hausdok

Hi Richard, Please, don't be offended. I wasn't picking on the fact that you reported that - only trying to make my case for why I think it isn't necessary. There are lots of ways to do this business. It's always going to be like that until some kind of nationally recognized common standard exists that spells out more clearly what's required and what isn't required, instead of the amalgam of standards being touted now by more than a half dozen alleged "professional" associations. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Done, Vino cracked badly yesterday; so did Leipheimer. Levi blamed it on his chain wrapping around his dérailleur, but it didn't take them that long to get to him and I think he could have caught them if he'd wanted to. Crap, in the time he continued to coast down that mountain with the chain wrapped, he could have stopped, unwrapped it and taken off hard on the descent to make up for time. It's hard to believe he couldn't have fixed his own chain. Rasmussen showed his usual mountain strengths. Hincapie could still do it if he started acting like a leader instead of a domestique, but I think the idea of winning it scares the crap out of him - especially after what happened to Landis and Armstrong with the doping allegations. After all, a quarter of a mil plus a year, without any requirement to win a thing is a pretty nice nut. When you win it, you take the winner's purse and divvy it up to all of the domestiques, mechanics, cooks, massage therapists and other supports staff and keep nothing, because, as the winner, you're expected to make millions from endorsements. Three days after Landis gifted his winnings to the team, the doping allegations came out and he got zip for endorsement deals. Even if he eventually prevails, he'll never be able to recover what he's spent on legal costs and lost endorsement contracts and the loss of income from suspension. I think George is a pragmatist; he probably figures a bird in the hand is worth a dream in the bush. Vino and Levi are using classic steady as she goes tactics from The Book of Lance. Rest day today. Who knows?; they might come out tomorrow like Landis did on Stage 17 last year and wipe the mat with half of the peloton. With nearly two weeks to go it's still anybody's race. For those unaquainted with the tour, check out Versus tonight at 8:00 pm. They'll have a recap of the tour so far from the prologue to end of yesterdays stage and bring you up to speed. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Response by Brandon Chew July 15th moved here: Les, Mike covered it well. A typical day of racing runs four to six hours, non-stop. If a rider cannot make it to the finish line by the time cutoff (usually a percentage added to the winner's time), he's eliminated from the race. They usually don't go flat-out from start to finish (but sometimes they do!), and there are many races-within-the-race linked together by periods of more casual riding. During those periods of slower racing, they take care of things like eating, getting more water, heeding the call of nature, taking care of non-emergency equipment problems, etc. -- all without stopping. As Mike explained, when an equipment problem needs to be fixed in a hurry, a team-mate might give a rider his wheel or his bike, or he will wait for either a neutral support car or their team car to reach them. If a team leader winds up behind the race due to an equipment problem or to heed the call of nature, their team will usually drop back and then pace the leader back into the race. A rider usually finishes the day's race on the bike that he started on, unless something happens that makes it unrideable. Mike explained a lot of the things they do to fix things that go wrong during the race. Each rider has a bike that is specialized for the type of racing for the day -- flat, mountains, or time trial -- and they use a bike each day that matches the type of race. After a day of racing, they eat, get a massage, go to sleep, and do it again the next day. Twenty one days of racing to determine the winner. There are usually two "rest days" interspersed in there. "Rest" is a misnomer. They still ride for about four hours on a rest day, but they don't race. During a typical tour (21 days of racing) an average rider will burn about 124,000 calories (hint to those taking the TIJ weight-loss challenge). Since their body fat percentage is already in the single digits, they need to consume that many calories just to avoid losing weight (muscle mass). I hope you guys don't mind the thread drift. I try not to make it a habit and we are in the chit-chat section. [:-angel] Maybe the moderator can split the thread?

My response July 15th moved here: Ouch, The stage leader, Australian Michal Rogers, just crashed on a descent and trashed his bike something wicked. Rogers wiped out on a guard rail. David Arroyo was on his wheel, hit him and was catapulted over the handlebars and the guardrail and landed about 20ft. down the slope. Arroyo climbed back up to the highway, checked his bike, got back on and took off. Rogers had to wait for the chase car to give him another bike. Now he's trying to catch up. That's a $6,000 bike that some mechanic will have to work all night on now. The crash was partly caught on camera. I hurt just watching it. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

My response July 15th, moved here: Les, They change tires constantly during the race. Every team has chase cars carrying extra bikes, tires, repair parts, water, food, mechanics, etc. The riders are in contact with their team manager via walkie-talkies. If a tire goes flat they pull to the side and the mechanic and a tire are there within seconds to change it and get them back on the road. If they have a problem with a durailer, you'll sometimes see a team car come up alongside the rider who's in trouble and the mechanic will lean out the window and make adjustments while they are moving. If the team leader's bike goes down and they don't have another bike for him, one of his domestiques - team mates who's role it is to help him win - will give up his bike and do what he can to finish on the busted bike. One would think that they don't make much money, but domestiques can make $60,000 a year knowing that they'll never be expected to win a race and that their entire purpose in life is to be a drone and bring the leader home by protecting his wheel and making his job easier. Changing bikes really doesn't alter the outcome that much. The stars all have 3-4 bikes for every task they do - the mountains, the flatlands, time trials on flats, time trials in the mountains. Winning is all predicated on who makes it the entire 3,000 miles in the shortest time. The guy who wins a stage today might be 2 hours back by the end of the tour but at the end of the race there's usually only seconds or sometimes as much as a minute or so spread between those who are the true leaders and are favored to win. As I'm typing this, there's a breakaway consisting of 18 men about a minute and a half ahead of the peloton with about 100k to the end of the race, 55k of which is uphill on 3 category 5 and 6 climbs. Some of the most talented guys in the tour are hanging off the back just trying to keep up with the peloton, one or two sprinters are just hoping to finish under the time limit and know they're going to be left in the dust on the climbs. It's a friggin ballet conducted by team managers sitting in cars studying computers and the gps position of every other rider in the tour, trying to predict what everyone else is doing and will do. These riders are all taking in 7000+ calories on an average stage, all without a single gram of excess fat on their bodies. Controlled, self-induced torture for 3 weeks. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Response by Les July 15th moved here: Brandon, Do those people use the same bike for entire race? Are they allowed to change tires, seat, frame, etc.? As you might imagine, I still ride a Huffy!

Response by Brandon Chew July 14th that was moved here: I've been an avid cyclist and fan of the tour since 1986, the year Greg Lemond won his first one. My wife and I toured Ireland by bicycle during our honeymoon in 1990, the year that Lemond won his third and final tour. The decisive move came on a mountain stage. My wife and I were watching this stage live on TV in an Irish pub (it was rare to see live TDF stages on US TV back then) among about a hundred drunk and screaming fans. In Europe, pro cycling races come a close second behind world-cup soccer. The level of excitement there was equivalent to being in a bar watching the superbowl here, or maybe more like watching the Kentucky Derby -- except the difference is that the cheering lasts for hours instead of minutes. The first week of the tour is usually flat, and showcases the sprinters, so I usually don't watch much of it on TV during the first week except for the last hour of the live broadcasts. It gets very exciting when the teams kick up the speed during the final 30 k or so, to position their sprinters for the win. I like the overhead helicopter shots during this portion of the race the best. You don't really appreciate how fast they are moving and how closely they are bunched together until you see it from above. Phil Liggett's commentary during this portion of the race adds to the excitement. I've been busy this past week and haven't followed this year's tour action closely to date, but I did catch the portion of that stage where Vinko went down. Vinko's injuries don't look too serious. He'll just need to "dig down deep into his suitcase full of courage" [] and claw his way back up. Kloden's injury is very painful. Even though he's still in the race, I'd be surprised if he makes it through the mountains. He's probably riding to help Vinko for as long as he is able. I'm amazed by the bike-handling skills of the riders. A little later in that stage during the downhill run into the finish, Popovych and Cancellara took a nasty hairpin turn too fast and wound up going off the road. I don't know how they managed to stay upright and not run into any spectators, and then re-join the race. Lance Armstrong did something similar during one of the years he won the tour. A rider going downhill crashed right in front of him and he went off the road when he swerved to miss him. He wound up riding cross-country, cutting off the apex of the next hairpin turn lower down, and he re-joined the race without losing any time of significance. The race is moving into the mountains now, where the real drama begins to unfold. At this point I try to watch as much of the live action as I possibly can, start to finish. The decisive moves in the race usually come in the second week, in either the alps or the Pyrenees. Vinko was my pre-race favorite for the win. If he can't do it, I look for one of the Spanish climbers on one of the Spanish teams to do it. This year the race goes counter-clockwise around France, with the Pyrenees coming after the Alps. The Spanish fans and riders get really pumped up on those Pyrenees stages. Some day I want to go to Europe during the tour and get right in the thick of those crazy Spanish fans that line those mountain climbs. Back to topic. Sadly, I can't remember the last time I sat down to read a book purely for pleasure. Over the years I've put together an extensive collection of literary classics. I imagine that "some day" I'll sit in my rocking chair and start reading them. That day hasn't arrived yet -- I'm still consumed by what seems to be an endless thirst for knowledge.

My response July 12 moved here: Floyd did a good job, I got over there and there was like standing room only. About 10-15 folks asked him questions from a mike up front and he stood there and very frankly answered all of them - even the ones about the doping scandal. I overheard his publicist talking to one of the store personnel off to one side. Apparently, they'd been told to expect maybe 300 folks. I'd say there was closer to 800 to 900, maybe more. He's a quick-witted young man and he had the crowd laughing and eating out of his hand in about 15 minutes. Plenty of applause after many of his responses. After his talk, the line to his table was so damned long, they had to make about half of them go away for an hour so they'd have the fire exits cleared. After the first line was reduced to manageable size, they called in all the rest of them. Tell you what, they should forbid people to bring those damned cell phone cameras into these things. After the first idiot pulled his out to get a picture, every subsequent techie in line pulled out his or hers and the damned line took forever to wind down. OT - OF!!! M.

My response July 12 moved here: Nah, not unless that yellow jersey has the power to turn him into superman. He didn't really show that much in the mountains last year. Besides, he doesn't have the depth in the squad to keep him up front for the entire tour. He needs to be happy with what he's got, try and not drop any time and conserve his strength over the next two weeks and then maybe, just maybe, he'll have enough reserve to put some distance between him and the others. He especially needs to save his strength for the time trials. That's what he's good at and that'll be his best chance to get some distance. They've gotta be partying hardy in the Cancellara's caravan tonight after seeing Kloden and Vinokourov burn in. OT - OF!!! M. Brian G. Not sure I've ever said sports are dumb - just that I don't follow the typical US sports - baseball, basketball, football. I do like to watch full-contact martial arts, extreme fighting; soccer, biking and lacrosse, oh, and yeah, fighting crickets.

Response by Brian G. on July 12 moved here: Originally posted by hausdok Is anyone out there a Tour fan? I've been up super-early all this past week to watch it live.... Who are you and what have you done with Mike "Sports Are Dumb" O'Handley? Somebody dig up one of those infamous "fighting cricket" posts of his. [] Brian G. Waiting, Waiting, Waiting for FOOTBALL Season [:-footbal [:-weepn]

Response by Kurt M. on July 12 moved here: Absolutely. In 1976, I was the only person I knew who had a subscription to Velo News; I've been an avid fan of the tour since the days of Mercx and Hinault. I'm still trying to figure team strategies. Vinokourov and Kloden both crashing, and both likely w/broken bones, could well be out of contention for the win. Two favorites, out this early, is not good for team Astana. Do you think Cancellara has the sand to maintain the lead into the mountains? The climbs are coming.......

Originally posted by me on July 12 and moved here: Hi, Is anyone out there a Tour fan? I've been up super-early all this past week to watch it live and I'm going down to 3rd Place Books in Lake Forest Park tonight to hear Floyd Landis speak and to get a signed copy of his book Positively False: The real Story of How I Won the Tour de France. If anyone wants a copy, let me know and I'll pick up an extra copy and get it signed for you. Did anyone see this morning's stage on Versus? Alexandre Vinokourov went down and skidded so hard that he couldn't catch up. He was over a minute behind the peloton at the end of the stage and there was a big oval chunk of his shorts about 4" wide by by 10" long exposing a big part of one hip and a huge road rash. Tomorrow's stage should be interesting. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi Walter, I'm not sure why that didn't work for you; it should have, unless the file is too large. I think you're referring to the Gwinnet County deck guidelines that you used to tell folks about on the ASHI forum. If so, we've got it linked here on TIJ. Scott, all you had to do was click on "home," put "decks" into that search box on the front page, and then search "all forums" and you would have found everything you needed, including the links below, in about 20 seconds. http://www.eng.vt.edu/pdf/upload_files/Deck%20Specs.pdf http://buildingcodes.jocogov.org/docume ... 20Book.pdf http://www.co.gwinnett.ga.us/department ... etails.pdf http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dpwes/publ ... etails.pdf Walter, what browser are you using; Internet Explorer, Netscape or Firefox? Let me know, so I can try and figure out what the glitch is. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike P.S. I'm in the process of putting stuff into the file library. It's not happening very fast, because I don't have a staff and the time I have available to do it is limited. There's a ton of stuff here on TIJ that has to be uploaded to that file. For instance, searching .pdf produces 15 pages of posts where there are pdf files linked - all of which I want to eventually get uploaded into the library, along with every .pdf file that I've got archived on my own box. Do I have any volunteers that have time on their hands and want to help?

Hi, I'm sorry, Scott, but I disagree. Using Richard's report as an example, there's really no need for him to state that he's tested those receptacles and that he found them functioning normally. His description of the electrical system is sufficient to meet the requirements of any of the SOP's and the fact that he tests receptacles in every job he does is a given. If he'd not found any electrical anomalies in that house, the fact that he's described the system in such detail proves that he's looked at it and there's no point in stating the obvious - the obvious being that the system was functioning okay or he would have written something about any deficiencies found. It's like saying, "The roof cover is functional and hasn't got any leaks." Well, of course it's functional and hasn't got any leaks if you haven't reported that it's worn out, has defects or you found leaks. What's the point of stating the obvious? Then there's this. There's a ton of stuff we can't see going on in a house. If I'm in the habit of reporting on only the defects that I find, and not reporting that everything is fine when I don't see anything wrong, I'm not painting a target on my wallet. If I say, "The plumbing system is functional without defects," and there's a rust scab on a pipe someplace which bursts after the inspection, I might as well get out the checkbook, because I told them that everything was fine. Now, If I'd only described the system and said, "I did not find any readily evident reportable defects with the plumbing," I might have a little more leeway, because instead of declaring that everything is fine, I've said that I didn't find anything to report in readily evident areas. Still, I'm taking a chance, because it gives the reader the impression that I'm putting my stamp of approval on it. We aren't hire to state that everything is fine when it is; we're hired to report on viewable defects that are readily apparent at the time and date of the inspection. Instead of putting out stamp of approval on houses, we should stick to describing the components that we're required to inspect and describe in our reports and report only the defects that we find. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

The byproducts of burning gas are acidic. The white material is the material produced when the acid in the exhaust reacts with the metal it encounters. If the metal is galvanized, it will react with the zinc in the galvanizing the same way acid reacts with the zinc in the battery posts on a car and produce that material. A little is normal. A lot means that exhaust is losing buoyancy and is thus cooling too rapidly. If there is a lot of this product and it goes on long enough, it can ruin an exhaust vent and/or the heat exchanger. The rust means that the air/fuel ratio is off. See the rust there? There shouldn't be rust there. That sucker is losing exhaust gas buoyancy. Time for a look-see by a competent HVAC guy. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

That's a good point, Scott. During the pre-inspection portion when I get to the paragraph in the pre-inspection agreement that discusses latent defects, I always point out that I don't have x-ray vision and I'm not a swami, so there're going to be things that I can't possibly see or know about. If you're got a properly prepared report format and pre-inspection contract, and spend some time to go over the contract with the client, and make sure that he or she understands what you're going to do, what you won't do and what to do in the event they think you haven't done what you're supposed to have done, you pretty much eliminate any need to even think about disclaimers when you're writing because it's all been covered multiple times. If you spend half your time pointing out potentials that you can't be responsible for, because you can't see them, you can end up looking like a weasel doing damage control before there's any damage discovered. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

If you subscribe to a particular standard of practice, either include the applicable portion of the SOP at the top and bottom of each section or simply hand the client a copy of the SOP. There's no need to waste time beating a dead horse. Devwave does that with their Inspect Express report format. They've basically paraphrased the requirements of each section of whichever SOP is being used and placed these at the beginning and end of each section in fine print. That portion at the beginning of the section says what the inspector is required to do, that at the end of the section reiterates what he is not required to do. It's in fine print. The way it's formatted, it's there if the customer needs it and it doesn't waste the writer's time trying to re-write it for every different house or circumstance. The IE landscaping and drainage section says at the beginning(underlining is mine), "our inspectors are required to inspect walkways, patios and driveways leading to entrances and the vegetation, grading, surface drainage and retaining walls when they are likely to adversely affect the residence." At the end of the section, it says, "Our inspectors are NOT required to inspect or report on the presence or condition of fences or erosion control. Earth stabilization measures, and geological, geo-technical and hydrological conditions are likewise not inspected or reported." That sums up for the reader what they'll do and not do. There's also a whole other exclusions page in the front of the report that's also done in fine print. Why sit there and worry about disclaiming stuff when it's already there and complies with one's standard? ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Steven, Then you need a statement that: - you have no way of knowing whether all of the downspout receivers are connected to one another and to drainage - you have no way of determining if the footing drains are properly installed - you have no way of determining if the sewer line is properly installed - you have no way of determining whether the main water line is properly installed - you have no way of determining the condition of the footings - you have no way of determining condition of wiring in walls, ceilings and floors - you have no way of determining condition of plumbing in walls, ceilings and floors - you have no way of inspecting the ceilings in the attic because they're under insulation - you have no way of knowing if there's insulation in every single wall cavity - you have no way of knowing if there's underlayment anywhere under the field of the roof except at the perimeter - you have no way of knowing etc, etc, etc. Where does it end? The whole purpose of the pre-inspection briefing and contract explanation and signing is to make people understand and agree to the limitations of the inspection. I don't think there's anything to be gained by filling a report up with disclaimers that are self-evident. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Well, That will happen with any house if it's left unheated and abandoned long enough. The thermal bridging through the ceiling joists cools the ceiling and ambient moisture moves to those cooler areas where it either collects dust or allows mold to grow. Get the house opened up, dried out, use a pigmented shellac on the walls to seal them and then repaint and it will probably be fine. OT - OF!!! M.

Hi, They should be into studs and they need to miss the top of the underlying clapboard, so it isn't restrained and can freely expand and contract; otherwise, they tend to split horizontally. There was no requirement to counter sink them. To the surface of flush with the surface would have been fine. Puttying them and touching them up will work fine if they can get a perfect match with the touch up paint (not likely). For more information about these, go here to download a copy of their free siding installation manual. Or take a free online installer's course here, or just browse the Western Red Cedar website here. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi, Yeah, roofers here are licensed. They have to have a contractors license and I think their bond requirement is $6,000 or something like that, basically 25 - 30% of what's required for a home inspector's pest bond requirement. If I'm remembering it right (I actually almost applied to get a roofer's license during my non-compete period after I sold my franchise), there is no requirement to be tested or to prove to anyone that you actually know how to install a roof. You simply hold a license. Roofers are constantly used here by listing agents (and some selling agents) for damage control after inspections. Most of the time, the roof certs aren't worth the paper they're printed on. I once had a house where my client called me up and was upset that a roofer had given a clear roof cert on a house where I called for repairs. I demanded that all parties meet me there that afternoon. I intentionally got there a little late, to get them stewing. When I showed up I didn't say a thing; just got out of my truck, set up my ladder, climbed up onto the roof, pointed at the client and roofer and said, "Come with me." Once they were up there, I walked them to the ridge, pointed down the back slope at a big old hole in the roof large enough for a racoon to crawl through. Everyone got down, I demanded payment for my wasted time and then I got in my truck and drove off, leaving them all there looking at each other all sheepish like. That roofer will say whatever he wants to and nobody will hold him accountable for it. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Well, Just be glad that you're not here in Washington State, because this state has the franchise on convoluted pest inspection regulations. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! M.

The E & O should be used as a last resort only. I learned that the hard way. We have literally thousands of new guys diving into this business head first and they have folks tell them, "No problem, just get E & O. If you screw up, you can call your insurance company and everything will be fine, " when that's not the case. The first time they have a complaint, they call their insurance company and the insurance companies are paying out practically everything out-of-court, because these claims are usually too small to make it worth it to them to fight them. In the end, that ends up driving up the rates for all home inspectors. E & O is for the type of thing that can take your home, your kid's college fund, put you into bankruptcy and ruin your future. It shouldn't be used for small claims and a roof leak is a small claim. We need to learn to deal with them, without running to our insurance company every time someone squawks. Then, if the situation escalates and looks like it might end up in a court situation, think twice before we make that call. Just my opinion - worth the price charged. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

I would have told her that I wrote it as insect damage precisely because I wasn't a bug guy and that I had never represented myself as a bug guy. I would have said, "Licensed bug guy or not; I know bug damage when I see it, so I reported it to you." You knew I wasn't a bug guy and there was nothing in my contract that said I was one, so you should have had the good sense to get a bug guy in to look at the issue after I told you about it. He would have identified the bugs involved, determined whether they were a danger to your home, and, if so, prescribed and supervised a fix. I did precisely what I was supposed to do, but you chose not to act upon it." This goes back to other people trying to tell us what the parameters of our profession are and us being so unsure of ourselves that we let people walk all over us. You have to be willing to make it really clear to people what you're going to do for them, what you won't do for them and what their recourse is if you screw up. If you take the time to do that - carefully - most of that kind of crap never crops up. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

No! Bad advice. Do not even call your insurance company and do not give her the name of your E & O provider. She could be looking for a payday, hoping that you'll do just that. Giver her the fee back, but not until you've got a signed hold harmless agreement in hand that says that no matter what else happens to that home, you are off the hook. After all, it has been over a year. If she doesn't want to do that, tell her that you did your job, tell her to re-read the pre-inspection contract and politely hang up. I once called my insurance company when I knew a lady was trying to take me for a ride. They sent out an investigator. He agreed with me 100% and told me that they had turned down her claim. I never heard another thing from her. About 4-5 months later, I got a bill from them for the entire deductible. I called them up and asked them what the hell was going on. Seems that even when they don't pay out on a bogus claim, they still bill the insured for their trouble. I was mad as hell. Then, to add insult to injury, they called me up months later and said that the thing was still not resolved; and asked me whether I would agree that they should give her a full refund of her fee, so they could close the thing on their books. Talk about pissed; I was damned near speechless. I told them to do whatever the f**k they wanted and hung up. My E & O went up 50% that year and the insurance company made a net profit of $650 off of a blatantly bogus claim which they knew was a lie. You should call Gil Stewart and ask him to talk to you "off the record." ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike