qhinspect

The way I write reports and add the comments to the summery, I try to make the first sentence as clear as possible. I would add the word "improperly" before the word "powered" so it clearly reads that something is wrong. I also don't inform the buyer or seller who should have/get a qualified electrician, just that one should be used. Just my 2 cents.

I had our local gas company come out due to a gas smell. The leak came before the meter so they had to dig a hole and repair the pipe and replace my meter. They would not turn the gas back on until my radon fan (which was 2 feet away) and the receptacle (which was 2 1/2 feet away) was disconnected and relocated. They helped me out by installing a regulator that was threaded at the port and terminated the vent 3 feet from the radon motor. The guy that found the gas leak and told me about the electric being too close to the meter told me the code in the National Fuel Gas Code book but when I looked it up, it didn't exist. Where is this code? I have called this out in the past and the buyers have gotten mixed information depending on who from NIPSCO (our local gas company) goes out. I made a complaint to NIPSCO but the only response I got was they do have it on record about my electric being too close and it was the right call but will not give me any more information verbally or in writing.[:-boggled It's pissing me off. Download Attachment: DSC01465-1 (Small).JPG 38.1 KB My gas meter after correction.

The movie War Of The Worlds really happened. They built a house around one of those ships. Image Insert: 82.68 KB I kind of like it. If you don't want to deal with the person at the front door, you zap them.[]

I'm trying to understand what M1801.11 is refering to if it doesn't refer to multiply-appliances on different floors. Why doesn't M1801.11 apply? Chapter 18 is titled Chimney and vents and M1801.11 talks about multiple appliance venting systems. A furnace and a water heater by the definition in the same book is considered an appliance. Now there are exceptions when it comes to M1801.11 but from quickly going over them, I don't see how that applies to this situation. When it comes to chapter 24, I'll have to look at that a lot closer.

Came across a one family dwelling (house) today that was built in 1990. The furnace was located in the crawlspace and the water heater on the first floor. The 2003 International Residential Code book clearly states that two gas appliances cannot be installed in a common natural daft venting system when those two gas appliances are on separate floors. I came across a house that was built in 1990 where the 80 plus gas furnace is located in the crawlspace and the standard 40 gal. water heater is located on the first floor. The house was clearly built this way so I'm wondering if this code existed when the house was built. Again, I am referencing the 2003 IRC M1801.11. Another question. If the type of venting noted above is not allowed, why not. What is the difference if the water heater and furnace are both vented on the first floor or on different floors. I've been told in the past the reason is in case of back drafts. But if the unit is going to back draft, I don't see the difference if the water heater back drafts with the furnace on the same floor or on a lower floor than the water heater.

I agree! I love when these classes use the words such as "Fast Paced".[:-censore

I understand what you are saying but your example is using the IR camera to make a call. "Imagine a cop using a piece of IR equipment from a helicopter at night to spot a perp breaking into a building and the perp flees and is later captured. If that cop isn't "certified" in how to use that piece of equipment, a defense lawyer can get the case tossed on a technicality for lack of sufficient probable cause..." Now if that cop uses the IR equipment to direct a police officer to a suspicious activity and the police officer was able to discover criminal activity through other means. I would think that lawyer would have a much harder time with that case.

Wow! 99% is a large number. Even with the cert II training under their belt, you feel that it is likely that they still don't have the ability to use the IR camera properly.

Are you planning on being one of the few that will have the level III training?

I haven't had my IR camera very long so I have to be very careful on determining what the IR camera is displaying and what is really there. I clearly inform my clients that I use the IR camera to help discover and not determine problems. When it comes to moisture in walls, I have not come across that yet. The most interesting thing I came across was from a friend's house. An exterior wall in the bedroom was cold during the winter months and warm during the summer months. I made a small hole in the wall and discovered there was no insulation at that location. I used that area as a reference for my IR camera to determine that there was no insulation at that exterior wall. That was a 2 year old house.

My mistake then.[:-banghea

I felt the moisture plus the moisture meter pegged off when testing the wood strip holding the carpeting in place at that location but no moisture at any other location against the wall. So, if you routinely check the base of all of your walls, you probably would have found it anyway without the IR camera using the moisture meter; no? ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike To answer your question/attack. I seen the dark area with the IR camera, I reached down and felt moisture with my hand. Anytime I think there is moisture from a condensation problem or water leaks, I use my moisture meter to check that area (It also gives my clients something else to see if for some reason the seller argues the point). If that area does show high moisture, I check the surrounding areas with my moisture meter for comparison. I look at all information that is available to me to help determine the possible reason for that moisture to be there and come to a conclusion. In this case, there was not enough information to tell me what the likely problem is. When it comes to the IR camera, I scan the basement and actually found two leaks on the carpeting. The first is from a leaky clean out on the waste pipe where I had to take a cover off to see where it was leaking from and the second is what I wrote above. It was likely that I would have seen the leaky waste pipe but unlikely that I would have seen the high moisture at the picture given above. Since I and my clients were already in that room looking at the walls, outlet and other items, I strongly feel that I would not have seen the problem shown in the picture above. So to answer your question directly; no, I do not routinely check the base of all the walls and unlikely that I would have discovered the high moisture at this location. When I see an area where moisture is likely or is present, I check that area plus the surrounding area to try to get a better understanding of the situation.

I felt the moisture plus the moisture meter pegged off when testing the wood strip holding the carpeting in place at that location but no moisture at any other location against the wall.

Just did an inspection where water seepage was noticed with the IR camera. No visual signs of water seepage or any indication that water seepage would or had occur. Yet the IR just saved me a headache when the next rain comes. Just a note, it has been a week since we had rain. What I was seeing. Image Insert: 10.98 KB What the IR showed me. Image Insert: 11.07 KB

No. At least from the Fluke, they quickly understand what they are seeing. If you tell them that you use it to help identify a potential problem and nothing more, I can't see why your clients would expect more.

It just amazes me that there are morons running around making calls with IR like that. I wonder if he took any of those expensive classes and did that? Chris, Oregon There are morons running around doing a lot of things. What profession is there that doesn't have morons that make the wrong call? When it comes to the IR camera, it has indirectly made me money. I know a few jobs I got where the IR pictures that I included in the brochure was the initial reason for the buyer calling my office. $4000 for at least a year or two of good advertising plus the possibility to find something that could keep you from using your insurance is not bad. When it comes to home inspections, I feel I have a better understanding of the house. Many times I just see the temperature difference on the wall from the studs and the insulation or the temperature of the casing of the breaker(s) due to the stove or air conditioner being on. But when you discover something that you would likely not have without the IR camera, that is when you think that camera is the best in the world. I have bought many things over the years. Some have been great, some good, some bad. When it comes to the IR camera, I would rate it as good.

I agree

Yep, what he wrote.[:-graduat But wait! These breakers are not new so they are grandfathered![:-bigeyes

For legal reasons, I chisel my reports in stone and mail them. In most cases, I can tell when somebody has altered the report.

This question is directed to anyone that uses a PDA for their report data collection. Even though there are different methods for collecting information, I would like to focus on the PDA. Over the years I have done data collection by pen and paper, tablet, laptop & voice recording. I am now looking at a PDA to help collect information. I was wondering what your experience is with PDA when it comes to viewing, ease of use, battery life, etc when it comes to the home inspection software you use. I know different programs that use PDA's will have different results but I'm just looking for the overall opinions about these little toys before I spend the money. At this time, I'm looking at the Pharos Traveler 535e PDA http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/prod ... lid=584388 or the Mogul GTS 6800 http://nextelonline.nextel.com/NASApp/o ... martphones. Located at the bottom of the website page. Both have about 4 hours of battery life and come with a voice recorder which I still think is nice to have when doing home inspections.

I have a client that is sueing me and seems like everyone else. The things she is sueing me over are silly so I informed my insurance company (Allen Insurance) and gave it to my local lawyer.

I went with the LLC. Due to my wife working in the legal field at the time, she was able to set me up for about 1/2 the normal cost. Even though I saved around $375 at the time, to pay a lawyer the full amount to set that up would still have been worth it. Inc is also around $1000.00 around here to set up. My wife is the brains in this family.[:-graduat I'm just here to satisfy her in bed.[:-bigeyes

Get Inc or LLC depending on what your lawyer tells you (not what you accountant tells you). Once you formed your business entity, then you work under that entity. Anyone can sue anybody, but if they try to sue you personally when working under that entity, your lawyer can get it dismissed quickly. This is true for Indiana but every state has different laws so find a good lawyer in your area and pay him some money so you can save more money. It's a good investment. I'll repeat what Scott already wrote: Get General Liability Coverage! It's too cheap not to have.

I look at the 1027 the same way as doing the minimal requirement (nothing more) when it comes to home inspections. Yes it meets the requirements but that is it. The few test results that I have seen from these machines makes me question why there were 6 or more 0.00 pCi/L readings in a 48 hour test (never had that on the machines I have used). I have never heard anyone that taught a class to become a radon tester/mitigator talk good things about this machine (always negative). There is a reason why this is a cheap (in dollars) machine. Now I hear that people are not happy with the other two models; quality at its best.

My wife has worked in the legal field for twenty years in three different states and has never seen a legal pleading, audit, appraisal, legal opinion, etc., written in the first person. If lawyers and other professionals do not write in this manner, I can't imagine home inspectors are at any greater risk for liability. That is why I was questioning that comment about using first person.