the best plumbing repair. Like the trap in the background? (Pic is a little wierd as I had to stick two together) Image Insert: 117.9 KB

Yep...roughly 15 PSI for every 34 feet. Kind of funny in that you'd think a home right next to a water tower at the top of the hill would have good pressure but probably wouldn't (depending on the height of the tower).

Yeah, on SFRs and townhomes. Only takes a few seconds, so why not? One added benefit is that I often find hose bibs with major leaks at the handle stems during the test. Just a washer or two to fix, but it would be a pain to a client the first time he/she tried to use it.

Unless it's a hard-wired batch processing disposal the NEC allows the wall switch to serve as the disconnecting means (always assuming I'm reading the code correctly). I'm with Jim regarding older houses for interior appliances. The NEC wording is "capable of of being locked in the open position". As most breakers are "capable" of being fitted with a lockout device, even if not currently present, I don't see that it's a big deal. If the guy replacing the dishwasher every 20 years is that nervous about homeowners going to the panel and deliberately trying to electrocute him, then he probably carries a selection of lock-outs. I see a need for them during construction but much less so once everything is installed and the panel is under the control of the homeowner. I don't think Jim is being "inconsistant". He's just applying common sense to the situation.

Present are a number of equally polite and intelligent people. There is a seller and their agent, a buyer and their agent, and a builder who had recently done some significant additions to the property. Politely explain that the presence of the seller, the listing agent and the builder will hinder your ability to confidentially report your findings to your client, will likely just prolong the process, and politely suggest they all go and have a three-hour cup of coffee. ...one of those persons is charged with the responsibility of implementing a Code of Ethics directly related to that home inspection. Wow...do you get a badge for doing that? [] Seriously John, I think you're overanalyzing things. It's all really simple: 1: Client pays you. 2: You do your best for the client. 3: You shoot anyone that gets in the way of that. OK...maybe just 1 and 2 (and a less violent version of 3). "Codes of Ethics" sounds very professional but, in reality, they're written to try to prevent a few unethical apples from spoiling the bunch. Most of us (I hope it's most) instinctively understand the job we are are hired for, who is our only concern, and would operate exactly the same way with or without a "code".

I find myself stuck on Scott Pat's incitement of theft from the neighbors... "The water heater is working, but it is old and replacement is not far down the road." [] I go with variations of... "The water heater, at 15 years old, is at the end of its life expectancy. Although it is possible that it could continue to function, I have to recommend immediate replacement as a preventative measure." Which leads me to offer "although" as an alternative to "however" in the original example. IE: "The water heater is old although it is still working". However, there's still something odd about that.

At the high end, I've seen copper once (pretty, but not sure how that's going to wear and age). At the other end of the spectrum, plain old painted plywood "decorated" with pot rings and scorch marks.

I went looking for anywhere it says photo-eyes are required. I found the following at http://www.cpsc.gov/businfo/frnotices/fr00/garnpr.html If I'm reading that right, it seems that "Inherent force activated secondary door sensors" might be "acceptable". I read through the WD iDrive manual again and, interestingly, there doesn't seem to be the normal user force adjustment control. It's definitely a very different beast from the normal opener and, as much as I dislike the lack of photo eyes, WD may be meeting the UL requirements. It did reverse very easily with light pressure at the halfway point. Still...wouldn't do any harm at all to add or include the damn eyes, would it now?

Hi Scott, Both the 8000 and 9000 series are roll-up, segmented types. Does anybody still make a tilt-up door? Anyway...the difference is the design at the top and bottom of each panel and the way the hinged segments join. To quote WD from their brochure..."Pinch-resistant design helps push fingers out of harms way if accidentally placed near a closing door." Having spent almost a year growing back a couple of fingernails after stupidly pulling a disconnected door closed by grabbing one of the joints during one of my early inspections, I can appreciate the anti-pinch bit. But...I still don't see why that would negate the need for a normal safety reverse feature.

My first one of these... Image Insert: 64.28 KB 1980's home but the garage door and opener were obviously very recent, so I was surprised when I couldn't find the photo eye reversing sensors (not even in the rafters [] ). So...I dug through the Wayne-Dalton site and found this in the installation manual (my hi-lite). Image Insert: 82.66 KB Wassup wit dat!!? Since when have the photo eye reverse feature been an anti-pinch rather than anti-entrapment feature? BTW...if you google this opener, there seems to be a lot of unhappy customers out there. Anyone have experience with these?

"The state board of home inspectors revoked his license." I was thinking that's one plus for state licensing but then there was also this... "...he pleaded no contest in Jefferson Parish to a reduced charge of misdemeanor theft for stealing a Rolex watch worth several thousands of dollars during a home inspection in February 2002." How many strikes does it take to get your license revoked (nevermind going to jail)?

And to answer Jesse's question from before...here's the page from the Miele install manual. Download Attachment: mieleinstall.jpg 109.96 KB No high-loop or air-gap required. At least by the manufacturer.

Here's a photo of another area of the house. Download Attachment: 0035.jpg 50.3 KB The bottoms of the tubes looked to be in good condition with only the cut-out areas kind of ragged. I don't actually know if the slab extends down around them though.

Hi Bill, I'm recommending duct cleaning, not only because they were filthy, but to ensure no blockages. It's doubtful our NW types of termites (subs & dampwood) would find the conditions particularly appealing. My thinking is that as long as there's good airflow and it's been this way for 50+ years, it's really not a big deal. Even if the cardboard has deteriorated, there's still a "tunnel" in the slab. What do you do when you find these?

Ok...this is new for me. 1951 rambler, on a slab (which is rare around here). The furnace heat supply ducts appear to be no more than cardboard form tubes embedded in the slab and cut out at each register opening. No signs of any coating (asbestos, etc), just a lot of dust and dirt. Normal return ductwork, through the attic. Anyone seen this before? Very good air flow at all registers, but it just don't seem right. Comments? Download Attachment: 0034.jpg 108.2 KB PS...the Pergo installed over the carpet was a nice touch (and a separate issue). Finally, the Coleman furnace appeared to be brand, spanking new but the serial numbers don't seem to conform to anything I've seen on the various forums. Model FC85080A12DH11B, Serial # W0B7424908. Anyone able to shed some light there?