Richard Moore

Great service drop!!! Tied to the original insulators which is then tied to the mast using a piece of rusty bailing wire (tough to see in the photo). FUBAR!!! Download Attachment: 0026.JPG 75.92 KB #2 cu SEC's to a newish panel with a 200-amp main breaker. Normally, I'd call that but then there was this handwritten note inside the panel. Download Attachment: 0046.JPG 29.8 KB That makes it all OK...doesn't it? [:-propell

Something a little different... 1907 bungalow, post and beam foundation. The brick furnace chimney extends as normal through an 8:12 roof. Download Attachment: 0033.JPG 44.61 KB In horrible condition inside and out...gas wall furnace venting into it...but that's another story. What I have never seen before is that approximately 16' of brick chimney just ends about 3 to 4' off the floor. Download Attachment: 0041.JPG 35.89 KB The walls back and side of the chimney appear to be normal thickness (no hidden cavities) and are located roughly over the central 6 x 6 beam in the crawl, but there is no other or special support down there either. I imagine it's been like this for all 99 years...but can it be right? All that weight somehow being supported by a corner of the stud walls?

It all sounds terribly efficient at first glance. You would need a very, very detailed published price list, which I'm not comfortable with. My main objection would be giving up the option of turning down clients when I suspect total dozer bait or something else just doesn't feel right. I used to grab every job. I have the luxury of being a little fussier now. I'm sure I have lost an inspection or two because I was deep in a crawl and couldn't answer the phone straight away. I'll willing accept that loss rather than not knowing what I'm getting into.

Ain't nuthin' wrong with re-using good custom boilerplate that expands on a particular finding. It would be stupid to re-invent the wheel each day. It's the automatic (or preprinted) irrelevant padding that should be avoided. "Ummm...the shiny home maintenance manual is very nice, and it's very interesting that you disclaim elevators and escalators, but exactly where did you report the defects in my single story ranch?" is not something I ever wish to hear?

I'm not normally one to blow my own trumpet, but I just received the following e-mail from Wednesday's client. The timing seemed too perfect not to post it to this thread... Richard, THANK YOU. Kristen and I really appreciate the time you spent, your attention to detail, your communication style, and the thoroughness of your work product. Your report was definitely a breath of fresh air compared to other ones I've seen...it's very easy to read and devoid of all the boilerplate garble I've seen in standard forms. The last inspector we hired was so rushed and quick talking and he just checked off boxes and scribled some barely legible remarks --- it seemed like wasted $$ and so after that experience we weren't excited about hiring another inspector. Well, I am so glad Tamaira referred you and I must say that after reading your website vs. the 5 or 6 other companies' / individuals' sites I considered, I was impressed but somewhat skeptical...well, after the first hour yesterday I thought wow, Richard really lives up to his marketing! Once again, thanks. And I know I'll be referring you to anyone who may need an inspector. Dave and Kristen Chad said "...it's an honest pleasure to provide well." Gotta agree!

I'm with those that test for static pressure and recommend a reducer (or repair if one already exists) when over 80 psi. Agreed that pressure can vary somewhat day to day, but when I see 120 psi I gotta report it. It's almost the first thing I do when I get to a house. I always run a little water first to make sure I'm not getiing a high reading from thermal expansion and usually try to read it at the rear hose-bib as some newer homes have the front bib feed before any reduction valve. As for CMA, it is one of those "snapshots in time", and so I take and save a picture of it! Download Attachment: 0007.JPG 43.24 KB

Chad...If someone was discussing a belly band at the exterior of a house, I would guess that it's the mostly decorative wide horizontal board or molding often used at the transition from bevel to shingle sidings, or just to break up an otherwise boring vertical "wall-o-siding". Of course, that would need appropriate flashing. Did I mention that's just a guess? It could also be Scott's waistline, but I believe that is self flashing...and not a pretty sight when it is!

Mark...Jim probably has a better explantion, but my crude one is... The donut is a magnetic device, much like a clamp-on multi-meter, that senses the amperage flowing through the conductors and can be used to drive a remote or second meter. I've seen it a couple of times in homes that have been converted to "duplexes" or have mother-in-law apartments. In those cases it was the feeds to a sub-panel within the smaller unit that were being monitored. The extra meter was inside though in both cases...presumably the landlord (read homeowner) did the calculations on splitting the electric bill and charging the tenant. Did ths home have "separate" quarters?

Damn...I missed the donut! That doesn't happen as often as it should. [:-chef] MIL?

I agree with Erby. For one to be a "sub" of the other there would have to be a large 2-pole breaker on the bus bar with 3/0 feeders. Don't see that. Plus you have the two meters, which is unusual, but another indicator that both panels are service equipment. I'd say you have a 400-amp service.

"The box has apparently been placed around it to keep combustible fumes away?" Or...that used to be the raised platform and someone decided to remove the shelf and sink the new water heater. If it's fixed and "air-tight" then there is no access for observation or service. If it's not fixed then I doubt that it would keep gasses out. Either way it's gotta be wrong. Makes for one hell of a drip pan though! I agree with Jim...tell them to raise it.

Not sure where I got this, but you might want to print it out and carry it with you. YORK (Unitary Products since 1984) Note: they skip the letters I, O, Q, U, Z. Year of make indicated by 3rd letter in the serial number. 1971 - A 1972 - B 1973 - C 1974 - D 1975 - E 1976 - F 1977 - G 1978 - H 1979 - J 1980 - K 1981 - L 1982 – M 1983 – N 1984 – P 1985 - R 1986 - S 1987 - T 1988 - V 1989 - W 1990 - X 1991 – Y 1992 – A 1993 - B 1994 - C 1995 – D 1996 - E 1997 - F 1998 - G 1999 - H 2000 - J 2001 - K 2002 - L 2003 - M 2004 - N 2005 - P 2006 - R 2007 - S

Here it is...he also posted it over at "one of those other sites". Download Attachment: fakestone.jpg 64.07 KB

Donald...are my eyes deceiving me, or are those PEX lines being crimped by the nail-stops? Connecting directly to the valve should be OK assuming the fittings are designed for PEX, but the REST of the set-up looks screwy! Doesn't the valve need some support directly behind?

Well...I'm one of the Brits, but I left the old country 32 years ago, long before I had any interest in roofs. I couldn't even tell you what was on the roof of the last house I lived in, although I was there for over 12 years. Probably the only roofs I bothered to look at back then were the quaint thatched ones. Wish I could help but never heard the term "compressed concrete tile".

I've used my Tele-steps for almost 2 years now. I know I managed before without it but you would have to pry it out of my cold dead hands now. Best bang for the buck I have ever spent on a tool! I've never actually seen an X-tend & Climb but I understand they are almost as good...just operate a little differently I believe. I think you will be more than happy with either one.

"eensy weensy", "teeny tiny"... Man, I love this tech talk! Can I get an "itty bitty"?

Do you carry a change of underwear?

If there's any more room in Brian's corner, I'll join the party there. [:-party] I call them if they don't fit the deadfront knock-outs, or otherwise appear to be an "odd fit" on the bus bar but, if everything else looks cool, nope. I can't remember ever seeing a mix on new construction. I would probably be more picky there.

It's a good thought Troy, but it doesn't work in this case. I've done a number of new homes by this major builder in this huge development. Those that have had jetted tubs all had the GFCI protection at a receptacle in the master bath closet. None of them have had any GFCI breakers at the panel. So...no, I don't see that as a mitigating excuse. I'm guessing it's the same guy who constantly crushes or disconnects the heating ducts in the crawl. Grrrrr. But...I'm over it now. [:-spin]

Mike... I think you'll find that the Germans have Photoshop. Either that or they are quite remarkable at parking a bunch of duplicate trucks in exactly the same spot. Still cool though.

This really bugged me today. Download Attachment: 0033gfciafci.jpg 34.18 KB New construction, 3600sf 5br/4ba home by one of the major builders. The labeling was clearly marked that the four bottom left breakers all served bedrooms. The fourth up was clearly marked master bedroom. At first I thought it was just an off-color test button but, no...once I had the cover off it was clearly marked as a GFCI breaker, clearly physically different from the AFCI breakers, and it took my GFCI tester (not AFCI) to trip the outlets in the master bedroom. Keep in mind that I have never seen a GFCI breaker in any of the panels in other new homes in this large sub-division (all receptacle GFCIs). I guess I'm having a hard time with the sparky (or probably his apprentice} not noticing or not caring that it was clearly a different and wrong breaker type. Ok...rant over...get back to your weekends.

This is from my Italy trip last year. Download Attachment: Italia2005147.jpg 165 KB Everthing is masonry, and the conditions in the photo are not that unusual. Note the "repairs" around the new windows. I don't know how you could be a home inspector there.

Ahhh...I see. I think you meant "common internal trip". Still don't know if that applies to all or most 220 handle-tied breakers. Someone else...please!

You know, I'm not sure about that. Obviously, in the case of a double-pole breaker with a single toggle, the linkage is internal (although I assume it's still "mechanical"). I thought that those with 2 toggles were basically just two separate breakers "glued together" and the handle tie was the tripping mechanism for the other pole. I could be wrong there. BTW...I believe the term "internal trip" means that a breaker will trip even if the handle is held in the on position, and doesn't refer to tripping of the second pole.