crusty

First of all Mike, don't characterize my posts as attacks on the franchise system in general. That's not what I said and I am offended to be categorized as such by your filibusters. My comments were not designed or intended to make comparisons of methods of entry into the marketplace or condemn any system as a whole. Knowing your sensitivity when it comes to dealing with controversial issues on your board, I strove to portray an objective point of view but my efforts were obviously fruitless, at least where you are concerned. Nor were they intended as a personal attack on your background. It appears that I unintentionally struck a nerve. Sorry, I had no prior knowledge and frankly don't care. You are what you are regardless of where you came from in my book. It was not intentional or judgmental. "I can't agree. I don't think making marketing as the highest priority is a mistake for any business that must rely on distinguishing itself from a large pool of others in order to do business. Without some form of marketing we'd all be toast."id="blue"> id="black">[:-bigeyes DAAAH. Please re-read what I said. The key word to bear in mind is PRIORITY. If we want to split straws and get into a pissing match should I interpret your remark as saying "knowledge, experience and training are not necessary." I will give you the respect due by not even going there. I dunno, I just think that taking pot shots at franchises and big companies is kind of narrow-minded.id="blue"> id="black">I certainly hope you don't think that was the intent of my posts. If so, you need go back and re-read them, impersonally. They are an accurate assessment of the current mean state of affairs of the average franchiser and franchisee today. Not all are bad, and I did not say that. Not all are good either, just like anything else, nearly (there are exceptions), on the face of this earth; but there are inherent shortcomings in the system that need to be addressed if we are to reign these players into the fold. Sticking one's head into the sand and taking stances designed not to offend anyone has never accomplished much in this world. There is a fundamental need to offend those that need to be offended if progress and unity are desired. As we all know, the blood suckers truly exist, and the lowest bottom dwellers in the franchise system can be characterized by noting their blatant exploitation of franchisees promulgated by (again,some, not all) franchisers who are in it for the quick money. They do exist and they run ads that lead unknowing pigeons to believe that they can get rich overnight with no experience necessary. Their systems are inflexible. Their support sucks. Their canned comments have all the appeal and informational content of a comic book dialog. Their reports are more designed not to offend or alarm anyone, especially referral sources, and they are rarely informative or educational, Mostly smoke and mirrors. Frankly these people need cerebral implants containing a conscience before you can even hope to reign them in. I want to be counted as saying... change or die a well deserved and long overdue death! The profession has a lot of other issues to deal with that are a lot more important, such as the need for consistent standards for entry into the profession, education, standards of practice and how to actually perform an inspection. id="blue"> id="black">This is exactly the point of my comments. Chad, I didn't think that judgment of franchises was your point either. I thought it was humorous as well. The thread just kind of drifted there. I wonder why. Maybe there really is an issue hear that bears objective discussion without personalized bashing Mike? If we can reign in the chaotic entry into the profession of those that are unprepared and ill-equipped to do the job properly, and establish consistent standards, I see the profession as eventually being a whole lot more profitable for everyone. That's where we should be addressing our primary concerns and the large players, if willing, can help us to get there more quickly.id="blue"> id="black">Well stated and I couldn't agree more. If you truly desire to accomplish this, and I believe you do, learn to recognize your allies in the cause and quit defending those that deserve to be offended. Sorry Mike, but you struck one of my nerves.

All valid observations Mike and there are exceptions to all generalizations. If I were to glean a point from my remark it would simply be that in a profession where knowledge, education and training are paramount, franchising and all the inherent good and evil that comes as the nature of the beast, the franchise process in general places marketing way too far ahead of the curve in relationship to training, creating a lot of people in risky positions doing a lot of business without proper training.

www.iccsafe.org The I Quest version of the handbook has incredible search capabilities.

With all due respect, I have not heard of a franchise company, especially in our profession, whose primary concern was anything other than selling franchises; or whose buyers are not typically inexperienced. Not a criticism, everyone has to start somewhere, just an observation based on the real world situation.

My bad then. In my alleged mind (a seemingly dangerous place to be) it has always carried with it the connotation of having a conscious knowledge of what one is doing and the effect of the performance of said action with intent and no allowance for accidental ramifications of said action. In this case synonymous with purposefully disseminating misinformation to my (mis)understanding. Sorry my for misunderstanding. Thanks Kurt. I'm glad we had this little talk [:-dunce]

Perpetrate suggests an intentional misrepresentation IMO Gerry. I'm sure there was no malicious intention. I have a lot of respect for the organization.

In the past, I too suscribed to that theory Ron. It is urban legend. I had an opportunity to ask Douglas Hansen last week. Residentially, no height requirement. In comercially hazardous locations they must be higher, unless the area is sufficiently ventilated.

Douglas Hansen adresses this complicated issue very well in Electrical Inspection of Existing Dwellings, a book that all inspectors should have IMHO.

Some %$@*!^@ dump.

1 1/2 hour inspection??? I'd say he got lucky.

If you are working in Word, try putting the pictures in text boxes or tables.

One word, union. I was doing work in the New York City area in the late 80's and they still required cast iron drain lines with poured lead joints. Nothing like quintupling the labor cost.

Shit, Kurt -that comparison aint fair. In 1950's Chicago they were pouring basement floors over an 18 inch layer of compacted teamsters. LMAO! ROFL![:-bonc01][:-bonc01]

You are lucky you weren't on it when it gave out I suppose. I don't trust any telescoping ladder.

I would be curious about opinion regarding national standardization Mike.

Another trick that works for me when I am too far away to utilize the flash is to frame the pic in such a way as I edge the sky out of it and let the camera adjust to the lower light condition at the soffit with only the soffit in the pic. Later I can brighten it up without the huge contrast to deal with.

You are more generous with your time than I am Kevin. I'll pursue things with contractors and the AHJ for clients but I charge for my time. For what its worth you may want to consider dealing with issues like this directly with the clients if possible. I know it always isn't, depending on the agent in the loop, but all agents are not equally motivated to service their clients best interests and an undocumented verbal exchange with an agent may or may not get passed on to the client adequately. I'm sure you CYA in the report but undocumented follow up with information passed to the client through a third party becomes indefensible as "here say" in the event the proverbial doo hits the fan and the client and their attorney come back on you in a couple of years. Often the more we try to do for our clients, the more liability we incur. I don't advocate less service but CYA. Years ago, in an another life as a home builder I sustained a bankruptcy due to a conversation with a Realtor which was never documented. Having no written proof of our conversation I had no grounds for the lawsuit which should have followed the unethical performance of my listing agent. Not a criticism, just friendly advice.

LOL. Spell checker even strikes at the publisher's level too.

Sorry Donald. I completely ignored the first paragraph of your post when I re-read it and posted.

Frankly it wouldn't matter to me who interpreted it how. My report would flag it a a major safety concern, forget the further evaluation crap and defer it for correction. If buyers called me to inform me they were having these kind of problems I would definitely inform them to keep looking until they found someone who knew what he was talking about sprinkling my conversation with liberal use of terms like fools, idiots and incompetents.

But I'm sure you knew this already Donald. 2003 IRC 310.1 Emergency escape and rescue required. Basements with habitable space and every sleeping room shall have at least one openable emergency escape and rescue opening. Where basements contain one or more sleeping rooms, emergency egress and rescue openings shall be required in each sleeping room, but shall not be required in adjoining areas of the basement. Where emergency escape and rescue openings are provided they shall have a sill height of not more than 44 inches (1118 mm) above the floor. Where a door opening having a threshold below the adjacent ground elevation serves as an emergency escape and rescue opening and is provided with a bulkhead enclosure, the bulkhead enclosure shall comply with Section 310.1.1 Minimum opening area. All emergency escape and rescue openings shall have a minutemen clear opening of 5.7 square feet (0.530 m2). Exception: Grade floor openings shall have a minimum net clear opening of 5 square feet (0.465 m2). 310.1.2 Minimum opening height. The minimum net clear opening height shall be 24 inches (610 mm). 310.1.3 Minimum opening width. The minimum net clear opening width shall be 20 inches (508 mm). 310.1.4 Operational constraints. Emergency escape and rescue openings shall be operational from the inside of the room without the use of keys or tools.

Could it be a cold joint and not a crack?

Better yet, both!

IMO the home inspection profession will be instrumental in effecting that change, not the AHJ. Education and proper certification/ credentialing in the IRC or whatever code is adopted in your area is imperative to this forward leap for our profession. I truly believe we have a golden opportunity to take the lead in this aspect and will be light years ahead of the AHJ. No disrespect toward them intended, but, IMO a properly motivated and educated HI will always outperform his government paid counterpart for one major reason. His personal a$$ets are on the line.

The very same.[:-sour]