Jump to content

Stone on Walking Roofs


hausdok
 Share

Recommended Posts

According to Barry Stone, barring prohibitive conditions, "A home inspector who fails to walk on a roof is professionally negligent and arguably incompetent."

Is Barry on solid ground or perched on a slippery slope? What say you?

To read the entire article, click here.

Well, in this column, after he gets done smacking the HI in question upside the head for not taking a roof walk (without knowing what the HI actually did/said/wrote), Stone does say that there are alternative methods for roof research, such as looking from a ladder, looking through binoculars, etc. (He didn't mention simply looking up at a ceiling or roof deck, or looking out dormer windows...) And, he takes the complaining homeowner's word as gospel, as if naive homeowners are perfect reporters...

Stone's "voice", IMHO, carries more than a little frustration. He smacks the whole HI profession upside the head when he gets a chance. In this regard, I feel his pain. We've got some honest and conscientious geniuses in the HI biz; that's good. But our little niche gig also holds many HIs who couldn't pass a middle-school writing assignment, let alone a GED.

What else can Stone say, if he wants to stay anywhere near the truth?

WJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, a column about home inspection is perched somewhere between blather and oblivion; who really cares? Only us folks........

Face it, it's boring except when it's not, and it's not only when there's something directly affecting (effecting?), a specific individual's world. Kinda hard to make something intersting that has maybe 9 people in the Western Hemisphere that care.

WJ had the only column *about* home inspection that was worth a damn, largely because he'd segue from HI work into universal observations and Jowers'es'es familial neighborhood ruminations. He'd springboard from HI boredom to something folks could grab a hold of.

Barry tries, but he's mired in mediocrity because he lacks the juice to make it interesting. One makes this stuff interesting by tying it to something other than this stuff.

Kinda like Royko would do.....he'd come up with an idea, and shoot off into universal truths and observations from that idea. Barry just comes up with boring ideas, and then spanks the baby, thereby justifying his existence.

That's the formula for a very boring newspaper column.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I paged through some of his columns. One has an editor scolding him for being "anti-reeltor." The editor was unhappy because Stone was costing him money in ad sales.

Now that's shameful. An editor picks up a guy's (boring as gruel) column, then tell him he needs to get on board with the ad sales at a pissant paper. Life In Hell...

Thank gawd, I never had that problem.

Really, who would read a lame HI column? (Well, just for today, me I guess.)

Minor rant: The HI profession produces no worthwhile press. We, taken as a breed, are painfully boring and off all radars that aren't manned by the "stakeholders." Almost every website has the same lame copy (definition of inspection, biggest investment, blah, blah). Same with brochures. We write like bureaucrats. Our boilerplate would bore boilerplate to death. We've mixed up trades, observation, reporting, invented ethics and invented spellings. As brother Les has pointed out, many of us don't really know what the job entails.

And we continue to do the job the same way we've been doing it for 30+ years. By some crazy luck, I decided to promote my business by creating a newsletter that entertained and informed, and made no sales pitch. It worked for me.

IMHO, HI work is just about as good as the HI makes it. It's a personality gig. If customers like you, you'll get work. If customers don't like you, well, it's back to the Tilt-A-Whirl.

WJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I'm seeing a pattern. I would suggest that all of Mr. Stone's future columns could be be reduced to to the following two lines...

Q: Dear Barry, without going into details, should I sue my home inspector?

A: Without those bothersome details, or the annoying inconvenience of any real investigation on my part, it's my uninformed opinion that you should.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have sat through several mock trials of home inspectors. All were entertaining and none were instructional. I have participated in several dozen real deal causes of action against home inspectors and none of them were entertaining and all were "instructional" and informative.

I wonder how many causes of action are going on as we kibitz here? Hundreds, if I am to believe Mr. Stone.

I think Mike O posts that crap to see if anyone is reading the forum!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Mike O posts that crap to see if anyone is reading the forum!

Nah,

There're plenty of people reading, that I know. I'm just trying to bait folks into discussing things amongst themselves. That's how we figure this stuff out; by talking about it, seeing what works, what doesn't.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree Stone regularly goes over the line, I tend to agree in general, with most of his points.

How can you provide the customer with the service they are paying you for without getting close enough to look at the roof?

I climb every roof that I can physically get on. Too steep to walk, too high to reach, clay tile, etc. and I still bring out the binoculars, ladder from the eaves, and even look at the neighborhood roofs for clues about age, storm damage, installation errors, etc.

I HATE not being able to see a roof up close and personal. I have the intention on every inspection of walking the roof and only decide based on site that it is not possible to do so. There is the other method that disclaims the roof on every inspection before they book the appointment.

If you don't want to get up on a roof, find another occupation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree Stone regularly goes over the line, I tend to agree in general, with most of his points.

How can you provide the customer with the service they are paying you for without getting close enough to look at the roof?

I climb every roof that I can physically get on. Too steep to walk, too high to reach, clay tile, etc. and I still bring out the binoculars, ladder from the eaves, and even look at the neighborhood roofs for clues about age, storm damage, installation errors, etc.

I HATE not being able to see a roof up close and personal. I have the intention on every inspection of walking the roof and only decide based on site that it is not possible to do so. There is the other method that disclaims the roof on every inspection before they book the appointment.

If you don't want to get up on a roof, find another occupation.

That pretty well sums it up.

I'd do this http://www.draganfly.com/uav-helicopter ... gqd3Afirst before leaving the profession.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That pretty well sums it up.

I'd do this http://www.draganfly.com/uav-helicopter ... gqd3Afirst before leaving the profession.

Sure! but can it carry a cold adult beverage?

You mean one of these.........

Download Attachment: icon_photo.gif BeerBales3 (Medium).jpg

85.55 KB

Uh!....................No

Jim, if you restrict your on board weapons to 200grams ...yep.

At over 20k, you might want to consider throwing your M80's over the fence, much cheaper.

BTW Do they still make M80 firecrackers.....I sure miss them and cherry bombs too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...