Les Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 I actually lost this battle. The "appraiser" thought this was just dandy. Click to Enlarge 35.58 KB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Raymond Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 Report him to his licensing body. Report him to yours, he's practicing without a license (and this case, without half a brain). I wish they were that stupid here, I'd have more free press than I know what to do with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles46 Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 As the saying goes, you just can't fix stupid, and boy is that appraiser ever stupid to think that is acceptable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottpat Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 Is that a hitching post for a horse? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Kibbel Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 Apply 200lbf first, then take the picture of it for your report. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 That's one of the funnier items I've seen in a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dirks Jr Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 Interesting because the number of risers in that picture does not even require a handrail. But that handrail looks like its existence is a safety issue in itself. Take it down and problem solved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hausdok Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 Well, Like Bill said, it's supposed to support a 200 pound man. Sit on that bar and see what happens. Just make sure you strap a cushion to your bum 'cuz you're gonna end up sitting on the ground when it pivots and lets loose. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dirks Jr Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 Well, Like Bill said, it's supposed to support a 200 pound man. Sit on that bar and see what happens. Just make sure you strap a cushion to your bum 'cuz you're gonna end up sitting on the ground when it pivots and lets loose. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike Exactly. The handrail itself is the safety issue. If it were not there, no issue. BTW, I believe the 200 lb force is a lateral force pushing against the side of the rail, not sitting on top of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Kibbel Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 BTW, I believe the 200 lb force is a lateral force pushing against the side of the rail, not sitting on top of it. A handrail (as well as the top of a guardrail) needs to resist the 200lbf in ANY direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 Yes, I thought guardrails were supposed to withstand 200 lb. loads in any direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dirks Jr Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 I stand enlightened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les Posted March 12, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 Your government paid lots of money for that! They have paid for hundreds more, just like it. I have personally seen hundreds and have never seen a compliant one. Report it to who? My Senator? My Congressman? Just as stupid as the new regulation to duct tape all tears and holes in floor coverings. $30 per tear or hole. Was in a house the other day where there was more duct tape than carpet! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Morrison Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 Yes, I thought guardrails were supposed to withstand 200 lb. loads in any direction. Not only that, but the MA code (based until recently on the BOCA code) didn't used to require a handrail on a set of stairs that was X risers high. Ours only ever required guardrails on stairs that were X inches from the ground. Probably because riser heights can vary so much. Is that just me? Or does anyone have a quote saying different? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garry Sorrells Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 Were was there a battle? The appraiser is there to valuate the property as it compares to the market area. The 2x4s don't add value at most it will loose a little on appearance. The appraiser isn't there to evaluate or apply building codes. Granted it does not meet code structurally. Not needed per code in the first place. So unbolt it and problem solved. Probably was added as a quick fix for a family member that had problems with steps and needed a little something to steady themselves. If you were to fall the 2x4 wouldn't add much to the injury claim. Oh by the way, the snow on the walk and step is more of a hazard than the 2x4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 The handrail is supposed to be there so the slip and fall hazard is ameliorated. It's not a "one is worse than the other" situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les Posted March 13, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 Garry, the appraiser is ther to view and see if "code" is applied. That is the new wrinkle in their job. They are in complete control of application of HUD standards. They are asked to make judgements they are not always qualified to make. This hand rail and hundreds (thousands) have been installed per HUD, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac instruction. It really had nothing to do with codes or requirements, only that an appraiser will note a hand rail was in place and life goes on! Every repo house(in Michigan) that has a HUD interest has had these needed and necessary handrails installed, carpet taped, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allseason Posted March 16, 2013 Report Share Posted March 16, 2013 Yes, I thought guardrails were supposed to withstand 200 lb. loads in any direction. Not only that, but the MA code (based until recently on the BOCA code) didn't used to require a handrail on a set of stairs that was X risers high. Ours only ever required guardrails on stairs that were X inches from the ground. Probably because riser heights can vary so much. Is that just me? Or does anyone have a quote saying different? I read an article in Smithsonian Magazine years ago about the history of stairs and how they started as notched logs placed on an angle against the side of a building. In the article it mentioned that a human while walking up a set of steps will look down and check their footing at the third and twelfth or thirteenth step (not sure about the 12-13 exactly), maybe that's where the riser requirement comes from. Think about it the next time you walk a set of stairs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Katen Posted March 16, 2013 Report Share Posted March 16, 2013 Yes, I thought guardrails were supposed to withstand 200 lb. loads in any direction. Not only that, but the MA code (based until recently on the BOCA code) didn't used to require a handrail on a set of stairs that was X risers high. Ours only ever required guardrails on stairs that were X inches from the ground. Probably because riser heights can vary so much. Is that just me? Or does anyone have a quote saying different? I read an article in Smithsonian Magazine years ago about the history of stairs and how they started as notched logs placed on an angle against the side of a building. In the article it mentioned that a human while walking up a set of steps will look down and check their footing at the third and twelfth or thirteenth step (not sure about the 12-13 exactly), maybe that's where the riser requirement comes from. Think about it the next time you walk a set of stairs. I'll have to look that one up - any idea how long ago it was? If you're really interested in stairways, you should get copies of Jon Templer's two volume set, "The Staircase, History and Theories," and, "The Staircase, Studies of Hazards, Falls, and Safer Design." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Raymond Posted March 16, 2013 Report Share Posted March 16, 2013 Garry, the appraiser is ther to view and see if "code" is applied. That is the new wrinkle in their job. They are in complete control of application of HUD standards. They are asked to make judgements they are not always qualified to make. That's why I said to report them to the licensing bodies. HUD and FHA will continue to push their dumb agendas until they get pushed back. If appraisers are getting spanked for practicing outside of their field they will push for a change in HUD policy, or stop filling out the forms. Worked for the licensing fuss over 203k guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allseason Posted March 16, 2013 Report Share Posted March 16, 2013 Yes, I thought guardrails were supposed to withstand 200 lb. loads in any direction. Not only that, but the MA code (based until recently on the BOCA code) didn't used to require a handrail on a set of stairs that was X risers high. Ours only ever required guardrails on stairs that were X inches from the ground. Probably because riser heights can vary so much. Is that just me? Or does anyone have a quote saying different? I read an article in Smithsonian Magazine years ago about the history of stairs and how they started as notched logs placed on an angle against the side of a building. In the article it mentioned that a human while walking up a set of steps will look down and check their footing at the third and twelfth or thirteenth step (not sure about the 12-13 exactly), maybe that's where the riser requirement comes from. Think about it the next time you walk a set of stairs. I'll have to look that one up - any idea how long ago it was? If you're really interested in stairways, you should get copies of Jon Templer's two volume set, "The Staircase, History and Theories," and, "The Staircase, Studies of Hazards, Falls, and Safer Design." Too many to remember,over 10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.