Brandon Chew

What is that pier for? What is it holding up? I see a floor joist running next to it. Where on the top of the pier is the load applied? Is the pier leaning or were you leaning when you shot the photo? Is it really "failed" or as Scott said, was an edge of the block cut off? What's going on with that mortar smeared on the left side of the pier, opposite the side with the notch? I'd like more info but I'm leaning toward not worrying about it. If it is loaded on the top of the pier near its center, like it is supposed to be, I don't see that notch as deep enough to cause a problem. You're not in a seismic area are you? If you are worried about it, just fix it -- no need for an engineer unless you want one to determine the cause of failure. Fill the notch with some concrete grout or tear the pier down to the good part and build it back up again. Either is an easy fix.

SUNY Purchase .... I worked in White Plains from 84-87 before I relocated to Albany. My wife is from Rye. Her brother was going to SUNY Purchase around that time for computer science. Small world.

Hi Jim. Thanks for the fine tuning. For homes in NY we use the electrical section of the 2003 IRC. That section is based on the 2002 NEC but does not include the entire NEC. I ran a search on the IRC and I think the applicable sections are: In the 2006 IRC, §E3606.2 (based on 2005 NEC) was changed to read: I couldn't find anything in the IRC that said the disconnect on the conductors that feed a panel is required to be marked as "Main" nor anything that would prohibit it. The 200 amp Siemens panel that I installed (as service equipment) in my home a couple of years ago and is labeled "may be used as service equipment" (meaning it can also be used as an auxiliary sub-fed panel) has "main" stamped into the metal on the dead-front. When I said "everything else labeled 'main' is labeled wrong" I was referring to the fact that in a single family home I should not walk up to three different panels and find all three with a breaker that is only identified "main". Assuming one panel contained the service equipment, the "main" in that panel should be identified as the "service disconnect" and the "main" in the other panels should be labeled "panel disconnect" or something similar. Labeled this way identifies each one "as to their clear, evident, and specific purpose or use" and includes "sufficient detail to allow each circuit to to be distinguished from all others". Brandon

The Jims can confirm, but I think you have that reversed. The factory will make the connections on the line-out side. The load is connected to the unit in the field.

Sign me up. Add New Zealand to the itinerary.

I'll play devil's advocate here and ask: So what? If the post is bearing on a footer then who cares if the concrete around the post breaks? It isn't any weaker than dirt back filled around the post. In fact I'd bet that even broken, it's still stronger because lateral loads would be imposed on undisturbed soils. If the post is encased in concrete and is depending on the friction of the concrete against the hole, well, that's just wrong no matter what( I know there are friction pilings but we're talking about decks here, not bridges or beach houses) Which brings me to the reason I don't like seeing posts encased in concrete. It gives frost or expansive soils purchase to lift the post even if the base of the post is below the problematic area. It doesn't bother me at all if the the concrete was placed in a smooth wall form that is has vertical walls or walls that taper to a wide base. As far as the alkalinity destroying wood I have an analogy: Stone walls built of sedimentary stone don't last as long as those built of igneous stone. BTW Brandon, I've never seen anyone else go from being new to being a respected member of the HI community as fast and as thoroughly as you. I'd have you inspect a house for me in a minute. T If you pour a footer, set a post on it, and then have a second pour around the post to hold it in place, then as you stated, if the concrete around the post cracks, it isn't likely to have an effect on the post bearing on the footing. But what professional builds a deck that way? The pro pours a footing and a pier that extends to or above grade and then attaches the post to the pier with an appropriate connector. When I think of a deck post encased in concrete, I think of the amateur who digs a hole, sticks a post into it, dumps concrete into the hole, and then moves the post to plumb. With this type of an install, when the concrete in the hole starts breaking up, bearing could be more of a factor. Bearing is one issue but there's more to it than that. Movement of a portion of the deck structure that is not supposed to move, and an accelerated rate of decay of the wood post are other issues. Once the joint between the post and the concrete opens up, what's to restrain the deck against uplift? And water getting in there not only promotes wood decay but increases the problems you noted with frost heave and hastens the destruction of the concrete (which destruction could, over time, affect bearing). I'm not sure what to make of your analogy, but a wood beam resting on a wall made of sedimentary stone will not last as long as one resting on a wall made of igneous stone. Thank you for the compliment. Coming from you, that means a lot to me. I know you are not fishing for praise, but I frequently find myself thinking "what would Chad do or say in this situation". Reading and actively posting on TIJ and other respected HI message boards has been a tremendous help and has shortened my learning curve, so kudos to all those who ask & answer the questions. BTW, I'm not the author of the post that Dave was looking for. If someone tracks that down I'd love to see what it says. Brandon

Fireworks! [:-party] Underlining was mine. I assume you meant to write terminal bar. Neutrals and grounds are required to be electrically connected at the service equipment (main disconnect). They are required to be kept separate from each other everywhere else. Every neutral needs to be by itself under a terminal screw. If allowed by the label on the panel, more than one ground can be under one screw. If there are not enough terminals, as Richard pointed out, in most cases an electrician can add more.

I'm with Tom. Find the service drop and the meter. Identify the cable that runs from the meter -- the service entrance cable (SEC). Trace the SEC until you come to "the main control and cutoff of the supply". This is the service equipment, main disconnect, or "main". Everything else labeled "main" is labeled wrong. Explain to the client why it is important to know where the main disconnect is located and why, when the client needs to use it, he/she may need to get to it quickly. If you made a good faith effort to ID the main and could not do so (for example, you could not remove the cover) then say so in your report. There are other issues in your photos that need repairs by an electrician. Recommend to your client that they have the electrician locate the main and properly label it and all of the branch circuits in the home.

Back to the original topic before the thread drift. You need 240 volts. You need space in the panel for the breaker since the A/C needs to be on its own circuit (there are many ways this could be accomplished). You need to make an estimate of the power needs of the A/C unit. You need to do a load calc on the house. You need to determine if the existing service provides at least the number of amps that are required by the load calc. If you were an experienced and competent electrician, you could look at the panel and in just a few minutes make a pretty good educated guess at the answer. Mentally, the electrician would be going through those same steps as he/she formed an opinion. You are being asked to provide a service that is beyond the scope of a typical home inspection, and one that requires skills beyond that of a typical home inspector. It is not difficult to learn them. Perhaps your electrician friends could walk you through it. If it was me, I would not: "wing it" or bluff my way through do it if I did not feel qualified to do it try to hide my lack of qualifications to do the task from my client do it for free (if I was qualified) When you do the inspection you are likely to find issues with the electrical system that need repair by a qualified electrician. I see no shame in saying "Determining whether the electrical system has adequate capacity to add central air conditioning is outside the scope of a home inspection and I am not qualified to do it. Have the electrician do this task for you when at the home making estimates for the repairs that I noted during my inspection. If this is an important issue for you, then have an electrician come out and do this for you separately from the repairs." If you learn what you need to know and feel confident doing it, then go for it! (and charge for the extra time, knowledge, and liability for providing this additional service). I hope this helps and good luck! Brandon

I'm siding with the naysayers on this one. That domino tool might be good for a production shop, but a doubled biscuit joint with a good glue bond is pretty strong and for even stronger joints you can go with mortise and tenon. One of the things I like about woodworking is that for most things there is more than one way to do it. Part of the fun is figuring it out.

I'll chime in too. The paint is forming a vapor barrier on the exterior of the house. Water vapor is moving from inside the house to the outside. The wall is trying to dry from the inside to outside. Back-priming the siding before installation and a better vapor barrier on the inside of the wall would help prevent this from happening. The wedges could help as a corrective measure by providing a way for the vapor to escape without traveling through the wood siding and pushing the paint off. Beyond that you are looking at replacing the exterior cladding with something breathable and/or reconstructing the wall assembly to get an insulation and vapor & air barrier system that is appropriate for your climate.

There is moisture in the soil. Concrete absorbs moisture. Wood expands when it gets wet. The expanding wood can break the concrete. Water can also get in the joint between the wood and concrete. Water expands when it freezes. In a freeze-thaw climate, the pressure of the ice can break the concrete. It's also not a good idea because the concrete is alkaline. This in combination with moisture will increase the rate of decay of the wood post. Preservative treatments on the wood will slow this down some but they will not stop it.

OK, I have to ask. What is AHIS and why should you have VERY GOOD Insurance? Next, what is considered to be very good insurance? Mark (AHIS) had posted that in certain situations he will turn on water and electric breakers that are off, and that he will light pilot lights. I took the comment to be referring to general liability insurance for any damage to the home or injuries to other people, and medical, disability, and life insurance to cover any damage to himself.

This forum is suffering from curmudgeonitis. First ya didn't like trusses with webs made out of Popsicle sticks, and now it's electric water heaters with plastic tanks. It's usually a lot cheaper to repair rather than replace a storage type water heater, gas or electric, if anything on it goes bad except for the tank. When the tank goes, it's time to put in a new unit. Back in 1992 I converted my oil-fired furnace to a high efficiency Cat-IV gas furnace. Shortly afterward, I replaced my electric water heater with a gas water heater, using the chase for the old oil fired furnace to run the new vent for the water heater from the basement through two stories and out the roof. That gas water heater is now 14 years old and while it looks and runs fine, the tank could go at any time. I'm going to put a new roof on my house this summer. I've had my eye on that Marathon unit for a couple of years. When my gas heater bites the dust or when I do the roof (whichever comes first) I plan to run the numbers and see if it makes economic sense to convert back to a well-insulated Marathon unit. When doing the comparison, as Mike pointed out, consider that during the real lifetime of the Marathon, you might go through 2 or 3 conventional units. Add replacement cost of the conventional units to the operating cost of the conventional units. Figure out the break-even point and compare that to how long you plan to live in the home. Also, in my case, by converting from gas to electric, I can eliminate a penetration through my roof, completely close off and seal the chase that runs from basement to attic and which provides a nice "stack effect", eliminate energy loss that comes from drawing combustion air from within the conditioned air space of the home and venting it to the outside, and not have to worry about back-drafting through the water heater vent when I use my fireplace. None of that really has anything to do with the Marathon, but is a factor in the conversion from gas to electric. I believe that the Marathons are either made by or are owned by a division of Rheem. It might be a good idea to surf or post on a professional plumbers forum to see what they have to say about the units. I haven't taken that step yet but plan to when I start getting more serious about it.

Dang! I wrote a nice long reply. After I previewed it and proofed it, I hit the wrong button and lost it all. I'm too bummed to write it again. The gist of what I wrote: The concrete looks funky. Mix looks wet to me. If so, concrete is weak. (Agree with Chad) Was the wall still in the same plane above and below the horizontal cracks, or was it bowed and hinging along the cracks? If it was due to hydrostatic pressure, expansive soils, or frost heave, I'd expect the cracking to be further below grade than you are showing in the pics, and I'd expect to also see bowing. It looks to me like someone grabbed the house by the footings, shook it, and the foundation tried to shear off where it came out of the ground. (Agree with Mike) If this is seismic damage and the concrete is weak (Chad and Mike are both right), the fix could be as extensive as having to jack the house up and replace the foundation. So on that note, and based on your description of the buyer, it might be fortunate that she's nervous (Agree with Eric). The house could still be a good deal for a buyer with deep pockets if the price is right. By the way, I don't try to sway my client either way regarding the purchase. I try to give my client good, clear information so they can make a decision about what is right for them. I'd call for evaluation by a PE that has experience with residential foundations. (Agree with Mike and You) If an evaluation is done I'd be interested in hearing about the findings and the recommended fix.

I don't think you are limiting your liability at all by doing it this way. They were acting under your instructions, using your tools ... it might as well have been you doing it. If I was on a jury hearing a case, that's how I would see it.

The HI SOPs that I have read that mention probing, including the one proposed for NY state, do so within the context of looking for damage to structural components. They do not specifically mention wood decay or probing exterior components such as cladding, trim, or window or door jambs and sills. In the SOPs, inspection of exterior components fall under the catch-all of "observe and report the condition..." I think probing is necessary in order to assess the extent of the damage to structural components. I want to know just how much of that sill, beam, column, or joist is still sound, and how much of it is damaged. I need this info to form an opinion and to convey to the client my thoughts on the size and urgency of the upcoming repair job. Where it does mention probing, I agree with Chad that the ASHI SOP says it well enough. I routinely find and report wood decay of exterior components by using sight, touch (finger/thumb pressure), and sound (gentle tapping on suspect areas with a hard object such as the handle of my screwdriver). That's all I need to do in order to complete my evaluation of the exterior components, report my observations, and recommend repair or replacement of the damaged wood. I don't think probing is necessary in order to assess exterior components; in fact, since those exterior wood components rely on an unbroken finish to protect them from the weather, any probing that breaks the finish on wood that is not damaged has just made that wood susceptible to damage. When I do probe on the exterior it is to check structural components that are exposed to the weather, or to go through a gap or hole in the the exterior components in order to probe into the structural framing. If I can't get to the structural framing without damaging exterior components, and I think the framing needs to be examined, I recommend an invasive inspection and I explain to my client why I feel one is necessary. I have a job to do when I'm at someone's house and I get it done. At the same time I recognize that I'm a guest in someone else's home and I treat their property with respect.

We've had a Bosch for about five years. We love it, and if it died, we would buy another one. When it is running you can't hear it unless you are standing right next to it. Even then, the sound reminds me of a gentle rain striking an asphalt shingle roof. The dishwasher heats the water to a temperature higher than what is delivered by your water heater. This has two benefits. First, the hotter water does a better job of cleaning the dishes. It also allows you to dial back the thermostat a bit on your water heater, which will save some energy on your household hot water. The most common complaint I have heard about Bosch dishwashers comes from people who are used to a dishwasher that has an electric heating element to bake the dishes in order to dry them, and they don't realize that the Bosch does not use that method. The Bosch relies on the hotter water temperature and the thermal mass of the dishes inside to store heat in the dishes, which then drives the drying process when the rinse cycle ends. It works well on ceramic, glass and metal, but not well on plastic (due to lack of thermal mass). Your Tupperware bowls might need to be toweled off before you can put them away. If you have a lot of plastic dinnerware, you might find this annoying. It also takes longer for the dishes to dry in the Bosch than in the dishwashers that use the electric heating element. The Bosch costs more than a lot of models from the major brands, but it's very quiet, energy and water efficient, reliable, and does its job of cleaning dishes well. I'm just a happy customer and I am in no way affiliated with Bosch or any kind of appliance sales. Brandon

If the CSST ends in a listed termination outlet, is properly supported at the connection, and an appliance shut-off valve is installed, then a flexible connector can be used between it and the appliance. CSST can be directly connected to the appliance shut-off valve on a fixed appliance. For movable appliances, a flex connector between the CSST and the appliance is required. Install instructions for TracPipe are available here: http://www.omegaflex.com/trac/downloads.asp

Generally speaking, you are not allowed to discharge "clean" water from roof drains or groundwater infiltration from sump pumps into the sewer system in most municipalities. It may be allowed in communities that have combined sewer systems. There is no one-size-fits-all answer to your question. You should find the specific prohibitions in either the local building code or in the local sewer use law. Combined sewer systems use one pipe network to convey sewage and storm water runoff instead of using separate pipe networks for each. You'll tend to find combined sewer systems in the older parts of old cities. Because combined sewer systems discharge raw or partially treated sewage to lakes, streams, and rivers when it rains, new ones haven't been allowed for several decades, and the existing ones are being placed under ever-tightening controls by the EPA and states. Thus, even in systems where it was once ok to allow the sump pump to be tied into the municipal sewer, it might not be ok today. The control programs are customized for each sewer system. Different areas of each system may be under different levels of control, and they may vary in how aggressive they are in seeking out and eliminating things like sump pump connections, once they are prohibited. Sometimes they grandfather existing connections until the title to the property is about to change hands, and sometimes they are actively searching for these connections and, if found, require them to be removed, usually at the property owner's expense. I think the best advice a HI can give to anyone who is about to purchase a property where the sump pump is connected into the municipal sewer system, is that the purchaser (or someone on their behalf) should contact the municipal sewer department and the local building code enforcement officer and ask them if it is ok at that address, and they should do this before they take title to the property. Once they take title, the prior owner's problem will become their problem to fix. Cost of correction by a qualified plumber would probably run a few hundred dollars, but could run higher if it is difficult to locate a suitable place for the sump pump to discharge once it is removed from the municipal sewer system. Brandon

I spent some time reading the residential side of their site, including the sample report, disclaimers, and FAQs. Much of my specialized engineering experience is in the environmental field. Here are my thoughts. They are selling publicly available information that they compile from numerous government databases. As Mike O. pointed out, anyone can probably get their hands on this same info for very little out-of-pocket cost, but as Chris P. pointed out, it would come at a considerable expense in terms of time -- even if you already know exactly what you are looking for and where to find it. There is no way I could do a due diligence public record search of the same scope on my own at the prices mentioned (<$100). So for people who want the info this company provides, it is a great value. My take on their certification is that it is part of the company's liability management strategy. They are merely a pass-through entity of information provided by others. Their liability is limited to accurately passing the info from the government on to their customer (info is assumed accurate but not guaranteed). Their customer is you, the HI, or the environmental professional, not the end-user. They do not interpret or analyze any of the info that they provide; that part is left for you. From their FAQ: There is very little liability in taking publicly available info provided by the government and handing it to a member of the public (to you -- their client, or from you to your client). The real liability kicks in when you start interpreting and using that info. If folks think liability exposure in the home inspection industry is high, it's peanuts compared to the environmental field. After your client receives the report, you'll be the one answering those kinds of questions, which will come to you from your client. This isn't the same thing as handing the results of a lab report to your client and telling them to call the lab if they have any questions about it. In that situation, the lab generated the content so they are responsible for it. Bingo. Chris P. nailed it. Especially the last part. See comments about liability above. You'll need to be very careful about what you say (and what you do not say) about the info on the report. Not only from the E&O angle, but also so that you don't step into conducting activities that are controlled by other licenses that the HI may not have (real estate, engineering, and various environmental abatement occupations come first in my mind). Your client is going to have a lot of questions about what the info on the report means, and they will be coming to you for answers and guidance on what to do about it. Is five hours enough training? To teach you how to read the report and what not to say ... probably. Step outside of what they are certifying you to do with that info and you could get your clock cleaned. Regarding the length of the report, even a clean or "Good News" report has value, if the report contains info about which databases where checked that turned up empty. I'd look closer at that list of databases before I jumped into this service, but from what I've seen by perusing their site, it looks pretty extensive. "So they themselves say the report is NOT factual." Actually, what they are saying is that the report is completely factual in the sense that they are simply a conduit for information that is provided by others. They are not providing any interpretation or analysis of that information. That part is done by the people they get the info from (as part of the official report from the source), or by the people they sell the info to (you). "The above is a cut and paste, the spelling errors are theirs." Did you correct the errors when you posted it? I didn't find any in the passage that you quoted. Maybe for a true buyer's agent. But for a selling agent I think it's like playing Russian roulette. A "clean" report would be a great benefit but if something turned up, it's going to cost that agent money (in terms of time and lower commission). I think they'd rather choose other routes to fulfill their disclosure requirements. I think a lot of it comes down to your individual market. As Nolan pointed out, the real question is "do your clients want this info and are they willing to pay the price you would charge for it?" Regarding the price you would charge, two key items are: what kind of value can you add to the info beyond simply handing them the report, and how well you think you can run through the liability minefield. You need to be adequately compensated for your time and the risk that you assume. Side comment -- when reading their FAQ for the HI, there is way too much stuff on there related to "protecting the deal". A home inspector has a fiduciary duty to their client and should have no stake in the transaction.

Business operates in the best interest of "The Bottom Line", otherwise it ceases to be a business. Sometimes what is good for the bottom line is good for the consumer, and sometimes it is not.

Jackson - Try this. Go here Dan Freidman's site The second paragraph on that page has a link to the PDF of the updated 2007 report: If you left-click on that "PDF format" link and attempt to open that PDF on your screen, the download freezes and the document does not open (it does this for me, and I suspect it is doing the same thing for other people too). Instead of left-clicking on the "PDF format" link, right-click and pick "Save Target As" from the menu. Save the document to your hard drive and then open it. Also, while at that web page with the link to the report, check out the menu on the left side of the page. You'll find lots more stuff about FPE there. Brandon

I agree with Bill's theory and Kurt's "perfect storm" comments. Factor 1: appliance was not properly converted from natural gas to propane Factor 2: insufficient intake & exhaust vent separation Factor 3: missing section of intake duct Factor 4: tight house (assumed, because it was new construction) Factor 5: no CO monitors Factor 1 and poor combustion air quality (due to exhaust being drawn back into the home near the intake for the boiler) probably resulted in high production of CO. Factors 2, 3, and 4 combined to draw high levels of exhaust back into the home. The missing section of intake duct meant that the appliance was drawing combustion air from inside of the house instead of from the exterior. Assuming this was a tight house (it was new construction), then the disconnected intake duct became the intake vent to replace all air that was exhausted from the house (boiler, kitchen, other fireplaces, bathrooms, water heater). Factor 2 meant that much of the air that was being exhausted by the boiler was being drawn right back into the house. All five factors lead to the boy's death and the rest of the family becoming ill. It's a horrible tragedy and I'm very sorry for this family's loss.

I was taught that homophones are words that have different spelling and different meaning, but the key feature is that they are pronounced alike. to, two, too pair, pare, pear wear, where weather, whether plane, plain need, knead not, knot no, know NOT winch, wench sediment, sentiment "a rye", awry I don't know the proper term for when people confuse the words in the last three examples. I just call it poor grammar.