Exposed gas line in living space.

[mgbinspect]

Good thread.

It was definitely good for me - and on a Friday, no less, with the weekend ahead to ponder some tacking over a extra dirty martini...

[Terence McCann]

Good thread.

It was definitely good for me - and on a Friday, no less, with the weekend ahead to ponder some tacking over a extra dirty martini...

Shaken, not stirred 007.

[mgbinspect]

Good thread.

It was definitely good for me - and on a Friday, no less, with the weekend ahead to ponder some tacking over a extra dirty martini...

Shaken, not stirred 007.

Indeed.. Is there any other way?

Have an outstanding weekend gentlemen and friends - every one of you.

Class dismissed. [:-graduat

[wcgosman]

I Think ASHI was wise in writing in the standards a couple of related items; 'not required to write code violations and not required to write up repair specifications.

I am willing to be judged in court by the ASHI standards, and thankfully after 26 years that hasn't come up, but there are a couple of ways to set yourself higher standards to be judged in court by. First is using the "Code" word in the inspection report. I consider that this is raising the standard by which one inspects by, such that if someone makes a claim that a code violation was missed it becomes difficult to use ASHI standards as a defence when the report includes other code violations.

Some inspectors even advertise that they exceed ASHI standards, wow, now what standards will the court go by - likely any one the plantiffs' attorny wants.

Some here seem to know all the codes well enough to cite all violations and thats admirable - I can't and have never written up a violation as "Code".

In my area it becomes a problem when something is written up as wrong and so do "x". The buyers then demand the sellers do "x" and the sellers want something other than "because the inspector said so" , they want a reference. This creates contract issues and nobodies happy.

Personally I would have writin this issue as "I consider the exposed gas line a potential hazard such as by damage from tripping on. I recommend having the gas co. or lic. plumber check and make recommendation" I have alerted the buyer, the buyers not going to ask the sellers to fix, and I have made a recommendation.

Its always worked for me anyway.

[kurt]

Well, a few things.......

1) Codes are references. Using reference material is how one arrives at informed convincing opinions. It's how professionals in other disciplines distinguish themselves from idiots and hacks. High schoolers writing term papers use references. Only in the HI biz do practitioners eschew reference material. Of course, that's understandable, as HI work is one of the few professions where one doesn't even need a GED.

2) ASHI writes their standards to include every gonzo method so as to keep membership numbers up. They were not written to provide a rigorous thorough inspection; they were contrived to avoid excluding idiots that can't write, spell, or form informed opinions using reference material. The ASHI standards are a pile.

3) If you screw up, or even if you don't screw up, someone might sue you. If they sue you, they will extract maximum pain and suffering by hitting you over the head with standards, no standards, the fact that you cited codes, or didn't cite codes, or whatever.

4) If I know how something should be repaired, I tell folks. If I don't, I don't. If I tell someone how to fix something, I reference specifications or documents that support my opinion. If someone wants to disagree, that is their prerogative. I do not care if there are *contract issues*, nor do I care if anyone is happy, or not.

Personally, I try to provide opinions with direct hard lines to credible reference material supporting what I'm saying. That's means I sometimes use code cites, mfg. spec's., pretty pictures showing what I'm talking about, or anything else that distinguishes me from the yahoo's running around worrying about exceeding the ASHI standards.

That's always worked for me.

[mgbinspect]

Somehow, whenever Kurt is done, I find myself feeling so completely inadequate... [:-fight] I'm never quite certain if he's speaking of "us yahoos" or "other even more inferior yahoos" [:-tophat]

I thought class was dismissed..

[kurt]

Hey, I'm never done. Class is never over. It's always an ongoing dialog.

At this stage of the game, I've been listening to the same goofy folklore for 30 years, and it's getting to me. I push back at the goofiness. Sometimes I push hard. On occasion, I'll take a slap at it.

It's about respect, and not continuing the vapidity of the vision of the trade associations push on us. Anyone that's serious about this gig gets my respect. The folks that push and continue to take things to a higher level are my brothers and sisters.

That's all.

[mgbinspect]

Hey, I'm never done. Class is never over. It's always an ongoing dialog.

At this stage of the game, I've been listening to the same goofy folklore for 30 years, and it's getting to me. I push back at the goofiness. Sometimes I push hard. On occasion, I'll take a slap at it.

It's about respect, and not continuing the vapidity of the vision of the trade associations push on us. Anyone that's serious about this gig gets my respect. The folks that push and continue to take things to a higher level are my brothers and sisters.

That's all.

That's why I hang out here. Always more to learn. Wasn't it Jack Nicholson that said, "You make me want to be a better home inspector." ?

All kidding aside, hey, anyone that thinks there won't always be room for improvement, is already on a downhill slope. That's a fact. I like teaching when I can and learning 24/7 and I appreciate the part you and the rest of the TIJ folk play in the process.

I believe my mind was freed up of a bit of folklore in this thread, and I'm glad of it. I'm still working on saying and sweating over writing the word "code". It's going to take some time, but I'll get there.

[kurt]

Try it this way.......

"The XYZ is screwed up; it's broken/a hazard/not working correctly. The basis for my opinion is (put appropriate code cite here)."

You're not citing code or enforcing it; you're using it as a reference and basis for your opinion. High school students do it. So does every other profession.

We should too.

You absolutely don't say....."the stairs ain't built to code", which is how most folks write, and that's what gets them in trouble.

[Jim Katen]

I Think ASHI was wise in writing in the standards a couple of related items; 'not required to write code violations and not required to write up repair specifications.

I think ASHI was wise in not limiting people from exceeding those things that are required. Because frankly, when you get down to it, the ASHI Standards are not a particularly robust set of parameters for a home inspection.

I am willing to be judged in court by the ASHI standards, and thankfully after 26 years that hasn't come up, but there are a couple of ways to set yourself higher standards to be judged in court by. First is using the "Code" word in the inspection report. I consider that this is raising the standard by which one inspects by, such that if someone makes a claim that a code violation was missed it becomes difficult to use ASHI standards as a defence when the report includes other code violations.

That notion keeps coming back like a bad penny. Can you produce a rock solid reference for that idea? How many times has a home inspector been held to a higher standard because he cited the source of his opinion as coming from a code (or from anywhere else)? As far as I can tell, it's never happened.

Some inspectors even advertise that they exceed ASHI standards, wow, now what standards will the court go by - likely any one the plantiffs' attorny wants.

And you know this because . . . ?

Home inspectors don't get sued when they provide references for their opinions. They get sued when they screw up. Avoid screwing up.

Some here seem to know all the codes well enough to cite all violations and thats admirable - I can't and have never written up a violation as "Code".

I agree that it's stupid to "write up a violation as 'code'." However I think it's a good practice to identify a problem, explain why it's a problem, recommend a course of action, and (sometimes) provide a reference source for your opinion. That's not the same as "enforcing the code," "acting as a code inspector," or saying something stupid, like, "this here thing isn't to code."

In my area it becomes a problem when something is written up as wrong and so do "x". The buyers then demand the sellers do "x" and the sellers want something other than "because the inspector said so" , they want a reference. This creates contract issues and nobodies happy.

Um, if someone were to provide a reference up front, that wouldn't be a problem, would it? It might just head off a bunch of phone calls, letter writing & arguing, mightn't it?

Personally I would have writin this issue as "I consider the exposed gas line a potential hazard such as by damage from tripping on. I recommend having the gas co. or lic. plumber check and make recommendation"

Is that exactly what you would have written? Is that even English?

I have alerted the buyer, the buyers not going to ask the sellers to fix, and I have made a recommendation.

Its always worked for me anyway.

I bet it works real well for the agents when you write stuff up so that buyers don't ask the sellers to fix stuff.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[Tom Raymond]

Aren't most of the items we write up code deficiencies? All of the gibberish in the various SOPs says that we are not code inspectors and cannot enforce code. I've never seen an SOP that specifically prohibits us from citing code.

Read your SOP. The stuff that it requires you to look at is stuff that is covered by the building codes.

[kurt]

Yes, exactly. Everything, in one way or another, goes back to building codes. Manufacturer spec's are "building codes".

[hausdok]

OK,

I guess the next time I see a fireplace tools stand on the hearth I had better write it up as a trip/fall hazard. Should probably also write up that darned metal thingy the firewood is lying in. Grandma likes to hug the walls as she walks and she's sure to trip over all of that stuff. While I'm at it, I need to get those radiators removed and put somewhere else, and then there's that......

The other day I had a customer that wanted me to write up the fact that there weren't any kiddie bars surrounding the front of a gas fireplace 'cuz his toddler will be able to touch the glass of the fireplace and burn his widdle hands. It's equipped with an ignitor so there isn't any 24/7/365 pilot; the only way a kid can get burned on it is if it's on and someone isn't watching the kid and saying something like, "No! Don't touch. Owee!"

I asked him if he had some kind of physical limitation that was going to prevent him from grabbing his kid and keeping him away or would stop him from simply turning off the gas valve and not using the fireplace when the kid is out of bed and wandering around unsupervised. I pointed out that I hadn't seen any evidence that the people that lived there had small children so there obviously wasn't a need for any safety bars. Then I told him where the nearest hearth and home store was and suggested he stop by and see if they sell any kind of child-safety bars or whatever. If they do, I said, he can make it his very first new homeowner's project.

Do we really need to be writing stuff because we think people in general are too dumb to not screw something up? Is that the job now?

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[Terence McCann]

OK,

I guess the next time I see a fireplace tools stand on the hearth I had better write it up as a trip/fall hazard. Should probably also write up that darned metal thingy the firewood is lying in. Grandma likes to hug the walls as she walks and she's sure to trip over all of that stuff.

Actually Mike senior citizens often use walls, mantles of fireplaces, furniture as a means of steadying themselves as they try and walk. It's quite common.

Do we really need to be writing stuff because we think people in general are too dumb to not screw something up?

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

Yep. I do it all the time - especially when I think someone could injure themselves.

[mgbinspect]

In all honesty, when I started the thread I was really a bit in Jim's camp as far as the "tripping hazard" goes. You'd have to work pretty hard at it.

My bigger concern was that when I look at that setup, I see fragility, and I begin to immediately imagine some far fetched, yet possible scenarios based upon the equation: gas + fragility + blunt force = disaster.

I mean, speaking of fireplace tools, what if one falls over and that solid heavy steel handle lands squarely on the aluminum tube at the fitting. Or, a direct hit from the mantle with the gold plated and engraved railroad tie that CSX gave you when you retired. Or what if the grand son is whacking the holy h@ll out of that tube with your favorite 2 iron, two seconds before you reach him to bust his butt for it. Or, the kid, for whatever reason, decides that that silver tube is just the coolest thing to saw on with the little pruning saw you left out on the front porch, because it's actually working! Look at all those pretty bits of silver fly as I saw. Wheee...

The fact is, I just plain don't like this setup and don't really need any reference to back it up. We all know that If a freak disaster can be imagined, it CAN happen.

This all touches on one of my pet peeves: Suddenly a few years ago, it became vogue for guys to strain at gnats with code, somewhat as if it were a religion and great gift to be able to spew the stuff - the very threshold to Nirvana, and yet swallow camels because it wasn't a code issue. Frankly, I think one of many necessary skills a home inspector better possess is the ability to imagine what can possibly happen and act on such intuitions. I sometimes think that some HIs have left the real world to wade through a sea of codes, when codes are usually based upon real world past disasters.

That being said, I DO plan to reference code now, but some guys become a bit too robotic regarding code only to mindlessly walk past real life red flags.

[Marc]

With this thread, I'm pretty much decided that I'm going to begin adding code cites to my boilerplate, something I've never done before, with all due diligence to the wording. As for this gas line in the OP, I've not seen any clear cut cites against it at all in this thread and...IMHO, that adds credence to Mike O's reasoning.

Marc

[kurt]

Mike's "reasoning" is disingenuous. It's not reasoning. It's not even logical.

As a start, the segue from a poor quality gas line installation to a discussion of old folks tripping over fireplace tools, alzheimer'd out oldsters walking along walls, and removing radiators, isn't addressing what we were talking about in the first place.

His "reasoning" taken to it's logical conclusion, means dismissing safety concerns because it's not our job. I think I can safely (no pun intended) say that nearly everything we point out as a safety concern has a very low statistical probability of any accident ever occurring. We could probably forget reporting on safety items, and the accident rate would barely increase. I get that. The problem is, Mike's "reasoning" takes us out of observation and reporting on possible safety concerns, and puts us in a position of degree of risk assessment.

If I recall my studying correctly, the underlying premise for all the IRC codes is building safety.

If someone wants to argue that it isn't dangerous, that's their prerogative. I'd love to line up a review board of fuel gas experts, pipefitters, the mfg's. of the aluminum tubing and flare fittings, and IRC safety experts and have them comment on this particular installation.

I doubt any of them would bless it.

How many times has one of us found an aluminum pilot light supply pipe that's kinked and leaking gas? I've found several in my career. This is something that is protected inside a furnace cabinet, and someone bumped it, kinked it, and caused a leak. The same materials, exposed outside of a furnace cabinet, have a reasonable likelihood of being bumped, damaged, with a resulting leak.

If anyone chooses to dismiss this item as nothing, that is their prerogative, and I respect that, sort of. There's lots of stuff to think about on this job, and this wouldn't hit my list of most important items.

But, the condition taken on it's face, by itself, is a POS install, and I hope that everyone here recognizes it.

[mgbinspect]

When you boil this whole gig down to its simplest, other than such things like describing systems and their maintenance, folks really want to know the answers to three basic questions:

1. What HAS happened?

2. What IS happening?

3. What CAN happen?

[hausdok]

Mike's "reasoning" is disingenuous. It's not reasoning. It's not even logical.

His "reasoning" taken to it's logical conclusion, means dismissing safety concerns because it's not our job.

Nope, not what I'm saying at all. What I'm saying is that, IMO, writing this up is making a mountain out of a molehill. I think it was the very first response where Granny tripping over the pipe was brought up; from there, the list of possibles has grown by leaps and bounds. Where does it end?

It wasn't so long ago there was a discussion on here about that particular type of ceramic log set and how dangerous it was to have the gas control valve and the gas line inside the firebox of the fireplace. The list of things that could go wrong just kept growing and growing. Well, if memory serves, the OP on that thread wasn't acquainted with the set and was, like in this case, just imagining all sorts of things that were going to go wrong. I didn't see an issue with it; I doubt that anyone out here where those log sets are a dime a dozen did.

Sure, the pipe and elbow sticking up out of that hearth is a crap install and looks like hell; and I wouldn't like it any more than the next guy, but I think folks are over-thinking this one. Have you looked behind a gas dryer or a gas stove lately? When little Sally knocks her favorite shirt off the top of the nicely folded clothes into the gap behind the dryer and goes to fish it out with a broom handle, don't you think it's possible that she's liable to hit that flexible connector, kink it, break it and blow herself up? Guess we had better start writing those up. How about the kitchen stove? When Gramma drops her change on the kitchen floor and it rolls under the stove, what's going to happen when she starts shoving that broom under there? Better write those up too.

I think I can safely (no pun intended) say that nearly everything we point out as a safety concern has a very low statistical probability of any accident ever occurring. We could probably forget reporting on safety items, and the accident rate would barely increase. I get that. The problem is, Mike's "reasoning" takes us out of observation and reporting on possible safety concerns, and puts us in a position of degree of risk assessment.

Well, that might be true if I'd even considered it a "risk"; I don't.

You are right; the job isn't about risk assessment; but neither is it about contriving wild safety scenarios in order to justify calling something we think is a piece of crap. The same thing happens with CSST; although with less regularity now that folks have become accustomed to seeing the stuff. Still, every few months.......

I'd love to line up a review board of fuel gas experts, pipefitters, the mfg's. of the aluminum tubing and flare fittings, and IRC safety experts and have them comment on this particular installation.

I doubt any of them would bless it.

Now whose being disingenuous? You know very well they will all decry it and you also know very well that if/when the pipefiltter calls them up to complain that some a**hole home inspector wrote it up, they'll probably take his side rather than risk losing his business.

If anyone chooses to dismiss this item as nothing, that is their prerogative, and I respect that, sort of. There's lots of stuff to think about on this job, and this wouldn't hit my list of most important items.

Exercising; also exercising my prerogative to voice my own opinion about it.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[kurt]

When would a pile of clothes damage a modern flexible gas connector? How would a broom damage a modern plastic coated flexible connector? I think that's why new modern flexible gas connectors are recommended/required in those locations you're talking about.

Change that comparison back to flexible aluminum tubing, and of course it could damaged. It probably would be damaged. That's why we should check gas appliance connectors.

Again, you're taking things we aren't talking about, and using them as examples to support you're flawed position.

And no, the same thing does not happen with CSST. They're two completely different materials and installation standards. We've got a small mountain of research, along with specific guidelines (including dimensions) by the mfg., where we can assess whether or not visible damage to the pipe is acceptable.

Where is the specification indicating those same things for aluminum tubing and flare fittings?

And, after you tell me where those guidelines are for assessing condition of bent and kinked aluminum tubing, explain to me how aluminum tubing gets bent and kinked in furnace cabinets, where it's reasonably protected.

You need to start considering what we're talking about, and stop interjecting different materials and installation standards. That's the disingenuous part.

No one has made a mountain out of this small molehill. Not even close. I think the majority opinion, and mine certainly, is that it is a very small potato.

And, if you don't want to write it up, that's fine with me. Honestly, I might not have even seen it depending on the house I was looking at.

OK, now back to flawed debate tactics and the weather............

[hausdok]

Ah,

He misses it again. I'll never win accolades as the great communicator.

I should have used a better example than gas lines 'cuz they're too close to this issue. Doesn't matter; I'm objecting to the idea of writing things up that we personally don't like or think are dumb, that are not prohibited by any rule that one can cite, and then using imagined scenarios to justify the writup. That's what bugs me. "Just 'cuz" is not a valid argument and if you're going to write stuff up it should be for valid reasons. I just don't see the danger in this one.

Now, if I'd heard last week that some lady down the street had hooked her toe on a gas pipe in a hearth, fallen and broken her hip, maybe I might be inclined to agree that this is worth writing up and would be the champion of the trip and fall argument, but not based on imagined trips, or imagined axes falling on the pipe, etc..

By the way, betcha a case of Martinelli's Sparkling Cidar that's a stainless steel gas connector. I haven't seen aluminum one's used in years.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[kurt]

Martinelli's Cider?!?!? What kind of wimp bet is that?

I'm thinking sumo beatdown, and I get a handicap of a baseball bat.......

Again, I might not even see something like that, and it's exactly the sort of thing that some customer will bump when they're moving in, they'll panic, call a repair person, and the repair person sez the home inspector should have seen that and told them to fix it.

You said yourself (a few posts back) it's a POS install.

Which POS's do you write up, and which one's not?

Now, don't make me come over there............

[Bain]

Awesome!! It's smack-down time!

I'm starting a pool . . . Odds are currently 4/5 either way. In case you're wondering, the 10% vig is to help cover my costs.

[hausdok]

Hah, smack down? Wimpenbuler?

Ain't gonna happen. The guy eats whey for breakfast.

He comes near me with a baseball bat and I'm gonna turn it into an oversize tampon and put it so far up his butt that a dentist will have to remove it bit by bit with a sawzall.

Ooh Yeah!

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[Erby]

Better watch out, Mike. He's pretty good at sticking things in tiny places himself. Just look at his avatar!

-