mgbinspect

I'm pretty much in Scott's camp - HomeGauge here. I also input the lion's share of my observations on a PDA, out in the field, and sync to my desktop later. Like Scott, I inspect and report by system and my report is pretty comprehensive (both check-box and narrative which meets complies strictly with ASHI SOPs). Major defects and deficiencies; safety concerns; industry wide materials defect concerns; noticeable cosmetic defects or deficiencies that a client might question; and grand-fathered sub-standard installations are all noted. These days, with the advent of software, I'm averaging about four hours (+/-) per inspection (about 2 - 2.5 hours on site and another 1.5 - 2 hours in the office). I'm still very much in the trial and error phase of HomeGauge and am fully confident that I'll eventually trim about 45 minutes of the process. I don't include model or serial numbers in my report, but I DO photograph such info for my own records.

Well, WELCOME Scott!

Tom, I agree...! A couple of weeks ago I inspected a $380,000 home that was going FHA! Lower down payment and lower interest rate is why they did it, or so I was told. And, that's the part I don't get about FHA. If a "first time home buyer" can afford a $380 K home, why do they need special considerations or help? I just don't get it... They were not first time home buyers, they just did not have the money(5%) to put down for a conventional loan and then the three months of reserves(3 months of house payments in savings or in the bank) that they require you to have. FHA requirements are much more relaxed. Got it. So, FHA isn't just about first time home buyers anymore. I remember when I got an FHA loan on my first house, I could transfer the loan, but I couldn't get another FHA loan. Things apparently have changed?

Tom, I agree...! A couple of weeks ago I inspected a $380,000 home that was going FHA! Lower down payment and lower interest rate is why they did it, or so I was told. And, that's the part I don't get about FHA. If a "first time home buyer" can afford a $380 K home, why do they need special considerations or help? I just don't get it...

Hmm.. As far as how we got in this mess - I wonder. I've always thought the intent of FHA was to assist first time home buyers in getting their feet wet. Sometimes, I wonder if the process continues to serve that interest. Around here well over half the foreclosures I see are big homes, which clearly attests to other practices that were running wild like: Stated income applications; 80/20 loans (100% of value); loans for 125% of the value of the home, ARMs (which I've always thought was flat out insane), etc. (Now, the second one, I pulled off myself, but I fully understanding the consequences and got it converted quickly with an end result of an almost instant 25K equity.) I think the REAL problem was that there were so many lender's reps comfortable throwing out loan tactics that were meant for savvy high rollers that clearly understand what the they're doing - GAMBLING. Unfortunately, thanks to a lot of wheelin' dealin' lenders, many poor folks didn't grasp the fact that they were gambling in a great big financial game of musical chairs, and they finally found themself chairless. It's all water under the bridge now, and most of those tricky investment options are GONE even to those who could actually use them to proper advantage. As usual, the bad apples have spoiled the entire barrel.

Glad to be of service!

I've had Chrome on and off my PCs a few times. At first, it seemed pretty zippy, but eventually it always seems to begin to bog down. Here's a site that I've been referring to for about ten years to help me consider software and services. It's definitely a commercial site, so one has to take the reviews with about as much salt as they would Motor Trend Magazine. That being said, here is their 2011 review of the top ten internet browsers: toptenreviews.com

Mike, was zonolite any easier to work with? Marc That name doesn't ring a bell. It was always Perlite and Vermiculite that was called for on these government jobs. As you probably know, architects tend to spec products based upon which building product sales reps have been calling on them to keep a product in the forefront (at least that's how it used to be anyway). That insulation deal sometimes became a big problem, though, because schools, jails, and a lot of commercial buildings all had the electric within the masonry. Sometimes we'd be ready to roll in the morning on a wall and the electrician wouldn't show up to install conduit and boxes ahead or along with us. In such cases we found ourselves with a field cost of about $2.50 a minute. We'd usually give the electrician about en minutes max and then raise the cotton - shame on him. Our only alternative was to knock the crew off and send them home. So, that electrician had to deal with added expenses to re-insulated the affected cores and some masonry patching. Fun times...

Looks like Perlite to me, as well. We used to use it as core-fill (insulation and sound dampening) in masonry walls for school gymnasiums, classrooms, etc. The tiniest hole in the wall down near the bottom, permits that stuff to sift out just like a sand clock until the core was empty. It made doing such things as installing an electrical box after construction a real pain.

Could it be plate steel hung from I-Beams? We used to work with that detail all the time on commercial work and schools. If so, a connecting plate would be welded to the hung-plate and the bottom flange of the beam every 16" O. C. to make installing masonry easy. The plate would be down approximately one to two courses of brick from the beam, again to make installing the masonry easy. The real tip-off will be that the plate won't bear into the masonry - the beam will two courses of brick above, so the plate will be obviously hanging. You'd have to look close, though because the plate will usually only be about .25" shorter than the whole opening, which means the gaps will be about .125" per end. Don't ask me why, but flashing was never called for in that detail. (It was over steel angles, but not steel plates.) In fact, it would be VERY hard to flash that affair with all those connecting plates. Maybe that's why they didn't bother. At any rate, if the warping is about every 16", that's my guess.

Sweet! It's cool how the puzzle pieces always fall together if you look and think hard enough. Well done!

There's a fair amount of ceramic tile here used in hearths and fireplace profiles in Richmond, but it is actually tile. It tends to be super tight joints, since they'd fall out otherwise due to the heat. The tiles are similar, in proportion, to brick, but are about maybe 2" x 6" - cute! I can't say I've ever seen a true glazed brick, but it may just be the area. Richmond, being the capital of the confederacy, has a TON of homes build pre-Civil War, but they tend to lean heavily toward Greek Revival, Georgian, Federal (now that's ironic) and some Victorian - lots of brick. The oldest known structure in Richmond was built in 1750.

Thanks for the pics, Mark! Having reviewed them, Bill is right, as usual: It is original work. There are header courses. The white appears to be surface applied later and removal was in progress. I'm pretty confident that during the removal process, they elected to leave an occasional brick white for affect. Typically the only colors would be the red range and the very dark bricks resulting from ironite in them. Enjoy that inspection. I love old homes. Our whole downtown area is block after block of homes over 100 years old. It's great.

The left profile does seem to, but I question the right profile. Hi Bill! I have never seen white flashed brick on an old historic building. Have you? It would be a first for me. I suppose they could be power washing off the paint or lime wash and leaving some white? It is rather stark where the white starts and stops, so you may be right - they're in the process of removing paint or lime wash. As Bill states, if they're sandblasting, the surface is compromised and the brick is going to be a lot more porous than it used to be. You may be right. It is VERY difficult to tell tell on the original photo, but I now that I lifted the photo to my desktop and did a bit of contrast and brightness adjustment, I think I may see a header course as well about a foot below the upper windows. And, come to think of it, I seriously doubt a wrought iron or steel cantilevered balcony support would be hanging on brick veneer. So, it probably is solid masonry. It appears I might have jumped the gun. And, me as well, Mark at mgbinspect(at)gmail.com. As I wrote, my interest is peaked, and I look forward to learning what you discover when you actually inspect it. I've never had a problem with being wrong, and I may very well be. That's how we learn, and an ego tends to be a hindrance to learning. [:-graduat

Mark, when your up close, it will become very obvious if the white is applied or leeching out. I hope Bill's right, because if it's efflorescence, there's virtually no lasting remedy. Do let us know what you learn. My interest is peaked.

OK, here's my suspicion: That is an added brick veneer. Why? 1. The chimneys are on the outer walls, but don't appear to be flush with the outer brick work. 2. The white flashed brick on the right half of the home aren't consistent with old bricks. 3. There definitely aren't header courses. As far as the white walls, boy... I really HATE to even think this, but it really appears to be the case: Sometimes brick masons used a salt based anti-freeze (accelerator) in the winter time to work much closer to freezing temps. That crap will leech out forever and can really look HORRIBLE just like that does. If that's the case, a professional can carefully remove it, with muriatic acid and a power washer, but it will come right back in a few seasons. The patterns of white could indicate some past moisture intrusion that was not addressed for a very long period of time and caused that efflorescence. Again, I wish I could get right up on it, because it would be a lot easier to really tell what's happening. But, I'm betting on anti-freeze and moisture past moisture intrusion. Please let me know what you learn, as I'd like to study this one myself. Take good close up photos of the white portions so it's easier to identify. PS. I even find myself wondering if the original house wasn't the front door and the two left windows - termed as a "half house", and the right portion was a later addition. So many possibilities. You've got your work cut out for you on this one.

The basic colors in brick come from the clay used and minerals added, like iron, etc. Newer brick often have an aggregate face applied just before it goes into the kiln - kinda like shake-n-bake, but no shake. It's all ceramic science. Way back then, they really weren't typically as into a wide range of color in the bricks. Most of the color range reflected just where the bricks were in the kiln and how well fired they were. the softer lighter colored (more porous) bricks were used in the interior wythes, because they really weren't suitable for the exterior. And, those soft bricks also received nails kinda like wood does. It's actually humorous that when masons re-claimed bricks and used them as veneer, they didn't do what the old wise colonial masons did - not use the soft bricks outside. That poor decision led to a lot of deteriorating bricks on homes built in the 70's and early 80's.

If there are not header courses to tie wythes of masonry together, it's not original work. Although, I must say that often old homes here will have a veneer front (still over solid masonry) without headers, but the corners will be inter-locked into the side walls in a quoined corner fashion. And, if the outer walls are wood framing, the masonry is not original. It was pretty common to white-wash brick back then. I wish I could get up close, because I could tell you for sure what's what. But, beyond what I've shared, Bill Kibbel is probably the guy that can offer some good insight regarding what is consistent with history.

The house may be that old, but I doubt the masonry is that old. It's difficult to tell from your photos, but that appears to be a veneer and they weren't doing brick "veneer" back then. It was solid masonry or nothing. The white bricks in the right hand side would suggest that it's most likely used (re-claimed) brick, as brick weren't coming out of kilns with a white flash.

Hm. Sounds like I may need to back my numbers down from 600 - 800, which I got many moons ago from an HVAC contractor. Anyone else out there using something other than the two spreads discussed here?

"Consult with a licensed HVAC contractor regarding the heating and cooling system, which might be undersized for the dwelling, based upon common standards." (I usually go with 600 - 800 SF / Ton, but have been cautioned by a couple of HVAC guys that those numbers aren't as applicable, in newer tighter homes, as they used to be.)

Well, Ron, I suppose the thing that I'm struggling the most with is the monthly fee - a bit hefty in this day and time. I do value my time and am willing to pay for things that are convenient and save me effort. But, the fee goes a bit beyond that in my mind. I'm still mulling this all over, but a markedly reduced monthly fee and a higher fee per report that produces makes more sense to me, as a home inspector. That's more my thinking. I'm sure there are some groups that find the service and the fee WELL WORTH IT, but for what I do, it's tough. And, of course, the monthly fee would be good for a large multi-home inspector firm, but for me as a one man band, it's a considerable expense. I"m not trying to put you on the spot here, so don't feel any pressure to respond. I'm just offering food for thought from a home inspector's point of view. I still LOVE the idea, but I guess I hate paying for something when I'm not sure it's really paying for itself. Think about it and maybe shoot me an e-mail if you come up with something more home inspector friendly. I'm going to give it a bit of time, but I think what I've said above is what's stuck in my craw.

That's pretty much what I was thinking as well. Both the diameter of the exhaust leaving the water heater and the grill on the outside make it apparent that pipe is not suitable. Although, I always thought when they use the outer pipe for intake, the bonus is that the combustion air is being pre-heated by the exhaust?...

Ron, Thanks for your input. I had indeed called the rep to cancel, and she convinced me to hang around at least through the cut-off date of the thirty day free trial to give the product a fair trial, which I am doing. Nothing would please me more than to be able to come to a property armed with reliable permit information in hand through a simple "click" on-line. That's why I bit, and am reluctant to cash 'em in. It's a slow week ahead, so I'm not going to have much to throw at you for a few days, but I do intend to take your service for a good test drive hoping for the best. Thanks again for stopping by, which was completely unexpected. All the best, Michael G. Bryan President MGB Inspection Services

Isn't that the truth. But, actually, snowboarding requires very little of one. It's far less taxing on the body than skiing, with less injuries (from the waist down) too! The prevalent injury is broken wrists from going down girly style - hands out to break the fall. The main motion of snowboarding is so dang simple that one hardly breaks a sweat - simply arching forward and sitting slightly back on the board. That's the entire motion of snowboarding - a walk in the park compared to skiing. When falling backward, just keep your arms in and roll over yourself, and when falling forward break your fall with your forearms as in judo.