kurt

Yep. That's why I have the two things separate, with the SOP part taking about 5 minutes to fill out, allowing focus on what matters. I can deliver one or the other, or both. I stuff the SOP stuff in the back. Few/no one cares. Very common, and the reason for short, concise comments with pictures and big red arrows and infantile icons.....in an attempt to drive home the idea this is stuff they should be thinking about. Excellent observations, btw.

Another review of the pics tells me the shims have nothing to do with it. There looks to be inconsistent mortar bedding between the blocks supporting the beam. Big old gaps. That, by itself, would cause settlement. This kinda goes along with what Baird said about the cores not being filled. The piers themselves are very poorly installed. Maybe the footing moved, maybe something I can't know because I'm not there. But it isn't the shims.

As an example..... Click in a field. Double click the function key. Dictate your comment. Drag a picture to it. Hit the tab button. Repeat. All the above is contained in a widely recognized computer operating system and a single software product. No secondary or tertiary software, no utilities, no nothing. A single software product and a dictation system built into your computer. Just one example. Personally, I type faster than I dictate. I clock around 110wpm. But, if one wants to dictate....

Daddy was a smart guy. I wish I woulda had someone tell me this stuff about 50 years ago. Another way to look at problems is they are a sum of parts. I don't try to solve a problem until I figure out the parts that comprise it. Lengthy reporting times were a big problem for me. I started looking at the parts. I propose that several parts of everyone's reporting system, including a couple in mine, are wrong. It's the wrong parts that are the problem. One of the parts is perception. Folks perceive what they are doing is right. A few of the reasons they think it's right are..... a) everyone else does it b) I do it that way so how can it be wrong c) antiquated notions about nearly everything; it's 2015, the worlds different than it was 20 years ago. Shit, it's way different than it was 5 years ago. d) fancy technology with infinite options makes it seem right e) Momentum. People continue as they begin. The HI report world started out wrong. I have a history of this going all the way back to a night in 1979 and a conversation with Mike Lennon; if anyone's interested, call me at my office to discuss. After looking at what's wrong, what's right becomes self evident. What's self evident will conflict with several notions you were trained to believe. Start by forgetting what everyone else is saying, doing, or selling. It gets easier after that. Double shit, forget what I'm saying. Go blank. Imagine a form, content, and system that would let you generate reports. It almost certainly will not look anything like what everyone does now. (Imaginary mind meld thought creations aren't allowed...keep it real.) That's how I got started. Which led me to database systems. Collections of data points. That's what a house is, isn't it? How might one collect the data points and turn them into a report? No sane person would imagine taking them all and stuffing them into a Microsoft product, let alone a Microsoft word processing product. I propose therein lies a big part of the problem. Data points fit into databases better than word processing systems. Apologies to sponsors.....

Hold it.....single story house...drywall cracks... Put up some pictures of the drywall cracks. The greatest likelihood is what Katen said in his last paragraph. It's dangerous in here. One can put up an innocuous supposed "problem", and the next thing you know there's recommendations for contractors, HI's, and structural engineers analyzing simple stuff that's in a few dozen million houses...that's wrong...but that will never mean a damn thing outside a few cosmetic cracks.

I've been informed by a lot of attorneys that you are wrong. "Hodge podge" was consistently pointed out (in my old reports, I used to use it all the time) as editorializing. What they suggested is a short technical description tied to a reference if possible. Maybe they're wrong. Sure. Everyone gets to do what they want, and most folks in here do it OK. Reread the part about "don't get hung up on the look/form/color/words, etc." That's the last sentence in my reports, right before the signature. My "call to discuss" comment is a tool at the end of specific passages where it's ridiculous trying to explain lengthy technical issues in the report. An example is an old house with little to no insulation and no particular way to do it without remodeling the house. I might say........ "The house has minimal to no insulation...this means etc., etc. You can't improve insulation without complicated renovation work that I'm not going to describe here; call me at my office if you want to discuss methods and costs for retrofitting insulation in this house." Or..... "The crawlspace supports have multiple major problems including but not limited to: 1) blah 2) blah blah 3) etc. Repairing them involves complicated and likely expensive construction work with multiple options for accomplishing the task. I can think of a dozen ways to do it, and every contractor will have their own approach. You should call me at my office to discuss the options." Or..... "The house was built with a soft lime mortar. Subsequent repairs used a hard modern Type N mortar. Applying hard Type N over soft lime mortar damages the masonry, sometimes so badly it can't be salvaged and entire walls have to be rebuilt. I am not going to describe the specific chemical and physical effects that cause the damage; it's a lengthy technical description. Just understand this is an expensive problem to repair. You can call me at my office to discuss specifics if you'd like." I may not use this comment in a report, or maybe I use it a lot. People like it. Attorneys love it. Some attorneys give me good advice, more than I can share here. If you'd like to hear all the good advice, call me at my office to discuss. Or, one can spend a lot of time writing reports describing in great detail all the stuff that fascinates me but that my average customer couldn't give two shits about. I have almost no unique or self generated ideas. I find smart people, listen to them, and work to integrate their ideas into this thing I do. My reporting, and life, got a lot easier when I figured this out. Les is the only guy that's ever grasped what I am talking about, back in the days when I was using the term "comic book" a lot. He tried it, but lacking a system to tie it to, I think he left it behind. It's about system. It's not about all the stuff everyone keeps taking it back to.

Exactly what I'm talking about.

I don't remember what I wrote. Honest. I'd go look but I've stopped caring. I'd write it differently next time. Fabry wanted to see what my comments would look like in my report; I can't do that without punching them through my system. I have a comment library, but most times it's easier to just clack out a comment. The pictures tell the story more than me. There's some stuff I go to the library for, but most stuff gets a sentence or two. I agree on the two sentence thing. Quite. Less is the new more. I thought I said it's OK to use the term "mess" in a summary section, but not in the list...(?)...and never when testifying. I'm sure I said that.

Attorneys like it. A lot.

There's a report software vendor that now has a video feature. Perfect opportunity to try it.

I agree completely. Lost interest, limited attention span, non-understanding so they skim, etc., etc. How many times have you heard someone say "they didn't even read the report"...? There's a reason for that. They're mostly unreadable. Even if they're well composed, people don't read that way anymore. They don't want to read that way anymore. Old people maybe......but probably not. I can't stand reading HI reports. If I can't stand it, what about the civilians?

Last thought... Don't over focus on my actual wording; I wasn't in the building where the pictures were taken. I used them and projected quickly on a Saturday morning because Chad wanted to see how they would look in my actual report. Focus on form. Simple, direct, active, numbered/delineated, pictures with arrows. White space. Yes, it's the opposite of what almost everyone does. What I might actually write or say on a particular item can only be determined if I see it first hand. Quite importantly..... I've developed an interface for putting these things together that allows me to crank out a report quickly. There are economic necessities in this gig, one of them being optimized production time. Inspecting is easy; writing reports is hard. My interface makes the report part a lot easier. And don't obsess on color, layout, or any of the actual page layout stuff. It's all easily changeable and adaptable. Icons and Defect Categories are sorting mechanisms; they're not carved in stone. Icons are in a relational file; if I go to the Icon file and change an image, it radiates out through several thousand reports and changes the icon in each of those reports. Or, removes it all together. Icons and categories are sorting mechanisms. Try to hang onto that idea and not the actual icon or category part. It's all changeable with minor scripting edits. Another feature.....all the information is in relational portals. I have a couple thousand reports on file that take up all of 384 mb on my hard drive. Things are divvied up amongst several different files, all linked relationally. Makes backups and storage quick and easy. That probably doesn't mean anything to those unfamiliar with DB design and management. It blows the socks off my IT customers familiar with such things.

The question is....are you serious? No, I did not test for it. The place reeks of mold. There's mold. Tense. You "do" not believe that assumption can go in a report. If you "did" not believe, I've convinced you of something you didn't believe previously. I put lots of stuff in my reports that HI schools and the collective brain void think shouldn't go in a report. Business has only gotten better since I started doing it.

I've always wanted a big red rubber stamp that says "Piece of Shit".....print the title page, hit it with the rubber stamp, send it out. The Photolog-Summary taken out of the context of a specific report doesn't show what it does. It is the single most favorite format of my HOA customers. This is what most HI's don't seem to get.....different formats for different reporting needs. There are times when a single spaced narrative running on for several pages is necessary. I've got that one too. Then, there's the times when a comic book is the best way. The focus and direction of the HI Report Software Industrial Complex, and the desire of almost all HI's,....... is all about which mobile device the system works on best and developing twirling pretty add-ons. I can hardly wait to see the HI videos that one of the vendors is now touting......HI's.....in poor production value videos.....unscripted.....explaining things they're incapable of describing in a few words...... woof.

Do you also aim at the hockey puck?

Attached are a couple of the formats I use; there are more. I use the Photolog when I'm reviewing a single system, or as a summary edition for HOA's. I've taken out all the extraneous pages, instructions and guides, inventories, and all the SOP stuff to show you what my defect lists look like. The pictures provided limit the report; I can have up to 4 pics per comment, they would be larger, and I work like a photojournalist to tell the story with pictures. These pictures don't tell the story like I would tell it. Don't obsess on my verbiage; I'm not adequately caffeinated this early on a Saturday morning. The VR commentary is boilerplate; the other's are must me clacking out quick comments. Don't focus on the words, think about format. Yes, the icons are infantile. My customers all agree they're infantile and they all really like them. I know this because I ask them. The generalized response when asked is "yeah, they're kinda funny, but I like them because they help me focus on what the comment means". (There are icons for Major Defects, Minor Defects, Needs Additional Analysis, and FYI. The icons are a sorting mechanism more than anything else; I could use the designations to sort the comments and not have the icons print.) My client base is young, urban, unfamiliar with the concept of a screwdriver let alone what it does or which end to hold, and entirely incapable of deciphering technical descriptions. That's why the pictures and arrows and minimal verbiage. Just because an attorney doesn't indicate anything in particular about your report, that does not mean anything. Most of them are as clueless as my regular customers. I had the fortunate benefit of working with a really good advocate attorney years ago on a pro bono case. It's a Christian law firm and they specialize in representing those less fortunate. Really good folks. FTR, I am a deist, not a Christian. I cracked up the entire law firm when I told them "I'm not a Christian, I'm a carpenter". These folks turned my head around about how to write. Short, simple, to the point, no editorializing. State facts, support them. Put them in a list form. Number them so all parties reviewing the report know they're talking about the same comment. Let the facts dictate the Summary. Saying things like "mess" in a summary is OK; it's not OK when you are listing facts. Do not say "mess" when you are on the stand testifying. Keep it to the list. It's really quite simple. Home inspection software and antiquated ideas about communication are what makes it hard. Like it or despise it, the world doesn't read like we were taught. It's a 140 character world out there that really likes picture books. White space is good. Conventional ideas about composition, form, margins, and all that stuff one gets in the software package should be avoided; old folks don't like that idea. Too bad. Forget it anyway. People don't read that way anymore, especially young people, and since I am now an old people working primarily for young people, I don't torture them with outdated ideas. FTR, I read voluminously on a wide range of topics...no Kanye here. But, I don't take my literary ideals and impose them on HI reports. Big mistake. Also FTR....central to my system is the interface. It's quick and easy. Film strip on the right side, comments on the left, write comment or choose from library, drag pic to comment. repeat until done. I developed mine years before HomeGauge came out; it's a very common DB format applicable to wide range of projects. I've got a few tricks in my interface lacking in HomeGauge. HomeGauge is OK, but it's just another package trying to come up with stuff to fascinate HI's. Mine's got everything you need and nothing you don't. It can also be formatted easily to reflect any professional society or State licensing requirements. The defect list is separate and apart from the inventories and SOP crap, making it very adaptable. Download Attachment: Blow.report_2.28.2015.pdf 253.24?KB Download Attachment: blow.photolog_2.18.15.pdf 67.99?KB

Half of Chicago metro is still on drum traps.

I see the opposite. Failed gauges all the time. Constantly. TPR's, especially one that's about 15 years old....not likely.

Gauge sez 40psi, TPR rated to blow @ 30 psi. Whoever works on it gets to figure out if it's the gauge or the TPR. Gauges are highly fallible, TPR not so much. Of course, one might refer it to a competent qualified hairdresser and dodge the call.....but I don't usually do it that way.

Pressure gauge is whacked, otherwise the TPR would be spewing. Otherwise, reasonably tidy...nice Bell & Gossett circulator. I like Weil McLain. My steam boiler is a Weil Mclain LGB series. Flush and service, it's common to get 30+ years out of them. Boiler people get real obsessive, and it's fashionable to diss Weil Mclain in favor of Buderus, Burnham, some folks like Peerless, etc., etc. IMO, they're all chunks of cast iron and life is totally dependent on the guy putting the sections together. If they did it right, they last, if they didn't, they don't. I look at Weil Mclain like a Chevy...a decent working man's boiler. Where do you get 40-50 years old? CG Series 1 was manufactured from 1999 to present. At most, it's about 15 years old. The whacked pressure gauge is from the old unit, the tank in the ceiling is the old abandoned expansion tank. I'm sure I could find odds and ends if I got obsessive, but it's looks reasonably tidy. Circulation issues would be my main concern, as Raymond indicated. That said, sometimes you can do it "wrong" and everything still works OK. Fire it up, wait a half hour, go around and check all the radiators. If they're hot at the bottom and cold on top they need bleeding. Not hard to figure out that part. Check all the valves...pretty common to find them stuck open.

Reality for me is they don't siphon. At most, there's a little gurgle-burp, but they never siphon enough to allow sewer gas by. Water sticks to the sides of any pipe as it drains; air circulates up the middle of the pipe. It's hard to get siphoning unless there's some other complete mess in the DWV system. That said, of course I report it (so they hear it from me before they hear it from their brother in law the plumber) and indicate repairs are problematic and possibly expensive because finding a suitable and accessible vent connection is often a Holy Grail undertaking.

It's called editorializing. If you're an expert witness, you're supposed to be a fair witness to conditions and describe them without bias or subjectivity. While I might have commentary in a summary similar to your comments, when I'm running down the list I keep it to specific facts and let the facts show why it's a problem. More in a minute....I'm writing a real report now. I can't show you how my report would look without importing the pics and putting it all together in the finished format. It also wouldn't show the interface where I assemble the report, which is a big part of the operation.

Clarity is the complement of truth. You want both.

I used to write like Fabry's comment until my attorney removed my testicles thru my anus for doing it that way. He also said to tell the client to call me to discuss stuff. Since then, I've had several attorneys tell me it's really smart to do that. Again, quicker, easier, truth and clarity.

Making lists is quicker, easier, accurate, and precise, therefore better.