Eric B

I'm in the middle of an insurance claim right now, first in 15 years. Normally I would have disputed the client's claim but he's a plaintiff's attorney - he chews up and spits out people like me for a living. He was coming up with some large bills for repairs so I turned it over to my carrier who's attorney agreed that my report did cover the conditions. But rather than take the chance that the client would get nasty they are going to settle for an amount that would have taken me some time to save up for if I was paying it. If I had tried to tackle this myself, the carrier would not later cover me if my effort failed - policy requires that I bring them in from the get go. I don't like to think about whether being incorporated would have have protected my personal assets or not. It wasn't worth risking. So while it's common practice, and I think it stinks, people get paid off to go away, even if you're in the right. Now I'm hoping my premiums don't change.

Gary, You have no obligation to the seller, he didn't hire (contract with) you for the information. Only for very significant issues of safety, (large gas leak, wires burning in the panel), will I mention a condition to the seller. Basically, your concern is what did you tell the client and what course of action did you specify - such as a need for repair.

Image Insert: 169.07 KB Image Insert: 197.23 KB Image Insert: 90.28 KB Three year old T.H. 1) In utility room 2) At furnace 3) HVAC bubba's receipt that says it's normal. Around here it is normal - but wrong. Contractor says he'll warrant his evaluation. I told client that next winter when the leaks start again to call the contractor. As I said before, explain to client what's happening because sure as heck the contractor is not going to understand what's happening. Is this a safety issue? Yes. I would not ignore it.

It's from the water vapor in the combustion gas that is condensing inside the vent. Happens in cold weather and indicates improper venting details and/or burner adjustment. It's very common in our area. If you look in the attic you will not see these deposits around the storm collar or flashing. They originate from the vent joints and seams. Spend some time explaining what's going on to the client because chances are high that the HVAC contractor is going to blame the condition on the roof details.

Sorry Mike, My experience got the better of me.

I wonder how much of the exhausted air (heated) is pulled right back into those units. I gotta think it's not what the manufacturer had in mind.

What are the black stains on the end of the pump housing in the third picture - carbon?

Perhaps this was not from the primary strike but rather a branch of the main bolt. It seems to me that l've heard that a secondary bolt can travel UP from the ground to the main bolt. I'm not sure about this - but it sounds like great inspector BS.

Looking at both pictures I'd say it likely was lightening but I'm amazed that there is no scorching of the wood.

"The other question…do licensed roofing contractors (or builders)have any obligation (other than moral) to evaluate and improve ventilation when installing new roofing on an existing property?" Now there's a question! In my experience, when roofing contractors bid out a job they simply size up the squares and price from that. They seldom, if ever, look in attics or pay attention to ventilation. Nor do they pay attention to the lack of spacing between the first layer of shingles and the side wall cladding. The laborers have even tighter fitting blinders on. I've seen where they have nailed over areas where the decking was virtually non-existent due to decay. They disconnect bath ducts from existing roof hoods but don't reconnect to the new hoods. The sad fact is that many roofers make little effort to fully evaluate conditions or mention problems they encounter. When I come across poor installations I recommend to the homeowner that he contact his roofer and hold his feet to the fire. So, is the "obligation" there? Apparently not.

"Poor flashing details allow for water entry. Unknown if damage has occurred. Repair is necessary" I have pointed out the condition and raised a question for someone else to answer.

A few months ago I was in an ACE hardware store which stocked those exhaust diverter boxes for clothes dryers. They didn't show much appreciation for my pointing out the problems with those things and in fact they admitted knowing that they were not safe. But they reasoned that since people asked for them they would sell them. Apparently they like the "Silence is Golden" rule. Tom I would have done the same thing.

Do you have a source to back that statement? Bill, If you're looking for a code reference I don't have one off hand. But searching online will yield info from industry (Alcoa) and trades (CSIA). Is there a flat out rejection of aluminum liners - not that I know of. But when you start to look at best practice there's quite a bit of substantial information available.

That's a pretty extensive list. Certainly enough to bewilder BillyBob. Thanks for posting it.

Neal & Jodi, Many contractors use aluminum due to its lower cost. Reputable contractors will use stainless due to longevity and best practice - which is often (usually) more money. The acids in combustion gas will eat through aluminum in about 10 years.

I think if you caulk up the valley it'll be ok. Deadend gutters - bad news. Image Insert: 127.09 KB

Very interesting, this one caught my attention. Pitch. The slope of a roof, indicated by the relation of the rise 10" high.

Whenever I want to deal with someone, I want to be sure that they're one of the best I can find in the field. I have never found all-in-one or little-of-this-little-of-that to be very useful. In today's market, people don't stay in a job long enough to learn it adequately. While the all in one concept looks good on paper, it really is a bad idea that does not pan out. I sure miss the mom & pop stores we use to have around here before we were urbanized.

Darren, I couldn't tell you how many times I write up the stains on the attic section of the B-vents. I do spend a little time explaining to my clients what has been happening and there's a blurb in the report. But I don't expect that the contractor will understand it and I don't expect that the problem will be corrected. I expect that clients just say the heck with it and let it go.

Jim, I use two laptops - 1 with XP, 1 with Vista. Even though the Vista computer is newer I much prefer the 3 yr old computer, it's significantly faster. I just read that many companies are not upgrading their computers to Vista and plan to wait for the next OS from MS. I really read nothing positive about Vista.

To answer the question directly, any panel after the main disconnect's location is a "subpanel".

I've got a failure issue going on now with HardiePlank boards on 3 yr old house. Hardie, Toll Bros, installer and painter all fighting it out and pointing fingers. I looked at some of the other homes in the neighborhood and found similar conditions. I tried getting info from Hardie on the condition and they were useless. Image Insert: 137.03 KB

Go to James Hardie's website. You'll find everything you need to prove improper application. Photograph over-driven nails, uncaulked joints, soil up against the siding - all things Hardie says not to do. Armed with such information, you may be able to convince the builder to play nice. If not, then you may need to resort to a more ambitious approach. Don't back down or accept crappy repairs.

I did an inspection the other day, buyer's agent was there for part of the job. The agent called today and said the appraiser called and was going to do a "drive by appraisal. " She seemed to think that I was suppose to be aware of this. What really baffled her was why a second appraisal was necessary since I had already done one. Apparently she did not realize that I had done an inspection for the conditions of the house and the appraiser was considering the value. Confusion? There ain't no stinkin confusion!

John, Look at it this way, there was no knock out there to begin with. It's an intended opening.