Bill Kibbel

Hi Gary, For decades, I've been reading every study I can find about retrofitting insulation and other improvements. I am also on top of the potential detrimental effects of filling in wall cavities that have been empty for a hundred or more years. My opinion is that if there was an absolute need for removing all interior plaster for some other reason, then installing thermal insulation - properly, and with compatible materials - would probably be a good idea. Adding insulation without a proper, complete vapor barrier doesn’t make much sense. I’ve seen many opened up walls in my lifetime to see old, saggy and soggy insulation inside moldy wall cavities. There has also been well documented problems from adding some types of blown and foamed-in insulation. Some have ammonium or aluminum sulfate as a fire retardant that, after absorbing moisture, creates sulfuric acid, which can eat away many old building materials. The big reason for not retrofitting walls with insulation is that it is not cost effective. I worked with an actuarial type math genius with statistics from 4 studies of insulation costs and values. These studies actually looked at different methods of heat loss: convection, conduction, radiant and thermal bridging. All the studies showed that heat loss from uninsulated walls was a relatively small percentage of the total loss. Compiling the statistics from these reports, we came up with an average cost savings that would illustrate the point. An average sized home, located at 45 deg. latitude (Minnesota, Montreal), would cost $4100.00 to insulate the wall cavities. The average annual savings would be $172.00. It would take 24 years to recover the cost. I can think of a lot of other things I can do with $4100.00 that would return my investment in a few years, with interest. Some items on that list are other areas of the home to improve. (Attic insulation, draft stopping, heating system update) I should just tell ‘em: “Don’t stuff your money into your walls folksâ€

I'm pretty fortunate to have recognized this slow RE market coming. I geared up for some consulting work to fill in the gaps in pre-purchase inspections. I hope for the best for new and seasoned serious, honest HIs during slow times. I think it was from Scott P. that I first heard the term "cleansing period".

My opinion about the "mold is gold" people is the same as it was 13 months ago when I posted here: http://www.inspectorsjournal.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2348 This needs repeating: http://www.forensic-applications.com/moulds/mvue.html

"It just doesn't seem complete to tell them how well the attic is insulated while ignoring the 100 year old plaster & lath with stucco exterior". About 20% of the buildings I inspect are (timber, balloon) frame constructed. I don't recommend adding insulation into the walls. If questioned, I can list good reasons why it's not a good investment.

"Heck, how about a little sex in the tub? Worrying about cross contamination isn't going to stop extracurricular activity, is it?" [] Is someone still thinking about Chris' New Years pic?

"Boilerplate is good - it is tried and proven, bulletprrof, if you will". Maybe yours is, but in my experience, a large majority of it out there is worthless nonsense. Most software generated reports I've read are full of nothing but general descriptions of building products under a topping of CYA, finished off with "Appears serviceable". How many HIs are still handing out 2-3 reports a day, generated by one of the most popular reporting systems, that include "climactic conditions"? "Not only are you wasting time, you're increasing your risk: if you describe the same problem different ways, you are giving potential plaintiffs (read - dissatisfied clients) a weapon - either through mistakes or by giving them an opportunity to make you look bad". I disagree. Each building is unique. Each client is unique. I don't reiterate canned speeches on-site, so why would I reuse canned text in the report. My clients get a customized report to suit their needs that precisely documents the actual building. I think that is a much better method of eliminating "potential plaintiffs - dissatisfied clients". It takes more time, but it's not a waste of time. I'm well compen$ated for the extra effort.

In PA, we're required to identify any "Material Defects" which are defined as "A problem with a residential real property or any portion of it that would have a significant adverse impact on the value of the property or that involved an unreasonable risk to people on the property". We choose to identify any issues in the report that are considered material defects by listing them again at the end. I make it a point to not reiterate the specifics. For example: 1. Have an experienced carpenter make all the structural repairs throughout the basement and crawlspaces that I indicated. 2. Have an experienced, reputable chimney contractor install proper type and size flue lining systems. 3. Have a qualified plumbing contractor make all plumbing system and fixture repairs indicated. 4. Have a licensed electrician make the electrical repairs and corrections listed. 5. Have a competent heating contractor make the corrections to the installation of the boiler...

"How many folks write simple sentences about what's in the house? I mean, does anyone make specific comments about the house, or is it all boilerplated stuff?" Well Kurt, I'm not a great writer, but I dictate each word in every report for each individual building. The only "boilerplate" is: A cover page that lists what steps should be taken now that the report is issued. A paragraph about dealing with mold. A paragraph from our attorney about mold. Each report is so unique that my typist can't devise any shortcuts, but she's pretty good at guessing what I'm about to say.

Sure, quite often. Like Chris said, to take some of the bounce out of the floor. They're most often under dining rooms, where the china in the cabinet rattles when the overweight family member waddles in. They're termite portals to an all-you-can-eat buffet on the dwelling above. Smart folks stick a patio block under the post.

It's wrong. There's lots of documentaion that says it's wrong. In the absence of manu. specs, the minimum slope is ¼ in 12 for standing seam metal roofs. (Many manufacturers require greater slope.)

Chris, I used to include detailed descriptions of many building components during the early years. I gradually realized that some are really not necessary to include in a report for any reason. I usually list structural lumber dimensions (when they're milled boards and not hand-hewn timbers), but not spacing, unless it's an issue.

There has to be clues that are not in the picture. I'm thinkin' it pulls something open and then reverses to let it close by gravity or spring tension. Was there a hatch cover below it? Large curtain rod or blinds nearby?

I find that condition frequently. It's usually from water entering the meter base. The SEC acts like a drain house from the bottom of the meter base into the service equipment panel, often dripping down the breakers on one side.

Real barn wood fetches decent bucks. I'm thinkin' this one's priced about at what it's worth. The roof's probably been torn open since Floyd or Isabel. It's built with thin milled boards that decay quickly. Not like old growth timbers, hand-hewn down to heart wood, that are common in the barns built centuries earlier.

I'd piss him off some more and tell him to show that the trusses were designed for the bottom cords to support a furnace with an A/C coil.

...appreciates old homes.

...in the crawlspace below a mid-19th century church. Many thanks to William Kibbel III (User Name: inspecthistoric) Director, Historic Building Inspectors Assoc.. LeHigh Valley, PA

I wrote: And I forgot until I saw this: The lighter blocks are severely spalled. Yes, Mr. barn is tired and leaning against his long time companion, Mr. Silo.

At the end of my inspection today, the buyer asked if I would like to review the report that had been done a few months prior for this property. I should know better, but I thumbed through some of it. Typical to this area, it was horrible, software generated boilerplate that lists generic descriptions of building products, not specific to what is actually on site. Each paragraph ends with "Condition: Appears serviceable". Handing it back to him, I noticed something on the front page. I thought I misread it, but no, it really said: "Climactic Conditions - 45°, Clear" It just illustrates Jimmy's statement: "If you try to sound smart...you inevitably end up sounding foolish."

Hi Larry, I know you from somewhere. I recall reading about an ASTM standard for water penetration resistance testing for windows, but it involves creating a static air pressure difference.

Fittings on steel or iron gas pipe can only be steel, iron, brass or bronze.

American Houses: A Field Guide to the Architecture of the Home by Gerald Foster This book is one of the very few that discusses Southern and other regional styles and illustrates more than just the façades.

Here are some links that I've collected: http://historicbldgs.com/styles.htm

It wants to be an Italianate when it grows up! In my realm, the only single storey ones are buildings secondary to the main house or small churches/chapels. I can see that the siding projects beyond the surface of the trim, indicating a recent NTE attack (Nefarious Tupperware Encapsulation). This usually results in the hacking-off of bracket thingies. My second guess is that there originally was an upper full or half storey that was lost and then replaced with the hipped roof. Adaptive re-use of a Gothic Revival carriage house:

The people who will be relying on your findings. I'm not concerned who pays for the inspection. I rarely even look at the names on the check, just the $. On some really, really 'spensive properties, it's written in the agreement that the seller pays for the buyer's inspections and testing (negotiating things like this is probably why they can afford to buy a high-end property). I don't know of this arrangement until the end of the inspection. In a divorce, sometimes the husband pays for the inspection of the home where the ex and his kids will be living. His name is on the check, but her name is on the contract. Two weeks ago, a Daddy had me inspect the horse farm he is buying for his daughter and son-in-law. He will not be residing there, but since his name is on the purchase documents and he is likely going to be financially responsible for the property, he is the client. (I should have asked if he has any more daughters) There are several other unique situations where the party paying for the inspection was differrent than the folks relying on my findings. I've never had any concerns about it. I just do my job.