hausdok

Uh, that'd be me - Michael Patrick Joseph Aloysius O'Handley. And you thought you had a mouthful. OT - OF!!! M.

Hi Gary, Thanks for reminding me that I have one more as-of-yet-unfinished humongous project ahead of me. [:-bigeyes OT - OF!!! M.

Hi Scott, No, Ambrosia is referring to an expanding fill phenomenon they apparently have in the Montreal area. Pyrite is iron and when it's in soil it can corrode and expand the same way it does when it's used to make steel and is used as rebar in concrete. According to the link I posted, it's a real problem in the Montreal area. Still, it certainly doesn't look like an expanding fill problem to me; I think it's efflorescence. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

What's with the dinky short eaves? Makes the house look like a kid with and 80's high cut. OT - OT!!! M.

As Tweety Bird would say, "He don't know me vewy well. Do he?" OT - OF!!! M.

Since you're in Montreal, I suppose it could be Pyrite but you'll need a local expert to tell you more. Have you seen this? ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi, It looks like efflorescence coming up through a concrete basement floor that probably doesn't have any kind of moisture resistant barrier beneath it. is it an older house? ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Nah, You're over-thinking this. There's no conspiracy by franchises or large employers. Why should anyone expect to become a "professional" at any trade without putting a substantial amount of time and money into doing so? What is it about home inspectors that they think this business should be as easy to get into as going down to MacDonald's and filling out an application to flip burgers? You were in the military; do you know how many thousands of dollars are spent on training each soldier in his/her respective skill at AIT? It's unfortunate for those coming behind us that they're going to have to spend more to get into the business but that's just the way it is. Me? I spent $17,500 just for the franchise fee alone. On top of that I had to purchase the franchise mandated truck, spend more than two weeks in Seattle going through training, and then purchase $1200 worth of tools and equipment from the franchise before I could even open my doors. Even with that, I still don't think that my initial training was enough, so I have no sympathy for anyone who is pissed off because they can't easily and cheaply go from flipping burgers to inspecting homes. If I were king, this business would require not less than two years of college in related disciplines, every inspector would need to go through at least a one year internship, and take a very difficult test - including an on-site peer review - before he or she could hang out a shingle, purchase a franchise, or be permanently hired by a large firm. Guess it's a good thing for folks in the business that I'll never be king, huh? ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

You sure Jimmy Hoffa isn't in the middle of that concrete? OT - OF!!! M.

Hi, OK, now I think I understand; it's ok to inspect homes in Virginia but if you call yourself a "certified" home inspector and haven't completed the certification criteria established by the state, you're breaking the law. It's only a guess, but I'm thinking that whoever put that together was trying to prevent clients of a well known public relations firm that has "certified" in its name from calling themselves "certified" inspectors in the state until such time as they've met the certification criteria. That's actually not a bad idea. I can't begin to tell you the number of times that I've answered the phone only to be asked whether I was a "certified" inspector; then when I calmly explained to the caller that there wasn't any such here in Washington State, they often get indignant and insist that there must be some kind of licensing and certification law in place to ensure that inspectors are competent. When I explain that one would expect so, but there isn't, I'm sometimes asked how it can be then that there's a whole association made up of nothing but "certified" inspectors. That's when I tell them, "Sure, and there was even a 12-year old who earned one of those certificates without so much as having ever done an inspection, that's how legitimate that "certification" is. So, do you want to book that inspection or not?" That rule in Virginia makes sense, because it forces them to operate without duping the public into believing that "certified" in the title of that public relations firm, which purports to be a home inspectors' organization but is in reality a private company with many thousands of clients, means that they actually are "certified" and thus have met some officially established criteria when they haven't. In your case, the state is saying, "OK, if you want to tell people you are "certified" you first have to earn a state-recognized certification before you can tell people that. The requirements themselves shouldn't be too hard to obtain within a year, so the requirements certainly aren't onerous. However, given the way clients of that firm constantly imply that their "certification," such as it is, is somehow real, I should think that unless the state of Virginia has a large enforcement budget that it's impossible for them to police those new inspectors who violate the rules. So, you're at a disadvantage for the time being. Until you've met those requirements you can't get your license, so when someone calls and wants to know if you're a state certified inspector, you'll have to tell them that you're not and they may hang up and go hire a state certified guy because they think that the state's endorsement will somehow have imbued that inspector with more skills than you. That's just the way it is; you'll have to get used to it. It looks like you should be able to spend 2 - 3 night a week in school for a semester or two and while concurrently completing your 50 inspections. That really shouldn't be that hard at all. Sometimes I hear new guys say to established inspectors, "Why should I have to meet such criteria; what what did you do when you got in the business. I know that you didn't go through all of that training." They'd be right in many cases; however, that'd also be true of any other profession you can name. In most cases, when a profession is relatively new, people make it up as they go along; then at some point folks in the profession decide to get together and become more "professional" and they begin establishing criteria. The first generation to go through that criteria are always the ones squawking about it. After that, subsequent generations accept it as the norm. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Yeah, A gap filled with backer rod and then a layer of caulk on top of that. Around here, they'll sometimes coat the caulk with the same stuff used to top-coat EIFS in order to make it look like mortar. OT - OF!!! M.

Hi Steven, Click on the picture to enlarge it. It's definitely a steel lintel but it's hard to tell whether the ends of the steel are sitting on top of the bricks or against the sides. OT - OF!!! M.

I don't understand the non-compete thing. I know that franchises and large companies like US Inspect, which is Virginia, use it, but I don't see independents doing that. I've trained other inspectors, have never forced them to sign a non-compete agreement, and have never had them take any business away from me. In fact, none of them are doing inspections today because, being so new, they couldn't compete in this market (There are about 150 inspection companies at any given time operating in the greather Seattle area). I don't understand how you could have a licensing law and it's voluntary. Does that mean that you are not required to get a license? If so, what's the problem; you can still gradually get the 50 inspections required and be able to apply for the license, no? Are those 50 inspections required to be done under supervision of someone else or can you do them on your own? For a process to be fair, it needs to have a way to credit experienced inspectors yet still hold them to some kind of standard. When the experience requirements were put in place here they said that new inspectors had to get 120 hours of approved education and get 40 hours of supervised training, plus take a test with a state component. However, for those who'd already been in business for two years and had already done 100 inspections, the 120 hour course and the 40 hours was pretty pointless, so they allowed that group to challenge the requirements simply by taking the test. It laid out a clear path; a new inspector could take a course and then ride along with an established inspector for a week to get the 40 hours of supervised training. At the end of that, the inspector could take the test. Pass the test, and the license is issued without requiring the rookie to have X number of inspections under his belt first. There is a long period of time between now and when licenses are required - for those with less than 8 months experience right now, they have until July of 2010 (27 months) to garner the 120 hours and ride along with someone for a week. For those who have more than 8 months experience right now, but haven't yet completed more than 100 inspections, they'll have until September of 2009 (18 months) to garner the remainder of those 100 inspections. I'm not familiar with your system, but if it places unreasonable obstacles to those entering the profession it might not even be strictly legal, depending on your state's constitution, unless it provides more than one path to entry. If that's the case, it's time to assemble a group of folks and begin working on finding a sponsor to submit a bill to get the law changed. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

There's your answer. you need to get air moving between these vents. Were there gable end vents as well? Add more vents under the eaves at every rafter bay, close the gable end vents and ensure that the total vent space at the eaves is evenly proportioned with that near the ridge. Sounds like they need to do more to ventilate the home. I wouldn't associate one condition with the other. Not if the barrier is installed properly. If you're not seeing moisture issues on the rim joists at the perimeter of the crawl where the framing is coldest, it's probably not moisture from the crawlspace that has anything to do with the attic issue. Nah, it's just a few basic principles to understand. You want to talk headache? Give me a column of figures to add together and you can physically watch as my head deforms into putty. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

If I were King, it might go something like this: 1. I'd get together a coalition of inspectors from various inspection organizations as well as independents. This group would be the initial focus group. They'd be allowed to also become evaluators, but would have to undergo exactly the same screening criteria that they've set for all evaluator candidates. 2. The focus group establishes experience/education criteria for evaluators. Then, because they need a uniform starting place, they establish a screening cutoff point for a passing score on the NHIE below which all evaluator candidates are eliminated. Why the NHIE? Because it's put together by inspectors from all of the various associations, as well as independents, and it provides a consistent point to determine whether those screened have the bare basic skills needed to be an inspector. To be an evaluator, the passing score would be well above merely passing. 3. The focus group contacts as many inspectors as possible in a given geographic area or county looking for those interested in becoming evaluators. Those who are interested submit applications listing their background and experience. From these applications, the focus group culls those who can't meet the experience/education criteria. What remains becomes the candidate pool. 4. Once a pool of candidates has been established, the focus group arranges for several test houses and sets up a 2-day evaluation process - preferably in a centralized location in the state and arranges for the testing firm that does the NHIE to conduct the NHIE at that location. Upon arrival and registration, everyone in the pool takes the most current version of the NHIE. Those who fail to achieve the cutoff score are eliminated from the pool of candidates. They may remain for the remainder of the seminar, so they can learn about the process in the event they want to try again at future sessions, but they may not be chosen for the initial pool of evaluators. 5. The inspectors then receive training about how to conduct an on-site peer review and are taught how to fill out the forms properly. That ends day one. 6. On day 2, from the pool of folks that pass, groups of four are chosen; one of whom is designated as the testee and the other three as evaluators. One by one, the testees inspect those test homes and are evaluated by the other three. Those who pass with sufficient Go's, move into the pool of "picked" candidates, those who don't pass are eliminated from the pool and told to apply again at the next application screening. 7. The remaining inspectors, including those who've passed, are shuffled into groups of 4 again and the process is repeated until all candidates have been evaluated by three other persons and either accepted or rejected. 8. Those who remain become the initial group of evaluators. They'll be authorized to conduct one-on-one evaluations of inspectors who request peer review through the administrator. 10. Periodically, train-the-trainer and understanding the peer review process seminars are conducted throughout the state to familiarize those interested in becoming peer reviewers and periodically the 2-day selection process is repeated using different houses in order to qualify new evaluator candidates to be added to the pool. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

WHY doesn't Apple, Inc. fill their ad space with a list of technical features? Their competitors do. If you are an Apple customer, the WHY has something to do with the obvious and elegant design. The assumption is that if it looks this amazing...it probably is...and YOU are smart enough to get it. The message is...we're the other guys, the anti-Microsoft (anti-establishment)...the ones who are going with the flow instead of battling the current. The WHY is extremely cool. My friend Simon Sinek is teaching me about the WHY. Be sure to join our next Teleseminar on April 15th. Simon is our Guest Star. Simon is the master at asking...and helping you answer...the BIG question. My WHY? I believe in the power of business. I believe that YOU have everything you need...in your head and your heart...to discover how you can deliver your unique gifts and services to the world...and to be rewarded for that. And, as you receive you expand. An honorable exchange of our gifts and services with each other across the planet is a beautiful thing. It's our best shot at world peace. You can do that. You can build a business of your dreams. Whatever you want. I can help you pull that idea out of your head and focus your actions. I can help you be a good financial steward. Mostly, I can help you see that you have everything you need...in your head and in your heart...to be do and have anything you want. Business is an amazing way to express your WHY. Want to share your WHY with me?

Dear Ellen, I crunched the numbers. I came up with a selling price that is three times the going rate in my market. My competitors have been in business for a hundred years and they seem to be doing OK. What am I doing wrong? Your truly, "Crunchy " in Muncie Dear "Crunchy," Remember the story of The Emperor's New Clothes? The punchline is that everyone knew the Emperor was naked but they all thought that the other guys were 'smart' enough to see his clothes. Once the brave young lad in the crowd shouted out, "Hey, the ol' geezer's naked!" then the crowd was free to say, "Well, he is!" Don't assume that the competition, the other guy, knows what he is doing in his business. Don't copy his selling prices because I bet his prices have no basis in reality. He made them up. He figured the other guy knew what he was doing and copied his pricing. No wonder so many businesses stink. The Emperor is naked, my friend. Your competitor may no idea what he is doing. You can make money. You crunched the numbers. You now have something to aim for - your financial goals. Good for you. Now keep score and run your Balance Sheet and Income Statement every week. Compare actual numbers to your budgeted goals. If you are reaching your goals, terrific! If not, raising your prices is an option. The key is to charge what you must and figure out how to add so much value that your customers say, "He is expensive. But he's worth it because he doesn't waste time (shows up on time, works without making a mess, knows what he is doing, is the only guy who understands radiant in this market, etc.)" Xoxo$$, Ellen Got a tough question? Bring it on! If I don't know the answer, one of my smart friends will...and I'll share our advice right here!

Hi, I saw it when it came in via Google Alerts but I didn't use it. It feels like a puff piece aimed at consumers; not home inspectors. I bypass about 15 or 20 of those a week. I didn't run it because I thought he'd written it himself as a way to get his phone ringing. The tip-off is the writing style and that there aren't multiple sources for the story; only one inspector is quoted, and the 'inspector of the year thing is thrown in right after he's introduced into the piece. No reflection on the inspector; he might be the best inspector on the planet for all I know, but I usually look for stuff that will be of interest to inspectors that's not specifically aimed at consumers. Naturally, if you're writing a fill piece for a reporter to use in order to get folks to call you, you don't want to put the name of other inspectors in the article. Lots of guys do that; they gin up a piece, send it to a reporter, and then the reporter re-writes some of it and slaps their own byline on it with the blessing of the inspector. There's nothing wrong with it; you'll see it done with pretty much every business out there. Want to make it look less like a puff piece? That's easy, just get together with another inspector to help you write an article and drop in quotes from both of you; you'll get fewer calls aimed at you, but you'll both benefit. Heck, it was one of the marketing techniques I was taught by the franchise I used to be involved with; they even provided me with instructions for how to lay out an article, examples of puff piece articles, and tips for how to get the attention of reporters. I mostly didn't use it because I didn't think it had any real information in there of real benefit to inspectors and was concerned that it might perpetuate the spread of inspectorlore. I have run puff pieces over the years when I thought they had information of value for inspectors but a few times I've just used them for filler material. I bet you'll be able to spot them if you try. Bonnie, if you're reading this, that would be a good topic for your writing course; show these guys how to do a puff piece that doesn't look and feel like a puff piece. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi Mark, Could it have been a once-in-a-lifetime type of circumstance? Did the flooding reach the furnace? If so, and it had flooded previously, it would have been pretty hard to completely remove the water line from every inch of plenum or ducting at floor level. If you didn't see a water line in there, and none of the basement framing that was accessible (under the basement stairs for instance) had water stains on it, then maybe it never flooded previously. The past few winters have gotten progressively worse in terms of rainfall. I haven't had past customers call me about flooding until this year; and those who did have lived in their homes for years without flooding. One guy has lived in his home for 8 years and never had a drop get into his basement until this past winter. This year it was just too much. The ground couldn't absorb any more water and hydrostatic pressure was forcing water into homes everywhere. OT - OF!!! M.

Raymond, Your post says that you want to reach non-aligned home inspectors, but that link requires one to register with an association to get access to the survey document. Is it possible to find the survey at a site where one can view it without registering? Perhaps if you know Mr. Mullen, you can prevail upon him to post the survey at another location such as the National Certification Program site where they can print it out without registering. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

[:-bigeyes [:-banghea [:-boggled [:-gnasher [:-headach [:-hypnoti [:-irked] [:-nonono] [:-ouch] [:-banghea [] [:-scared] [:-cry] [:-shake] [:-sick][:-taped] [:-weepn] [:-wiltel] [:-yuck] [:-timebm] [:-banghea I'm just expressing frustration with the whole radon thingy. First it's bad, then it's not, then it's bad, and then it seems like the government drones have been lying to people for years. Jeez! What the hell is one to think! Yesterday, for only about the 4th time in 11 years, a client who'd moved here from Portland expressed concern about radon. I explained to him how the state radiation guru had said that the only "hot" spots in Washington state are in Spokane and in the Vancouver area (just across the Columbia from Portland), but that if I wanted to do the testing in order to give my clients a warm and fuzzy, sure, go ahead. He seemed to understand, but his wife was having none of it. She expressed solid conviction that she knows it kills people, so it looks like they'll need to do some testing before she feels safe. I gave them the name of a reliable local environmental testing lab. OT - OF!!! M.

You know, Lewis, I really wish you would refrain from perpetrating these unsubstantiated claims about "those behind licensing" - especially since you never attended any of the sunrise review meetings to talk to other inspectors or voice an opinion on the matter. Ascribing an ulterior motive to those you don't even know, and without any facts to back up your claims, only breeds ill will. After the signing ceremony yesterday, I spent a few minutes talking to Senator Spanel. I asked her very directly if her impetus to license inspectors was in some way connected to those in the state who are involved with educating home inspectors. She said that it absolutely was not, that the only contact or correspondence she'd had with any "educators" was to call one or two to inquire about what was available for training here in the state after she decided to go ahead with the idea. I asked her if she'd been motivated by established inspectors who were intent on limiting their competition. She denied that too. I was a criminal investigator half of my 20 years as a cop; after having conducted tens of thousands of interviews of victims, suspects, perpetrators, and witnesses to crimes, I think I have a little bit of experience reading people and I know when someone is lying or stretching the truth. She wasn't doing either; I'm sure of that. She might have been misguided and motivated by stories of poor inspections that were blown up in the press about the same time she began this process, but I don't think she was talked into it by any educators intent on rolling in the gold, or old timers looking to protect their turf. I admit that I once thought that might be the case, but after interviewing her yesterday, I think my fears were unfounded. As for WHILAG, the only persons in WHILAG who were instructors for any schools are myself, the WSPCA guy who dropped out of the group over a year ago and was opposed to licensing from day one, and an interNACHI guy who dropped out of WHILAG that was the one who tried to get Rep. Erickson to initiate a licensing law back in 2005. He quit WHILAG and opposed this law because it didn't have any E & O written into it. Nobody else in WHILAG, except myself, teaches home inspections. My course is only for appraisers, investors, and realtors to understand the home inspection process. The community college I work for has been putting together an online course for inspectors for years and it was in the pipeline before this process begain. Incidentally, I'm on a part-time salary. It doesn't matter if I have one student or 1,000 students, I still get paid the same - 20% of what a full-time instructor does for one semester every fall. That salary is set by statute and it's not a whole lot of money, believe me; when I tried to get someone else to take it over, when I thought I was taking a leave of absence for a year, nobody would do it when they found out what it pays. There is no grassy knoll here, Lewis. That would be my model too; except I'd require them to submit to a peer-review and re-test every 5 years. Unfortunatly, what you and I want matters little to politicians unless a preponderance of their constituents are pushing for it. Since a miniscule percentage of inspectors in this business want peer review and only about half, based on my experience, are in favor of a standard test, that's not likely to be the case anytime soon. In an event, it's now a moot point; the law is what it is and all the arm waving and hollering in the world isn't going to do anyone any good. What inspectors here need to do now is stop dissing each other, come together, discuss this thing, and figure out who they'd most like to see serve on this board and then approach those people and try and get them to subject themselves to the abuse and ridicule that's going to come with the job during what's going to be a very tough next few years. All good questions and there's no way to answer that until the Department of Licensing garners the applications, reviews them, makes their recommendations to the governor, she appoints a board, they get to work, and come up with answer to all of those questions. Hell, there isn't even a board yet; lets give them a chance before we start implying it can't be done. Have you even bothered to read the law? There will be enforcement in the law; that is clear, and it will be DOL's responsibility to see that it get's done. If it doesn't, there are procedures that have been in place for decades in Olympia for dealing with enforcement issues that come under DOL's responsibility. Maybe so. Unfortunately, this isn't Oregon or Idaho, is it? ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

I love it when a plan comes together! [George Peppard] OT - OF!!! M.

Hey, loved the song; just couldn't stand the lame slide show. OT - OF!!! M.

Finger hovering over the delete key on that last one.