wall to roof flashing detail

[Bain]

I have an English degree and have always devoured style and usage manuals/books. Kingsley Amis, in The King's English, explains that the purpose of language is not to impress or confuse, but to communicate. I was horribly pedantic many years ago, but soon realized that if nobody understood what I was saying, I was pretty much wasting my breath. I've forgotten where I read it, but someone once said that the most difficult aspect of writing is trying to explain a complicated issue or idea in simple language. Stephen Hawking is a successful writer because he's able to explain quarks and black holes in a manner that laypeople can readily understand. I'm sure he could also explain those things in a way that would be impenetrable to anyone who didn't possess a PHD in physics, but he deliberately chose not to because he wanted to communicate.

John

[Chris Bernhardt]

This is how I wrote it up.

4) Exterior: Questionable siding details in two locations. One on the left side of the house where the rake of the garage roof meets the house. See picture. And on the back of the house where the siding meets the rake of the roof over the kitchen. See picture. We know that a weather resistant barrier should be present however these are inherently difficult areas to detail properly. Further investigation is needed if there is some better way to detail the flashing of these joints so that they are just not open.

OK now, swing away! To those about to rock we salute you.

I spent some time before I wrote it and tried to really figure out a better way of doing these particularly joint details better then just to let the WRB do it. This same brand newly constructed house had no insulation in the attic and had passed final inspection.

Chris, Oregon

[hausdok]

Hi Kurt,

I'm not saying don't have a spirited discussion. It's a fascinating debate, everyone is making some great points, and I for one don't want to see this discussion end, because this is a topic that we all know needs to be out there, but it looks like it could be on the cusp of, well...you know.

I'm just saying it would be a shame if such a valuable topic takes an unpleasant turn, so I'm asking everyone to keep it alive by choosing their words carefully.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[Les]

Chris, nothing personal I'm just feeling pissy this morn - but, check your punctuation in first line and fourth. "we" don't know - in the third line. Fifth line, get rid of "some" and put in "a". "some" leaves too much to the imagination. But ya know what? I understood what you said!

ya ya, the punctuation sucks in this post!

[Chris Bernhardt]

Thanks, Les

I have inspected a number of this builders homes and like many builders this guy considers home inspectors like flys on dung. I know its not well written and I know both the client and the realtor pretty well. For a unfamiliar client and realtor I would have been more formal. But I get the "we" thing. I tend to use that too much and need to shed it. The "some" was a good point. I use "some" and "a number of" a lot so the seller doesn't pin me down to a specific number or location. This happens a lot with siding issues, outlets and the such. but there are probably other ways of writing to cover my concerns and be more accurate and clear which I hope to learn here.

Chris, Oregon

[randynavarro]

Originally posted by hausdok

Hi Kurt,

I'm not saying don't have a spirited discussion. It's a fascinating debate, everyone is making some great points, and I for one don't want to see this discussion end, because this is a topic that we all know needs to be out there, but it looks like it could be on the cusp of, well...you know.

I'm just saying it would be a shame if such a valuable topic takes an unpleasant turn, so I'm asking everyone to keep it alive by choosing their words carefully.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

I too am interested in this discussion and meant no disrespect by my previous post "Wow. [:-boggled"

But I was simply making the point that housewhisperer really uses a lot of words!!

Twenty four year of experience- I look forward to learning from him if he can 'hang' with the board here. But even I was going brain dead trying to understand what he was communicating.

[kurt]

Originally posted by hausdok

Hi Kurt,

I'm not saying don't have a spirited discussion. It's a fascinating debate, everyone is making some great points, and I for one don't want to see this discussion end, because this is a topic that we all know needs to be out there, but it looks like it could be on the cusp of, well...you know.

I'm just saying it would be a shame if such a valuable topic takes an unpleasant turn, so I'm asking everyone to keep it alive by choosing their words carefully.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

I appreciate that. When I step over any line deemed unsteppable, delete my post. I'm a big boy, and understand obnoxious people should be brushed off. It's the internet; it's just x's & o's in the ether.

This just hits home in a lot of ways for me. We're professional technical writers, like it or not. All these bizarre individualized cosmologies for communicating simple things are goofy.

[kurt]

Originally posted by Chris Bernhardt

This is how I wrote it up.

4) Exterior: Questionable siding details in two locations. One on the left side of the house where the rake of the garage roof meets the house. See picture. And on the back of the house where the siding meets the rake of the roof over the kitchen. See picture. We know that a weather resistant barrier should be present however these are inherently difficult areas to detail properly. Further investigation is needed if there is some better way to detail the flashing of these joints so that they are just not open.

OK now, swing away! To those about to rock we salute you.

I spent some time before I wrote it and tried to really figure out a better way of doing these particularly joint details better then just to let the WRB do it. This same brand newly constructed house had no insulation in the attic and had passed final inspection.

Chris, Oregon

Not bad, but not good either. I used to use word like "questionable" but what's that get anyone?

How about.....

"The flashing detail(s) @ the ...... are installed poorly; they could leak. The flashing @ ........ should be repaired to close up the gaps @ these locations to prevent leaks."

Maybe add something like this.....

"These specific locations are tricky to flash properly; the flashing that's installed doesn't conform w/any recommended practice from the VSI or the siding mfg. There's a reason the VSI & mfg's. make these recommendations; if you do it the way they say to do it, it doesn't leak."

Recently, I've taken to using photos; lots & lots of photos for this sort of thing. When you give someone 2-3 photos, w/closeups and arrows pointing to the gaps, it's real easy to understand. Even folks that don't know anything about flashing or siding can look @ a gap in the wall & see it could leak.

More photos, less words can be very effective.

[Brandon Chew]

I by no means have perfected the art of writing a good HI report but that won't stop me from sharing what I think on this topic.

I think having a glossary as an appendix to the report is a good thing to have for the reasons Kevin has stated. The glossary does not need to be extensive. It just needs to have the terms and meanings that you, as the inspector (and your lawyer), think are important to clearly define to your client. I am using a glossary in my report.

I think putting the terms from your glossary in ALL CAPS and bold every time you use them in your report narrative is excessive and actually interferes with the process of communicating your message to your client.

I think we need to communicate our message to our client in full sentences using plain English, in a manner that they can understand, and using no more words than are necessary to convey it. Sometimes when explaining complicated concepts it takes a lot of words to make my point. But those sentences should still be easy to read.

I've worked for more than 20 years as an engineer in a government regulatory agency, so believe me when I tell you that I've seen some of the most bloated and confusing writing that has ever been written! The time to impress our clients with our knowledge is before they hire us and while we are performing the inspection. But when we are communicating with them the most important thing is that they understand what we are trying to say.

I've been told throughout my career that I write well. Even so, when I decided I wanted to get involved in the inspection business, I've been doing some self-study to improve my writing skills. This is just a reflection upon how important I think this skill is to the profession.

Brandon

Edit to add: LOL... after re-reading this I realized that you guys had me so pumped up that I forgot to add that I'm preaching to the choir since a lot of those opinions were shaped by many of the people who post here.

[hausdok]

Hell Brandon, that's OK. We're all so old that we're suffering from alzheimers (Or is it old-timers) disease anyway and won't remember having posted it.

OT - OF!!!

M.

[kurt]

Brandon, I think you write very well. It sounds like you talking, not some software program. And, you use paragraphs to separate your ideas; simple stuff like that seems to elude most HI's.

And, I'm with you. My opinions on this strange job that we do are formed & clarified by a lot of the folks in here.

[housewhisperer]

It's gratifying to see the discussion this has created and that, for the most part, we all respectfully refrain from engaging in ad hominem (attacking the person rather than the idea) argument or debate. At the risk of being accused of repeating myself, I'll say, again, that I agree with everyone who believes that we must speak and write in a manner that our clients understand. However, the appropriate use and placement of technical written language and "legalese" and the use of simple, clear, and succinct language including a degree of "vernacular" where it's effective, aren't mutually exclusive concepts.

The home inspection profession, like practically every other profession, has its own language with its own specialized vocabulary. Practically speaking, the jargon of our profession is a two-edged sword. It's a useful and convenient shorthand for inspectors when speaking with each other. On the other hand, it confuses and excludes people who aren't familiar with it and don't understand it. That's why, when inspectors talk with each other, terms like overcurrent protection device, barge rafter, lift station, and evaporator coil can be tossed around with ease because they're understood by other inspectors. But these and similar terms can impede our communication if we use them when speaking with clients

This isn't to suggest that instead of overcurrent device we say "electrical doohickey that turns off the juice in the main box." No, we say circuit breaker or fuse depending on which is appropriate. When it's necessary to use a term that clients may not understand, if we're attentive, we immediately explain the term before they have a chance to look or feel foolish because they don't know what it means. We respectfully educate as we inspect.

What we do or don't communicate verbally during an inspection isn't what we will be held to in arbitration or litigation. In any litigation or dispute resolution, we will be held to our contract and to what we have or have not written in the inspection report. LAWSUITS ARE WON ON FACTS. It's difficult to litigate against facts and quantifiable data and information. Subjective statements, editorializing, vagueness, “waffle/weaselâ€

[kurt]

I can't disagree w/that.

The two times I've had (minor) problems w/inspections, it was my failure to write a competent report that was my downfall. I'd talk all around the problem, but never identify it clearly.

Lots of words, but no clarity. Been there. Don't want to go back.

[Bain]

Kevin, I don't think the patronizing definitions were necessary.

Having said that, you're mostly correct. The words one uses and the manner in which he speaks tells others about his education, background and experience. There's nothing wrong with describing an egregious structural defect or the profligate work of a contractor(definitions purposely omitted). But the stilted language utilized in your earlier posts serves no real purpose.

Who doesn't silently moan when someone says, "That is correct," rather than, "Yes" or "That's right?"

[housewhisperer]

Bain,

I guess I'm to be held to a double standard. Because the writer of an earlier post said that he didn't understand or wasn't familiar with some of the terms/phrases I used, I respectfully defined terms where I thought it might help in my last post. Now, I'm labeled as "patronizing." I thought we were doing a pretty good job of refraining from ad hominem argument. Apparently, I was mistaken.

[Jerry Simon]

Originally posted by housewhisperer

Bain,

I guess I'm to be held to a double standard. Because the writer of an earlier post said that he didn't understand or wasn't familiar with some of the terms/phrases I used, I respectfully defined terms where I thought it might help in my last post. Now, I'm labeled as "patronizing." I thought we were doing a pretty good job of refraining from ad hominem argument. Apparently, I was mistaken.

Perhaps a private reply to the gentleman would have been appropriate. Addressing us all with such a reply sounded a tad condescending. Some well-taken points, though. And, the lack of bolding, italics, and underlining was easy on these old eyes (thanks).

[Bain]

ad hominem

Latin. 1. appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.

2. attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.

I'm guilty of neither of the above. I was merely stating an opinion regarding the manner in which you chose to express yourself.

[kurt]

Originally posted by housewhisperer

I guess I'm to be held to a double standard. Because the writer of an earlier post said that he didn't understand or wasn't familiar with some of the terms/phrases I used, I respectfully defined terms where I thought it might help in my last post.

Well, if I'm that guy, I understood all the words and am familiar w/the terms/phrases. I just thought it was bloated.

There was the distinct impression that the author was in the background, straining to find big words & use them in long sentences, like Superman fighting Kryptonite....

"Must....use...big....words; must....appear.... smart.....arrgghh....."

Now it's at the point where things can go bad, so I'm taking a deep breath & signing off on this thread.

[Bain]

I'm with Kurt. Enough is enough. It's sixty degrees near the end of November here, and I'm gonna take Loki the wonder dog for a walk. With no coat. Global warming? Not if you read Mark Twain, where oranges used to grow in Missisippi but no longer can 'cause it's too cold. Loki will bark and chase the moon, probably like we humans used to do before we became so civilized.

[housewhisperer]

This has been interesting and valuable. I've learned much to my benefit from what has been brought to the table - from both the text of the thread and from "reading between the lines." However, I'll bow out here since others seem inclined to yield the field. When the game is no longer worth the candle, it's time to move on to different topics and new pursuits.

Adios, amigos! Perhaps we'll reengage ideas another day.

[Brian G]

Originally posted by Chris Bernhardt

This is how I wrote it up.

OK now, swing away! To those about to rock we salute you.

I feel like Dracula...now I've been invited in. [:-vamp][:-dev3]

Exterior: Questionable siding details in two locations.

Sentence fragment. Like Brandon, I favor using all complete sentences in a report. A great many HI's act like they're paying 50 cents a word and don't want to run the bill up with little words like "I", or "the", or in this case "I found". That's just one of my things.

---

One on the left side of the house where the rake of the garage roof meets the house.

Fragment #2.

---

See picture.

Which one? Was it imbedded by this text? If not, did it have a number?

---

And on the back of the house where the siding meets the rake of the roof over the kitchen.

Fragment #3. Those three would have made a nice compound sentence.

---

See picture.

See above.

---

We know that a weather resistant barrier should be present however these are inherently difficult areas to detail properly.

Aside from the use of "we" Les already recommended against, this reads like a run-on sentence (but may not be, at least technically). I'd put a comma after "present".

You could just drop "We know that" altogether.

Nice use of "inherently" there Chris...someone else might object to it, but I think it's the perfect word for what you're trying to say.

---

Further investigation is needed if there is some better way to detail the flashing of these joints so that they are just not open.

This is the one that made me post. As I read that, if there is no better way to flash this detail then no further investigation is needed (much less outright repair). The second part isn't quite right either. My version of that part would be something like this:

"You should find a contractor who has experience with flashing details like this and have him do whatever is necessary to fix these two spots."

---

So the new paragraph might read:

Exterior: I found questionable siding details in two locations; one was on the left side of the house where the rake of the garage roof meets the house (see photo # 14), and the other was on the back of the house where the siding meets the rake of the roof over the kitchen (see photo # 17). A weather resistant barrier should be present, however these are inherently difficult areas to detail properly. You should find a contractor who has experience with flashing details like this and have him do whatever is necessary to fix these two spots.id="maroon">

I saw where you said in a later post that this report was for people you knew and you didn't write formally on purpose, so it is what it is, but hey.... you invited the vampires in. []

Brian G.

Blood-Sucking Parser of Paragraphs & Phrases [^] []

[Jim Katen]

Originally posted by Chris Bernhardt

This is how I wrote it up.

4) Exterior: Questionable siding details in two locations. One on the left side of the house where the rake of the garage roof meets the house. See picture. And on the back of the house where the siding meets the rake of the roof over the kitchen. See picture. We know that a weather resistant barrier should be present however these are inherently difficult areas to detail properly. Further investigation is needed if there is some better way to detail the flashing of these joints so that they are just not open.

OK now, swing away! To those about to rock we salute you. . .

id="green">

Well, since you asked, I'll take that as a license to preach.id="blue">

Exterior: Questionable siding details in two locations.id="green">

Do you really think that the details are questionable? I think they're wrong. "Questionable" is a weak word. It has no firm footing. It tells me you're unsure. By using it, you give your opponent an easy out. I suggest using strong unambivalent words such as "wrong." Wrong is a good word; I use it a lot. Throw your boat in the water and jump in with both feet. Don't stand on the dock & put one foot in the boat.id="blue">

One on the left side of the house where the rake of the garage roof meets the house. See picture. And on the back of the house where the siding meets the rake of the roof over the kitchen. See picture.id="green">

Maybe it's just me, but I find it confusing when I have to stop and refer to a picture. Write the comment well enough so that no picture is necessary. Then give them the picture to drive the point home. First the cake, then the icing. Don't scramble them up together. As a side benefit, for me anyway, it helps to hone my writing skill when I have to write as if there were no picture.id="blue">

We know that a weather resistant barrier should be present however these are inherently difficult areas to detail properly.id="green">

We know this, do we? I'll bet that your customers don't know this. Aside from that, I really don't like the way you use "however" here. You're using it to imply a concession. From a forensic point of view, you're giving your opponent a way out. id="blue">

Further investigation is needed if there is some better way to detail the flashing of these joints so that they are just not open.id="green">

The passive voice is weak. Try to stay away from it, especially when making recommendations. My personal preference is to use the imperative form. Aside from that, the sentence is confusing. I think you left out the words "to determine" between "is needed" and "if".

As for the content of the recommendation, it's weak too -- inexact and vague. What is this "further investigation"? Who's to do it? Is there really further investigation needed or are you just unsure about what you're seeing? The whole tone of the recommnedation leaves the reader wondering what you're really trying to say.

Worst of all, you never explained what the problem is. You never said, "There are gaps in the siding that can leak."

I would say: At the point where the corner of the garage roof meets the house, and again at the point where the corner of the kitchen roof meets the house, there are gaps in the siding. Water can get behind the siding in these areas and cause damage to the walls. Have the siding reinstalled properly so that water doesn’t run behind it.

In a primo report, there would be a couple of pictures of the offending areas adjacent the text. Circles & arrows would be nice.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

id="blue">

[Chris Bernhardt]

Thank you, Thank you, Thank you!

It probably would have taken me another 10 years in my bubble to get a brain. Uh, not saying I got a brain now but at least I have a new path to one.

Chris, Oregon

[hausdok]

Hi Chris,

That's why TIJ is here. Jim, Kurt and others like them don't have to help their competition by sharing their knowledge of technical issues or helping them understand how something could be written better. They do it because they really want to help and because doing so helps to raise the skill set within the profession. Helping others is infectious, take what you learn here and spread it around and eventually, maybe not tomorrow but someday, the entire profession will garner more respect, and we'll command fees that reflect what we deserve - not what some real estate person thinks our knowledge is worth.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[Les]

AMEN!