Jim Morrison

Brian, I couldn't agree more. Me: Ms. Client, You should have these receptacles protected with GFCI's. They're cheap and could save your life. Ms Client: Oooooh. Smart, sensitive, AND caring. They don't make 'em like you anymore Jimmy... Mr. Broker: (interrupting) Blah, blah, blah. Me: Excuse me, but you're interrupting us with something that has nothing to do with what this conversation.

Chad, Here's my take on septic inspections. Every day I go to work, I place my professional reputation on the line, so I only do things I think I can do really well, and at the risk of sounding arrogant, better than most guys. My fees are more than double the national average, so I have to live up to the expectations that sets. I know one of the best septic inspectors around and have been out with him on inspections. He visits the local Board of Health, gets pumping records and water bills, locates all components of the system, excavates the tank cover and d-box, has the tank pumped (separate charge) and snakes out the leaching lines with camera and TV monitor. It is a lot of work for $500, but because you get so dirty and stinky, not something that necessarily dovetails with an inspection. I am certified to do them, but I don't. Doing them entirely separate from home inspections is something that many folks in MA do-but you have to know your shit. (Pardon that one, but I figured if I buried it in the middle of the post, O'Handley wouldn't even notice) Plus, the boiled-down version of the law in MA states that the seller is required to have the septic system inspected to the state standard by a state certified person. I know there are plenty of people who do them, but dye tests alone are next to meaningless. I do a thorough, high end inspection, and to add on a dye test would, I think, erode my credibility and give me the look of a profiteer. I do what Kurt does, a 2 minute explanation and with my own personal graphics. Like Terry, I punt,

I'm reluctant to criticize anyone's site, because I don't really like the one I threw up in a rush a couple years ago and haven't gotten around to revamping, but since you asked... I really like the clean, professional look. It clearly gives the sense that you are a professional and not some laid-off nailbanger trying a new line of work. I think you get your message across well and if anything, I'd be trying to cut text rather than add it. People like pictures and bullet points, I find. I like the artsy skyline, but can't tell the difference between Detroit and Chicago. All in all, one of the better HI sites out there. So many of them look almost identical. I don't know if this counts, but for the record its the closest I'll ever come to kissing your ass. Good Luck,

I guess my point is "should ... for safety" trumps "must" every time in my world. There are plenty of meaningless "musts", but "should...for safety" is always a high priority.

I don't want to take away from the load of work that went into making that chart. Obviously a fair bit of research and effort went into it and I thank the authors for giving it to us all at no charge. But I'd hate for someone new to think this is required information. It's something I'll print and file, but it's about as necessary to everyday HI work as a chart of what a 175 lb man would weigh on each of the various planets in our solar system. Fodder for internet arguments for sure, but of little consequence in our line of work. From a safety standpoint, GFCI's are a very good idea in wet locations today. How do you make your point more clearly than that? Now, if I ever travel back in time to do inspections (at today's rates of course), that's another matter.

Master Hansen, My search for the truth has yielded more questions than answers, I'm afraid. Marcy, from Ideal Industries Tech Support, tells me that GFCI's are supposed to trip at ground faults between 6 and 9 mA after 200 milliiseconds . She assures me that the new Suretest ramps the fault up from zero and mine is working fine. What do you make of her assertion that GFCI's are supposed to trip in the 6-9 mA range? Has the standard changed? Yours in the quest for enlightenment, Simple Jim

Hey Randy, Welcome aboard. Your GFCI tester won't trip an AFCI. You need a special AFCI tester, and the Suretest is the only one I know of, though there must be others you could probably Google up. AFCI's are built into circuitbreakers and look similar to, but distinct from GFCI protected breakers. They have a test button on the breakers. I'm new to the Suretest, but I like it a lot and would encourage all other electrically challenged inspectors like me to get one.

Me too.

TIJ Inspectors are the smartest and best looking inspectors around. It’s unscientific and unverifiable, but that’s what I think. So where else would I go when I have a question? Tomorrow, I’m scheduled to inspect a Colonial which used to be a Cape. My client tells me that the old Cape roof and shingles are clearly visible from the attic. I’m sure most of you have seen this type of setup before. A few months ago, I was speaking with some other inspectors about this sort of thing and one of them stated emphatically that the asphalt shingles must be removed immediately because if there were ever a fire in the house, the shingles would turn into napalm. I thought about it some and forgot about it, but now I’d like to know what you guys think of it. Common sense tells me that some shingles can’t be more dangerous than the dozens of plastic Rubbermaid storage bins I see in a lot of attics, or even a gas-fired furnace. I mean, a house on fire is a dangerous place to be for a lot of reasons and by the time flames are in the attic, you’re either outside, or on your way to the morgue. Does anyone else recommend removing the shingles in this kind of situation?

I suppose it could have something to do with climate, but I just can't get excited about a carelessly exposed nailhead or two on a cap shingle. Maybe 2-3 times a year I see 80 year old slate roofs with no cap flashing on the ridge or arris lines. The ridge board and rafters beneath these peaks are stained, but only very rarely have any decay and never admit enough water to wet insulation. Now there's a whole lot more water coming through an open ridge than there is down the shank of an ungooped, cap shingle nailhead. Of course, tis better to goop. Scott, can you explain what you meant by the Catch 22 of roofing? I didn't get it.

Brian, I apologize if I already chimed in on this one but... You shouldn't be seeing exposed nailheads on any flashing, period. I'd tell my client the flashing should be replaced now. The only exposed nails on cap shingles are usually on one end, and while it's better that they be gooped up, I don't think it matters and never take notice of it. That's my take,

I hope you guys don't kick me out of the club for this, but I was curious, so.....I read the directions. I know, I know.... If you have the new Ideal 61-155 like me, they read: " To activate the GFCI test, press the GFCI button...The actual current being bled from hot to neutral will be displayed. (6mA is the nominal current sent through the fixed resistor....)" Like I said before most every GFCI i've tested in the past few weeks trips at either 7.3 or 7.6 mA. So I guess the engineers at either Ideal or Leviton are due a kick in the pants. But my question is: Is the extra milliamp and a half actually meaningful in the real world, or am I just trying to pick fly shit out of black pepper? What do some of you veteran Suretesters say about this, if anything?

Hmmmmmmm. Two birds, one stone. Well, just to satisfy the curiousity of my egg-shaped head I'll wait for Douglas' response before making any irreversible decisions. BTW You should be more careful with what you post here. People who don't know you might misunderstand and get the idea that you have a problem with real estate agents.

I've been using my shiny little Suretest for a couple of weeks now and I notice that most GFCI's I test will trip at 7.3 or 7.6mA. I've read that some really Pecky inspectors consider this a serious life safety hazard because GFCI's should trip at a fault between 4-6 mA. I have a hard time swallowing that, but still wonder about the disparity. How many milliamps are too many? Douglas, Keeper of the Knowledge of All Things Electrical, can you point me toward enlightenment?

You just said that to hurt me.

I asked because I saw one in a super-cheesy new house this morning, and I've never come across one before. I wouldn't be surprised if they have some kind of reputation as being pieces of shite, and if that is the case, I just wanted to find out so I could put it in my report. Here's a question from this morning's inspection: Can you flash a deck with drip edge flashing? Answer: Yes. It just looks funny and leaks anyway. I really do have to buy myself a digital camera. I also found my first instance of high voltage drop (14%)since starting to use my SureTest a couple of weeks ago. Feels like a rite of passage.

I guess I'm just looking for for a heads-up on anything you know about those specific units.

Has anyone seen enough of these units to have formed an opinion about them? They're supposed to have a lifetime warranty on the stainless steel heat exchanger. I saw my first one this morning. Whaddya know?

I finally took the plunge at IW and bought the Ideal Suretest with Arc fault #61-155 for around $240 from Professional Equipment. I think Jerry Simon posted something recently about getting it for around $180 on the internet. Jim

Has anyone ever actually watched an episode of that show? It seems like a fairly boring premise for a TV show. I actually filmed an episode about a year ago that has aired a few times and I still haven't seen it. despite their promises to send me a tape.

Chad, I tell my clients to have that tape tested and I never hear back from them, so I have no idea how many test it, or how often it contains asbestos. Neither mold, nor asbestos excite me much either. I just explain to my clients that there are about 3000 building products that can potentially contain asbestos, and I can't recognize the overwhelming majority of them. If I see one of the more common dozen or so, I'll point it out to them. Since the only way to determine if something contains asbestos is to have it analyzed chemically and look at it under a special microscope, they have to hire a specialist to tell them more. My grandfather died from "asbestosis" almost 30 years ago. He was a smoker who worked in a Navy yard and breathed that stuff in by the lungful every day. He died (albeit miserably) at the age of 78. Shoot, I'd sign up for 78 in a second. My brother and I used to lift weights in my parent's basement and always thumped the barbell into the asbestos covered pipes overhead, showering ourselves in magic dust. Not to say asbestos isn't harmful, I'm convinced it is. I just think that we (Americans) could use a little perspective on the issue. Ever talk to a European about it? They can't get over how silly we get over asbestos pipe insulation and duct tape. Nice call on the "holey" beam. My father wants to sponsor federal legislation that mandates a 7 day waiting period and a background check on any plumber wishing to purchase a reciprocating saw. There's just too many of those damned things on the street. Don't get me started on mold, Jim

Well, then. I don't think you can test a condensate drain for blockages effectively when the unit isn't running. When it is running,if the drain is blocked, it's obvious. If I'm wrong, then the esteemed Moderator from Michigan will correct me and enlighten us all. Besides being a handy little relief port for home inspectors, the opening is a vent. It should remain open to the atmosphere for both purposes.

The only way a diligent HI can test the drain for blockages is to pee in it. The opening before the vent is your target. Welcome to the profession! Jim "The hazing home inspector" Morrison

Yew boys tryin' to pick a fight? Living among the farms, but rooted in St. Margaret's Parish, Dorchester, Jim