mthomas1

Kurt, Kurt, Naw...no financial secrets in my marriage, I was on the bluetooth headset trying to book a job with a price shopper who cold-called off the web site - then put me on hold - at the same time my wife was trying to call me to discover why I was not there yet to pick her up - just too many balls in the air and no time to explain what was happening. Sorry if it appeared mysterious/impolite/brushoffish - it was all just to much at multi at once for my tired old mind. ---------- If I'm available I'm always up for a look at an interesting property, and a chance to learn more about how the camera actually behaves.

Hmm... just did my first inspection with my new cam (Fluke). My normal procedure is to check every suspect (for example, missing kickout flashing) roof/wall junction at the interior with a meter if accessible. This time I checked the wall with the cam first... and caught an intrusion (verified with the Tramex) at a location where I would probably not have caught it with the meter alone, about 5 feet out from the gutter above a window header and out of arm's reach of where I would normally have set up the ladder opposite the eave to meter the wall. Knowing it was there, it was possible to work out the logic of how water could have likely traveled along the header, but even knowing it was present there was no evidence of the problem at the wall's surface visible to the naked eye. If this is typical of the increase in the number of problems I'll be finding, I am going to have to think more carefully than I had supposed about marketing and price. As for liability, I can see some considerable upsides. For example last summer I had clients complaining about water intrusions after very heavy rains following a long dry spell. There was no way I could have predicted the likelihood of subsequent problems at the time of the dry spell inspections, but in the future when I find (for example) questionable flashing over windows and doors I plan to image the areas and archive the pictures. If there is a subsequent water problem I will scan again, and hopefully not only be able to demonstrate based on the image's differences that excessive moisture was not present at the time of inspection, but also turn the client's perceptions around by being able in some cases to assist in diagnosing the immediate problem, and perhaps even pick up additional work checking the entire property.

I've got around $600 in various ladder accessories, and my only regret is that I did not spend the money the first year in the business - as my wife frequently reminds me, "Dead inspectors write no reports". At 60, and 5'8", I find the 32 footer a challenge single handed, but still do use it occasionally. One thing I would strongly suggest is a good set of adjustable legs, the higher the ladder the more important it is to have it exactly vertical side-to-side when you are going up to tie off. I use these as they adjust easily and snap on and off, it's that much less weight to carry around until you need them: http://www.globalwholesalersinc.com/quick_connect.htm http://www.globalwholesalersinc.com/_ladder_leveler.htm Often when I'm using this ladder it's to access three story flat roof, in which case there is often not much ladder above the roof edge. In such cases I use a pair of these, you can tie off to the gutter and step *through* the ladder rather than going around it: http://bestmaterials.com/detail.aspx?ID=15566 they are surprising light, and make roof access a *much* less stomach churning experience, especially if you are in a tight situation where you have had to set up more vertically then you would prefer.

All I'm gonna' say is: I've been interviewed several times for newspaper articles (none related to home inspection), and what's said often has little resemblance to what's printed.

I've caught a few by probing the newly painted bottoms of stringers, etc. for rot - it's not conclusive, but it's suggestive, and it adds weight to a report of possible concerns.

in the case of the flip-up type, the argument is that the "face up" requirement in 406.4(e) is violated as the face of the box is pointed upwards and level with the counter-top. I've read that these: http://www.mockett.com/default.asp?ID=4&action=detail&partCode=PCS39/EE/HW are UL listed for kitchen counters, but I don't find such a listing in the specs on the site.

Best to check with the local AHJ, some will not approve any type of "folding" outlet box on a kitchen counter surface. My favorite solution if you don't mind the look is a Lew Electric "floor nozzle". This one has outlets on both sides:

Just wondering: Image Insert: 168.83 KB

If that's stucco over lath over housewrap, with no bond-break between the stucco and the housewrap, and you believe Joe Lstiburek, they have bigger problems than that: http:///www.buildingscience.com/documents/primers/bsp-063-water-managed-wall-systems/attachment_download/file

I try to use them whenever possible when I suspect that whoever may be called to correct a defect may not realize it is a defect, for example: http://www.paragoninspects.com/pdf/elec ... utrals.pdf

5 gal heater trashes high-school lunchroom: http://www.safteng.net/Accident%20Photo ... losion.htm

How did you and the owner decide who got which?

Not quite in Kurt and Bill’s class, but I’m happy with the result: http://img65.imageshack.us/my.php?image ... erhead.jpg http://img65.imageshack.us/my.php?image ... Bottom.jpg http://img65.imageshack.us/my.php?image ... N_Post.jpg http://img67.imageshack.us/my.php?image=Stairs1.jpg http://img53.imageshack.us/my.php?image=Stairs2.jpg York Spiral Stairs laminated the stringers and handrails to spec in their press, I did the install and trim carpentry.

I've seen Kurt's canoe up close, it is truly a work of art.

One thing you may want to consider: when you are selling your house a few years from now, and one of us comes through to inspect if for the buyer,there are aspects of that plumbing that will indicate to us that it was a DIY project. If the property is located in a area that requires permits for such work, the buyer will have a legal responsibility to correct unpermitted work later discovered by the AHJ (whoever is responsible for permitting and inspecting such work) even if it was performed by a previous owner . So the inspector will almost certainly suggest that the buyer check with the building department to determine if your work was permitted and inspected. If not, and this check arouses the interest of the building department, you may find yourself paying a heavy fine in addition to having to tear out ALL of the unpermitted work you have done in the house - my small cash strapped city collected 4.8 million dollars in inspection fees and fines last year, and unpermitted DIYers become a "revenue source". My suggestion is that you have that work corrected as required by a licensed plumber, and inspected by the AHJ if required.

Actually, though the drain line is wrong I've seen much worse installs, for example it's nice to see those Webstone valves as it makes backflushing the unit much easier. If you are new to tankless units some things to watch for when inspecting their the relief valves are that 1) tankless manufactures generally specify PRVs rather than TPRVs (though local codes may still require the latter) and 2) the larger capacity units (such as the Takagi T-M1) require higher capacity PRVs than most of us are used to seeing on residential water heaters. If you don't see a lot of tankless units these you may find this useful, it's a page I've put together based on my experience installing and inspecting tankless units: http://www.paragoninspects.com/tankless ... l-faq.html

I quit lighting pilots on dormant equipment unless I absolutely have to years before I started inspecting, when an access panel of a boiler at one of my rentals went half-way through the panel of an exterior wood door on the other side of the basement . (Missed me however, though my hand and arm had a pretty good "sunburn".) There was NO gas smell, or I would have discovered why before lighting anything. So. To keep the heat on if one of my own buildings if it's below freezing? Yes... VERY carefully. To satisfy a real estate agent or client? No way! It's like Kurt's story about sticking his hand in wet sumps 'till he finally got a shock - IMO, as it is we already unthinkingly do enough hazardous stuff that sooner or later it occasionally catches up with us.

Eric, As I'm not familiar with these I looked up the site: http://www.hydromatic.com/ But I'm still missing something, what's the issue with testing these? - Thanks

For the heat tapes to work it's quite likely that you will also need to run them into the gutter and down the downspouts and leaders (the commercial "self-regulating" types work best). Also, there have to be correct drip edges / other appropriate flashings installed, and the gutters or other water control means have to be properly placed, pitched and fastened. Usually, the heat tapes will require a dedicated circuit. However, assuming the roof membrane is intact and the roof edges, fascia and gutters are detailed properly, if properly designed and installed the commercial heat tapes will solve your problem, and can eliminate ice damming when other measuers will not.

Meanwhile, what I came over here to ask: I've never seen a calculation of the efficiency difference between a CAT IV furnace supplied by internal/external air in a typical heating climate. If anyone is aware of one, I've be interested in reading it...

Kurt, I actually ended up researching this a while back, Chicago's greatest recorded snow depth was 29 inches of snow on Jan. 14, 1979, so to meet the 12" rule in Chicago the vent terminal should be at least 41 inches above horizontal external surfaces. IMO, the problem is not so much "snow" as the accumulation of frozen condensation in wet snow, I've seen this happen when the furnace has been off for a few hours in a "setback" period and exhaust passed through a down-turned elbow above a roof - the blockage was not total, but it was enough to trip the back-pressure safety switch.

"Sill muffler" is a new term to me - GOOGLE turns up several references, but no picture.

This article discusses up a number of changes not mentioned in others I've read: http://www.iaei.org/subscriber/magazine ... anche.html

Exactly. OK, it happened. But looking at that exhaust/intake setup, I would have supposed it unlikely that more than a few percent of the exhaust was being returned to the intake. Or, looking at Randy's pics, how likely does it seem, "intuitivly", that that much recirculation would would occur given that gap, absent an operating furnace and enough humidity to make the flow visible? Certainly an eye opener for me, anyway - I've always taken this sort of stuff very seriously, but I'll now report my concerns with a much higher degree of conviction that it might be an actual, as opposed to a theoretical, hazard.

That was pretty much my line of thought as well. I searched the State of MN site referenced in the graphic, but could not find an incident report or analysis.