hausdok

Has anyone seen one of these yet. OT - OF!!! M.

WASHINGTON, Dec. 18 The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) today applauded Congress for passing legislation to eliminate taxes on mortgage debt, noting that it will help struggling home owners to avoid foreclosure. “This bill helps to address the subprime lending crisis by preventing strapped home owners from taking a significant tax hit to restructure their mortgages and allowing them to stay in their homes,â€

Lot's of theories here but little fact. If there's no prohibition against it, I can't see spending mental effort trying to figure out why some unnamed person at some unnamed time did anything. Come to think of it, I don't try to figure it out even when there is a prohibition against it. It is what it is - dwelling on it for more than a second doesn't seem necessary to me. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! M.

Jerry, I've been meaning to ask; is it actually on the floor or is that a shelf built around/under the panel that someone's covered with tile? OT - OF!!! M.

No, immigration has nothing to do with the prevalence of bubba construction. The fact that there's a large percentage of poorly-educated immigrants with no formal training in western framing and construction techniques working in the construction sector is entirely our own fault. We prize independence and the right for anyone in this country to do anything they want to the detriment of our population. In England or Germany, a student has to go to a trade school for at least three years before he gets turned loose as an apprentice on a construction site. He or she then works for a set number of years before he becomes a journeyman and it's many years later before he or she can be called a master builder. Other old world countries have similar systems. It's a simple fact that there are some folks that immigrate here from other countries who are better trained at construction than many of those native Americans who are today considered old hands at construction. So, immigration has nothing to do with it - it's the fact that employers are forced into a situation where they have to accept unskilled labor and do the best they can with it or go out of business. That's a fact of life for builders. In this country, although there's plenty of educational courses to teach folks how to build properly, very few places actually require folks in the construction trade to actually be educated in construction, in order to work in the business, and there's nothing stopping Joe-Bob, Esmeralda, Jose, or Ivan, who've never had any formalized training in construction from getting into the trade. In fact, since we make it so damned expensive for builders to stay in business, they can't afford in most cases to pay a really decent wage and the only people who want those jobs are the Joe-Bobs, Esmeraldas, Joses, and Ivans who don't have the training or experience to qualify for a higher-paying and less dirty/less labor-intensive job. Most colleges can't make money on the construction programs because most smart young folks these days want to go into computers,IT, or something similar where they won't have to get dirty. In the old world they prized tradition and learning the job right and still do in many countries. We prize keeping the cost low and getting the job done quickly. To do that, builders have to keep the cost down and that means hiring just about anyone they can to fill many of these jobs. Yes, there are many folks in the business that care about producing a good product. Yes, there are many in the business who've had an excellent construction education. However, the sad fact is that there aren't enough to keep up with the demand for trainers and the number of people who are now in the second and third generation of learning how to do things sloppily and wrong has grown to the point where things are almost out of control. Oh, by the way, when I'm talking about lack of decent training and trades being flooded with those who're marginally trained, I'm also referring to our own. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi, Well, I agree with most of your comments, Randy, but improperly installed I-joists are a common fact of life here in the Northwest too. Believe it or not, there is a lumber company in Snohomish County that sells a "framing kit" to builders that consists of custom-made 9-1/4" high I-joists that are matched to conventional 2 by 10 rim joists. The lumber company has an engineer on staff that says it's perfectly alright and they've been selling builders those kits for the past 20 years. Now, the other side of the story - the I-Joist manufacturer's design engineers, the Wood I-Joist Manufacturer's Association (WIJMA), and the APA-Engineered Wood Association's engineers have all condemned the practice and the manufacturer won't warranty the joists. Worse, even though the manufacturer makes a custom squash block for all of their joists, and can tell a builder exactly where to put them so the joists will be properly reinforced, the lumber company isn't selling any of those with the kits and the systems aren't being reinforced. When I discovered it and started revealing it to homeowners, one of the builders that uses the system tried to sue me in order to shut me up and prevent me from inspecting any more homes in the developments they'd put in. You'll find these in a lot of homes - especially in Snohomish County because the lumber company is in Arlington. Look for I-joists matched to conventionally-sawn rims and the name "Cascade Lumber Company" stamped on the side of the joists. If you get any of these, you need to make the buyer aware that, according to the APA-Engineered Wood Association, they'll be sitting on a structural failure time bomb, and, according to the I-joist manufacturer, the lifetime warranty on the joists is null and void. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

In this article, a new Canadian franchiser is seeking the perfect beat-up house to use as an office and a test bed for his inspection staff and franchisees. To read the article, click here.

Hi, Yes, I think your statement can be proven true. However, it's also possible to prove it false. I think you'll find that there are fewer problems related to accumulated moisture in older leaky homes than there are in newer "tight" homes. Have you ever seen a ventilation issue in an old turn-of-the-20th-century balloon-framed vernacular home without any attic vents? I haven't. I think that a lot has to do with the building materials used. Around here, I've looked at thousands of homes built before the 60's with plastered walls. Most have one-by T & G wall sheathing (some, no sheathing), little to no vapor barriers in the walls, and nothing more than gable end vents. Some don't have any upper vents at all, and have only eave vents instead. Nonetheless, I think that the overwhelming majority of them are doing fine. Conversely, I've looked at newer homes where the walls are covered with modern gypsum that's primed with a moisture-barrier PVA primer, there's an emulsion coated vapor barrier on the interior side of wall insulation, and they're sheathed with plywood or OSB, where one sees lots of indicators of moisture on the underside of the roof plane. Obviously, some of these modern materials tend to increase stack effect instead of allowing moisture to diffuse naturally outward as with older homes. Most of these new home configurations look fine; others don't. Last March I looked at a new home delivered in November 2006 where the underside of the roof was covered with what I initially thought was green paint. It turned out to be mold. Eave vents and ridge vents, but also gable end vents. Almost no air convecting through the attic. The house sits in a little hollow surrounded by trees that screen it from sunlight. The gable end vents are oriented east-west but the wind blows primarily south-to-north here. The house's whole-house air change system was not functioning at all. It's hard to say whether it's the whole-house system's failure or a combination of vents and poor orientation that caused the underside of the roof to get like that in such a short time. One might blame it on the failure of the air change system; but, then how do you account for the exact same configuration in a home without an air change system, where the house is oriented to the sun and wind differently, and everything is fine? There really is no one-size-fits-all solution to any of this stuff. It's one of the reasons that it's so important for folks in this business to actively study as much building science as they can. If I were King, I'd sign a decree forbidding anyone from getting into this business who hadn't attended at least a year of college with some building science woven into the curriculum (That would, by the way, result in my getting myself kicked out of the business as well.). Without an understanding of the way building science works, I don't really see how anyone can do a competent inspection on anyone's home. Then again, maybe that's just me. After all, I have been called a commie dictator on more than one occasion. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi Chad, If we're talking about ventilation theory in general I'd say that, in theory, gable end vents shouldn't work well when used in combination with upper and lower roof vents and should defeat the system. I'd say that scientists who deal with this stuff have, in many cases, proven them to be, if not ineffective then marginally effective, and have proven that they can actually be counterproductive, because they'll reduce the amount of convective draw from the eaves and this, in turn, can sometimes cause portions of the underside of a roof plane to remain damp instead of drying out as it should. I'd say that there's plenty of documentation to back that theory up and it can be found on various websites and in various texts; Dr. Joe's site and the ORNL site are good places to start, if you're looking for something in writing. You could also look at study done by the University of Illinois (or whoever the hell it was) that did the study for Certainteed that backs that position. I'd say that the effectiveness of gable end vents can hinge on a number of factors, with building orientation, age, and type of construction all playing a role in how well, or how poorly, they work. I'd say that, for everyone that wants to argue about how many homes they've seen with gable end vents where there aren't any issues, you'll be able to find an equal number of homes with gable end vents where you will find problems. I'd say that I think it's convenient in this business to argue for gable end vents, given the fact that it's difficult to argue against them when they're still being installed so widely by so many builders, and because so many inspectors will talk about how they've never found them to be problematic. However, I think that building scientists will argue to the contrary and be able to show that, in theory, they do defeat roof ventilation when you are relying on convective airflow through eaves/soffit vents to ridge and/or jack vents to move air through a roof plane and keep the underside of a roof plane dry. Have I said enough? ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

If you took that away, you should give it back. There is absolutely nothing in the NEC that would even suggest that a splice in an electrical enclosure is improper. What you were probably reading about was section 312.8 where it places some limitations on using panel enclosures "as junction boxes, auxiliary gutters, or raceways for conductors feeding through or tapping off to other switches or overcurrent devices, unless adequate space for this purpose is provided." It then goes on to define what adequate space is. It only applies to stuff that's feeding through the panel, not stuff that's originating in the panel. - Jim Katen, Oregon That was something that Jerry Peck was constantly harping on, back in the day. Nobody seemed able to make him understand the rules for overcrowding in panels and pass-through raceways. S'funny, I'm an idiot when it comes to electrical stuff but it seemed clear enough even to me. Listen to Jim, he's got it right. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi Jim, You forgot the attachment, no? By the way, isn't the Floguard manual somewhere in the TIJ library? OT - OF!!! M.

Hi All, Most of the newer Trane furnaces I find have the manufacturing date clearly stamped on the label. My decoding chart, which I've put together with the help of many others over the years, says that Trane's dated serial numbers begin in 1971 and that age was initially a number followed by a letter in the serial number. Example: 1C-xxxx = March 1971, 81, 91, 01 (Use common sense to distinguish one decade from the next.). Then, beginning somewhere around 1982 the date of manufacture is stamped on the ID plate. However, there have still been a few instances when I've had fairly new Trane furnaces where the date was not stamped on the label and I was left scratching my head, trying to figure out when the thing was manufactured. Well, I think I've figured it out. I've been looking closely at the Trane serial numbers for months now and I've noticed that the first digit of the serial number corresponds to the year and that the next to digits correspond to the week of the year. For instance, the last two Trane jobs I did: Trane XB furnace, Model# TDE1B0809451AA, Serial# 7165RHA1G is stamped that it was manufactured in April 2007 Trane XB furnace, Model# TDE1A060A9361AA, Serial# 6132FD1G is stamped that it was manufactured in March 2006. So, if you get one of those tricky Trane data labels that doesn't have a date stamp on it, look at those first 3 digits to see if they'll fit within the time period that you suspect the furnace was manufactured. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

After reading this article about the day that city housing inspectors in Lancaster and Pittsburgh, PA had, you'll be more than happy to put up with manipulative real estate agents and ticked off sellers. Click here to read more.

It's possible that water got into the motor somehow and fried it but it's unlikely. These things are designed to suck moisture-laden air out of bathrooms. They're subjected to dampness all the time. OT - OF!!! M.

That's not going to siphon any trap dry, it's too far away from the first trap to do that. Don't know why anyone would put a trap there. OT - OF!!! M.

Hi, Go here: http://www.rd.com/familyhandyman/content/18312/ or here: http://www.rd.com/familyhandyman/content/17556/ OT - OF!!! M.

Here's a story about a lady chasing odors in her house. There's a mold guy involved in this story too. By the way, when I post links to articles like this, there's often a way that you can respond to the author of the article, the same way that you respond here, so provide feedback from a home inspector's standpoint when you can. I dunno, reading this story, early on it occurred to me that a rat might have gotten up under that island cabinet and expired there. Sometimes the simplest explanations are the ones that nobody thinks about. Enjoy: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07349/841500-30.stm OT - OF!!! M.

Guess what; the repair is going to be miserable and costly. Did you check the lable on that ITE panel to see whether it's listed for 42 stabs? That's a lot. Bet some of those need to be moved to that sub-panel. OT - OF!!! M.

Hi Jim, Yes, thanks for taking the time. I'm still having trouble wrapping my head around it but that's just me. Like I said, I'm not really wired to understand this stuff well. Randy kissing Jim? Be afraid, Jim, be very afraid. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

No, What they are saying is do your homework thoroughly before you send these folks a dime. About 4-5 years ago a piece of shit named Michael Napadow took a whole lot of inspectors for an expensive ride when he scammed them out of thousands for E & O policies that didn't exist. Check them out with your state's insurance commissioner and anyone else you can before you commit. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Here's an APA technical paper on how to properly attach and suspend fire sprinkler systems from APA performance rated I joists. As with anything on the APA site, you'll have to register to gain access to it, but registration is free, only takes a minute, and they don't spam you. To reach the paper, click here.

Yeah, Well, in that circumstance it was especially dumb because there was a ground bus there, screwed directly to the enclosure, and the electrician that installed the sub-panel chose not to use it, left it empty and improvised his single mondo-cable clamp. I can't anwer Jim's question. I'm just not "wired" to understand this stuff very well. To me, I don't see the difference between these two panels and a split-bus panel. OT - OF!!! M.

WASHINGTON, Dec. 14 To help alleviate the current housing downswing and allow the Federal Housing Administration to insure mortgages for more home owners, the Senate today approved legislation that would improve the capacity and flexibility of the FHA to serve the credit needs of subprime and other challenged mortgage borrowers. The bill passed by an overwhelming 93-to-1 margin. "The nation's home builders applaud the Senate action to modernize the FHA to allow the agency to carry out its mission to spur housing opportunities for America's working families," said Brian Catalde, president of the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) and a home builder from El Segundo, Calif. "The measure would offer borrowers a safe and fair mortgage alternative to the volatile subprime market. We urge the House and Senate to move quickly to iron out differences between their bills and bring this legislation to the President's desk before year-end." Faced with a severe deterioration in the availability and affordability of housing credit during a period when FHA's programs have failed to keep pace with procedural and technological advances in conventional mortgage loan programs, S. 2338, the FHA Modernization Act of 2007, would enable the FHA to respond to the needs of borrowers and play an important role in stabilizing the mortgage markets. Specifically, S. 2338 would: - Increase the current limit for FHA-insured mortgages to enable deserving potential buyers to purchase homes in more markets across the country. - Grant the FHA authority to establish greater flexibility in setting downpayment requirements for its single-family programs. - Simplify requirements for condominium loans, which are often burdensome and differ significantly from the rules applied to mortgage loans for detached single-family homes. - Allow the FHA to insure more "reverse mortgages" and increase the maximum loan amount for such transactions. ##### Source: NAHB

Ah, no Brian, the ground bus (in that case - terminal) was connected directly to the enclosure. The main bonding jumper in that circumstance was connected to the enclosure and only used to bond the neutral bus to the enclosure in the case of a main panel. In a sub-panel that neutral bus needs to be left unbonded. The main bonding jumper in most of the older panels I see bonds only the neutral bus to the panel's enclosure and to the ground bus via the enclosure. Since the panel I looked at was a sub-panel, there should not have been a connection between the neutral bus and that enclosure. Yeah, I've seen lots of new panels where the equipment ground bus is isolated from the enclosure and there needs to be a screw or strap connecting the enclosure to the ground bus but not in situations where the bus is mounted directly on the enclosure without an insulator. Those don't even come with a bonding stap or screw for the equipment ground bus; it's always on the neutral bus. See? Toldja so! ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hmmm, Well, yeah, except that it might be an FPE panel. I think there's a little more to it than that. I think that it means that there aren't any reasons known to the inspector doing the inspection to call for repair or replacement. Keep in mind, though, that what one inspector terms "satisfactory" might be unsatisfactory to another inspector who's been better educated about homes and systems and has more experience. I'm glad that I don't have to labor under such a system. Since I do a full-narrative report, the description of the house's components and systems proves that I've looked at something, so I feel that if I don't find an issue with something there's no reason why I have to state whether it's "satisfactory" or not. I prefer to list only the stuff that I find unsatisfactory. My sympathies to all Oregon inspectors. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike