Panels not marked

[sepefrio]

Just curios how you guys write up panels that have no markings, as in you can't tell which breaker goes to what. You can't confirm if the appropriate breaker for the AC is the right size for example. Do you mention it in just the panel section? Do you mention in all concerned? Or do you make simple comments at each item, then an overall comment in the summary?

Just reread this and I'm not implying just panels. I mean overall. For example a leaking roof. Do you do a complete write up in the roof section and the attic section (since there is water damage from the leaking roof), then one for the living room that has water stains or make simple comments in the individual sections and in the summary make a detailed write up about the entire condition?

[resqman]

If the panel is not marked, it is wrong and I call out for an electrician to repair. I check the size of the breaker against the gauge of the wire, not necessarily to what device it is attached. Without tracing the wires how would you know for sure? Most HVAC have dedicated disconnect panels. I check the disconnect breaker sizes against the data plate on the HVAC.

As to other areas, it depends on how your report is organized. Some people organize their report by room., i.e. These are ALL the things that are wrong in the bathroom. (electrical, plumbing, interiors, ventilation, etc.) Some organize by system, i.e. These are all the plumbing problems in the whole house.

I organize by System. If there is a roof leak, the source of the leak (if I could identify it) would be listed in the roofing section. i.e. The flashing around the waste vent pipe is deteriorated. Water has penetrated the roofing system and has caused black water stains and damage to the roof sheathing around the waste vent pipe. Repair. In the Interiors section I report the water stains on the ceiling. i.e. There were water stains on the ceiling of the master bathroom ceiling. The ceiling was wet and soft to the touch. The waste vent pipe flashing directly overhead is leaking and causing the water stain. Repair the roof flashing leak and then repair the damaged ceiling.

My summary section is also sorted by System so in the summary both statements would appear. That way my summary follows the same organization as my report so readers can refer back to the body section of the same name. The statements in my summary are the exact same statements from my body. The exception is the photos are only in the body.

I write the body of the report. Once complete, all Safety , Repair and Further Investigate are copied and pasted to the summary. Maintenance and Recommendations are forbidden from the summary section by the licensing board rules in North Carolina.

[Chris Bernhardt]

Yes, I call out unmarked or apparently mis-marked circuit directories; I just don't verify them.

My summary is my report. IOW, I make an ordered list of the things I found that I want to bring to the clients attention. There's no need to do things twice. After the ordered list of findings, are picture pages, then a section of required descriptions, ending with a section of all my disclosures and disclaimers. My report is not broken into a section on roofing, a section on electrical , a section on plumbing, etc.

You'll get lots & lots of arguments to the contrary, but IMO sectionalized reports by roofing, electrical, plumbing, etc. are obsolete (the old and traditional way of doing things). In ten years of inspection I have never produced one.

What I have found time after time after time is that clients jump right to the ordered list of pictures.

The comic book format pioneered by Kurt M. I think is the wave of the future.

Chris, Oregon

[Jerry Simon]

Originally posted by resqman

If the panel is not marked, it is wrong and I call out for an electrician to repair.

Probably HI folklore, but I heard once nothing in the NEC requires a panel to be labeled, and if so, such might not be *wrong*. I'm too lazy to check/verify, though.

[Phillip]

Originally posted by Jerry Simon

Originally posted by resqman

If the panel is not marked, it is wrong and I call out for an electrician to repair.

Probably HI folklore, but I heard once nothing in the NEC requires a panel to be labeled, and if so, such might not be *wrong*. I'm too lazy to check/verify, though.

That What I have heard too. It changed in my area when it went to the 2003 IRC.

[Mike Lamb]

NEC 2002

110.22 Identification of Disconnecting Means.

"Each disconnecting means shall be legibly marked to indicate its purpose..." etc.

[hausdok]

IRC E3304.11

Identification of disconnecting means. Each disconnecting means shall be legibly marked to indicate its purpose, except where located and arranged so that the purpose is evident. The markings hall have the durability to withstand the environment involved.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[msteger]

I agree with what the others above say. I recommend all breakers/fuses be labeled and those that are labeled (if any) be verified. I explain to my client that a licensed electrician can do this pretty easily. I look at the individual breaker ratings and the branch wiring going to each. If they don't match (wire gauge vs. current rating), I call it out as a potential fire hazard and evidence of non-professional electrical work.

I organize my report by system.. roof, exterior, attic, plumbing, electrical, basement, etc. We all have our own ways of presenting the home inspection report to the client.

[John Dirks Jr]

I'll write up a bad roof in the roofing section which will include the usual comment about the possibility of leaks.

Then, when I get into the attic and see evidence leaks, I'll take pictures of them. The pictures will go into the attic section. The comments in there will point out the evidence of leaks and refer to the bad roof that was discussed earlier in the report.

Roof

"The roof old and worn. If not already, it will soon cause leaks. Hire a roofer and have them replace the roof covering."

(insert picture of worn roof)

Attic

"In the attic I saw water stains on the roof sheathing. The stained areas are wet. We talked about the bad roof in the roofing section. When the roof covering is replaced, some of the sheathing may need replacing. Have the roofer replace any water damaged sheathing."

(insert picture of water stained sheathing)

[Brandon Whitmore]

Roof

"The roof old and worn. If not already, it will soon cause leaks. Hire a roofer and have them replace the roof covering."

(insert picture of worn roof)

Attic

"In the attic I saw water stains on the roof sheathing. The stained areas are wet. We talked about the bad roof in the roofing section. When the roof covering is replaced, some of the sheathing may need replacing. Have the roofer replace any water damaged sheathing."

f

(insert picture of water stained sheathing)

That's the way I used to do it. I then realized I was doing my client a disservice. Wouldn't it be better just to say "The roof is shot, and is leaking. Have a competent roofing professional repair/ replace the roof and all damaged sheathing"? That way the client wouldn't have to read something that says it could leak at the roof section, and that it is leaking in the attic section.

[Chris Bernhardt]

That's another pit fall with the traditional sectionalized report or rather sectionalized thinking; inconsistencies in reporting between sections and failing to point out the forest from the trees.

Chris, Oregon

[resqman]

"My summary is my report. IOW, I make an ordered list of the things I found that I want to bring to the clients attention. There's no need to do things twice. After the ordered list of findings, are picture pages, then a section of required descriptions, ending with a section of all my disclosures and disclaimers. My report is not broken into a section on roofing, a section on electrical , a section on plumbing, etc."

Could you clarify a bit please...

In your ordered list of findings, is it a radon list of defects, or are they arranged by some magical ranking of most dangerous, costly, exciting, the order in which you stumbled across them during the inspection, or just as you happen to type them into the report?

Similarly in the section of required descripitions do you intermix and match plumbing, electrical, insulation descripitions or do you lump all the decriptions of a system together?

I understand your stance against summary sections but they are required by the NC licensing board so the issue becomes not weather to or not but rather how to best write a summary.

As to the forest vs. trees of roof leaks. The inspector has to see both the trees and the forest. Sometimes repairs require mulitple Tree contractors to complete the Forest of damage. Roof leaks into attic causing sheathing damage and drips on to ceiling, down the wall, across the band joist, and foundation wall. Saw it happen on a 1920's home. Roofer needs to fix roof sheathing and roof. General contractor to repair rotted studs, band joist, and drywall. Mason to repair deteroriated foundation. If each is listed as a specific defect, then each contractor is given a specific definition of "his" problem.

Sounds like you would have a single item in your ordered list indicating a water problem that caused numerous defects. Forest only view?

Just trying to get a more thorugh explanation of your style.