Installation Defects/ Code

[Brandon Whitmore]

So, I inspected a 1930's house in Salem the other day and tore into the arch. comp. roof installation--- I was sure the homeowner did the work (wrong). The roof had been torn off down to the plywood sheathing (no new sheathing installed), and a new single layer installed.

This morning I received a call from the contractor who installed the roof. He did not sound defensive at all, but wanted to know what he needed to fix on his installation for me to pass it.

1) He stapled the roof which has not been allowed by the IRC (ORSC) for years. He told me that he called around to several reputable roofers in Salem who told him that I was wrong, and that staples are still allowed.

QUESTION: It is a requirement that all new installations on existing homes comply with current building codes/ standards..... is it not? (starting to think I am crazy).

I wrote that I recommended a saddle/ cricket (wrote just like that) be installed at the chimney. The chimney was around 4' wide on the eave side of the home with about a 5/12 slope roofing draining to it. The sheathing was not replaced, so I do not believe that a saddle was required, but I still recommended one be installed (flashing was jacked up anyways).

He had to have me explain what a saddle/ cricket was [:-bigmout

The staple placement was pathetic, with staples placed at over half of the seams throughout, placed too high, etc.

No problem--- he told me he is going to use a 50 year rated sealant on all of them.

Does anyone else have a problem with using sealant at butt joint areas. I'm sure? he is going to pop the shingles loose at seal beneath the shingles, but still...........

I wouldn't usually care what the contractor said about my report, but I do have a problem with the fact that he has already contacted the seller (Realtor), and my client/ Buyer's agent and told them I am wrong. I am going to have to re- inspect this mess to "pass" it. All I'm gonna do is re- write all of my issues with the roof again. I just knew/ know this was/ is a headache.

Maybe I just need to start charging more for my original inspection/ report. That way I can justify spending extra hours researching manufacturers installation instructions (gotta find out who the manufacturer is), and write/find specific sources (such as building codes/ manufacturers specs) in my report.

This post is partly just to vent, but I would like to know how you all would handle this, etc.

[Scottpat]

Originally posted by Brandon Whitmore

So, I inspected a 1930's house in Salem the other day and tore into the arch. comp. roof installation--- I was sure the homeowner did the work (wrong). The roof had been torn off down to the plywood sheathing (no new sheathing installed), and a new single layer installed.

This morning I received a call from the contractor who installed the roof. He did not sound defensive at all, but wanted to know what he needed to fix on his installation for me to pass it.

1) He stapled the roof which has not been allowed by the IRC (ORSC) for years. He told me that he called around to several reputable roofers in Salem who told him that I was wrong, and that staples are still allowed.

QUESTION: It is a requirement that all new installations on existing homes comply with current building codes/ standards..... is it not? (starting to think I am crazy).

I wrote that I recommended a saddle/ cricket (wrote just like that) be installed at the chimney. The chimney was around 4' wide on the eave side of the home with about a 5/12 slope roofing draining to it. The sheathing was not replaced, so I do not believe that a saddle was required, but I still recommended one be installed (flashing was jacked up anyways).

He had to have me explain what a saddle/ cricket was [:-bigmout

The staple placement was pathetic, with staples placed at over half of the seams throughout, placed too high, etc.

No problem--- he told me he is going to use a 50 year rated sealant on all of them.

Does anyone else have a problem with using sealant at butt joint areas. I'm sure? he is going to pop the shingles loose at seal beneath the shingles, but still...........

I wouldn't usually care what the contractor said about my report, but I do have a problem with the fact that he has already contacted the seller (Realtor), and my client/ Buyer's agent and told them I am wrong. I am going to have to re- inspect this mess to "pass" it. All I'm gonna do is re- write all of my issues with the roof again. I just knew/ know this was/ is a headache.

Maybe I just need to start charging more for my original inspection/ report. That way I can justify spending extra hours researching manufacturers installation instructions (gotta find out who the manufacturer is), and write/find specific sources (such as building codes/ manufacturers specs) in my report.

This post is partly just to vent, but I would like to know how you all would handle this, etc.

I would not have had the conversation with him! In my best Southern Gentleman's voice I would have told him that he needed to contact the shingle manufacturer for their installation guidelines, and then he would need to follow them.

[Mike Lamb]

Regarding the staples, I'd want to call the manufacturer myself. This document from Certainteed suggests that it's OK.

http://www.ctndl.com/resndlsite/PDF/AllForms.pdf

[Darren]

QUESTION: It is a requirement that all new installations on existing homes comply with current building codes/ standards..... is it not? (starting to think I am crazy).

To answer this question; YES.

Section R907.1 General- Materials and methods of applications used for re-roofing or replacing an existing roof covering shall comply with the requirements of chapter 9.

[hausdok]

Originally posted by Darren

QUESTION: It is a requirement that all new installations on existing homes comply with current building codes/ standards..... is it not? (starting to think I am crazy).

To answer this question; YES.

Section R907.1 General- Materials and methods of applications used for re-roofing or replacing an existing roof covering shall comply with the requirements of chapter 9.

Yes, it's a requirement in the model code; but whether the local juridiction has waived that requirement and allows it is a question for the local AHJ. If you ask that question, make sure that you request copies of the local juridiction's amended code requirements.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[Darren]

That's what I like about NJ; it's called the Uniform Construction Code which means it can't be modified by any township or city; it's uniform across the state.

[Neal Lewis]

Darren, what about including something that used to be in an older code, but has since been changed or dropped?

[Darren]

Neal,

Are you asking something like you have a new building and the CO is requiring you to do something from say the 2000 IRC?

He can't do that. He has to follow what is currently adopted.

Now, if it's renovation, then they might be some slight changes in the Re-hab code. But if it's a new building and it's not in the current code, the CO can't require it.

[Neal Lewis]

Darren, I know you'll correct me if I'm wrong[], but my understanding is the self closing garage interior door is no longer required. Yet, the town of Franklin Lakes still requires it for C/O inspection. I called Trenton and was told they can't do that.

[Brandon Whitmore]

Thanks for the comments guys......

[Jim Katen]

Originally posted by Brandon Whitmore

. . . He stapled the roof which has not been allowed by the IRC (ORSC) for years. He told me that he called around to several reputable roofers in Salem who told him that I was wrong, and that staples are still allowed.

QUESTION: It is a requirement that all new installations on existing homes comply with current building codes/ standards..... is it not? (starting to think I am crazy).

Yes, it's a requirement.

R907.1 General. Materials and methods of application used for re-covering or replacing an existing roof covering shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 9.

However, if he doesn't do any carpentry on the roof, there's no requirement for a permit. Many people think that this means that they can ignore the code.

From the 2008 Oregon Residential Specialty Code

R905.2.5 Fasteners. Fasteners for asphalt shingles shall be galvanized steel, stainless steel, aluminum or copper roofing nails, minimum 12 gage [0.105 inch (3mm)] shank with a minimum 3/8-inch (10 mm) diameter head, ASTM F 1667, of a length to penetrate through the roofing materials and a minimum of 3/4 inch (19 mm) into the roof sheathing. Where the roof sheathing is less than 3/4 inch (19 mm) thick, the fasteners shall penetrate through the sheathing. Fasteners shall comply with ASTM F 1667.

Roofing staples on asphalt shingles have been prohibited in Oregon since April 1, 2003.

I wrote that I recommended a saddle/ cricket (wrote just like that) be installed at the chimney. The chimney was around 4' wide on the eave side of the home with about a 5/12 slope roofing draining to it. The sheathing was not replaced, so I do not believe that a saddle was required, but I still recommended one be installed (flashing was jacked up anyways).

He had to have me explain what a saddle/ cricket was [:-bigmout

A person who doesn't understand the meaning of saddle or cricket isn't a roofer, he's something else.

R905.2.8.3 Crickets and saddles. A cricket or saddle shall be installed on the ridge side of any chimney or penetration more than 30 inches (762 mm) wide as measured perpendicular to the slope. Cricket or saddle coverings shall be sheet metal or of the same material as the roof covering.

The staple placement was pathetic, with staples placed at over half of the seams throughout, placed too high, etc.

No problem--- he told me he is going to use a 50 year rated sealant on all of them.

Does anyone else have a problem with using sealant at butt joint areas. I'm sure? he is going to pop the shingles loose at seal beneath the shingles, but still...........

Go to the manufacturer for the fastener placement requirements. Staples across the seams is unspeakably stupid.

I wouldn't usually care what the contractor said about my report, but I do have a problem with the fact that he has already contacted the seller (Realtor), and my client/ Buyer's agent and told them I am wrong. I am going to have to re- inspect this mess to "pass" it. All I'm gonna do is re- write all of my issues with the roof again. I just knew/ know this was/ is a headache.

Write it clearly. Include pictures next to drawings of how it should be. Include direct quotations from the code. Invite him to do the same.

Maybe I just need to start charging more for my original inspection/ report. That way I can justify spending extra hours researching manufacturers installation instructions (gotta find out who the manufacturer is), and write/find specific sources (such as building codes/ manufacturers specs) in my report.

Or just charge appropriately for the reinspection when these things rear up.

This post is partly just to vent, but I would like to know how you all would handle this, etc.

I write a reply, as I described above, the primary purpose of which is to make him and his claims appear to have no merit whatsoever.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[Brandon Whitmore]

Jim,

Wow....

I wrote almost exactly what you have just written and sent it to the roofer?, both agents, and the seller this afternoon.

I included something telling them that I stand behind the rest of the report as well. I let them know that I can back anything else up that any other contractors try to contradict.

I really enjoyed writing the e- mails, because the buyer's agent despises me ( probably has something to do with killing a deal 8 months earlier for this same buyer). She wouldn't even stay in the house with me during the inspection, kept walking away during the walk through at the end, made some smart a$$ comments about the way her other inspectors do things, and sent me an e- mail after the inspection.

The crazy thing is that the roofer seemed like he wanted to do a good job, but did not have the necessary experience. He called his roofer buddies (he said several contractors in Salem) who backed him up and said I was wrong and staples were allowed in Salem. He proceeded to tell me that nails were only required in high wind areas? Maybe roofers are like inspectors in that many of them never check the source for info.

I e- mailed the roofer and let him know that he could not go wrong by reading/ following chapter 9 in the IRC (ORSC) and following manufacturers instructions.....hope I didn't overstep and tick him off.

[Darren]

Neal;

FTO-13 deals with garages (I posted it here several times) and was released in June 1999. That clearly states:

The door between the garage and the adjacent interior space shall be a minimum of 1 3/8-inch solid core wood, or 1 3/8 solid or honeycomb steel. There is no requirement for this door to be provided with a labeled jamb or with a door closer.

How old is this CO?

[Neal Lewis]

I spoke to someone in the Franklin Lks building dept about it last fall. They said they were allowed to include it in the C/O inspection.

[Brandon Whitmore]

I haven't had time to look into this yet, but here is a reply I was given to the use of staples on the roof:

Any news yet from the contractor? I will try to answer all your questions, but first wanted to let you know I spoke to Mitch Routh at the City of Salem, Building Codes Department this morning and he said that even though the codes were revised to address the use of nails in roofing, the portion of the 1995-97 Code approving both nails and staples, and the 2000 Code addition which defers to the manufacturer's instructions are still applicable. This is referenced in Ch 9, Code Section 905.2.5, ASTM F1667. Chapter 1 is where the standing reference to follow manufacturer's instructions are. We also spoke to Kevin Olson at Pabco's Corporate Offices and were told that even though the industry is moving to nailing, stapling is an acceptable application for Pabco's Premier 30 year roof shingles. We were given a name if Brandon wishes to talk with them: Sid @ 1-800-426-9762, Pabco Corporate Office.

[Brandon Whitmore]

And here is the reply I received from the roofer?.

Hi Brandon, Thank you for the info. I will read this over so all my i's are dotted and t's are crossed on my next roof. I believe I used Pabco Premier. I get my materials from Dallwig Bros. This was the first chimney I've flashed that was over 30" wide thats why I didnt know about the special flashing. Most re-roofs that I roof I replace the flashing the way it was. Now I know. I went back there today and fixed the flashing along side of the upper skylight, cut back the over lapped shingles, checked and fixed more staples at seams, installed the storm ring for the heat stack, caulked the seams on the two vents, and caulked the staples near the lower skylight flashing plus I added a step shingle along the lower side wall. The seller has pictures to show my repairs and my guarantee that the roof will not leak. My standard is 12 months. Considering the last winter storm we had I believe its passed its first and maybe last big test for leakage. The shingle warranty is always there too so now that I can assure the installation is good we'll be ok. I appreciate your time and heads up for the building codes.

[Jim Katen]

Originally posted by Brandon Whitmore

I haven't had time to look into this yet, but here is a reply I was given to the use of staples on the roof:

Any news yet from the contractor? I will try to answer all your questions, but first wanted to let you know I spoke to Mitch Routh at the City of Salem, Building Codes Department this morning and he said that even though the codes were revised to address the use of nails in roofing, the portion of the 1995-97 Code approving both nails and staples, and the 2000 Code addition which defers to the manufacturer's instructions are still applicable.

That's a complete mischaracterization of the code. It doesn't "defer" to the manufacturer's instructions, it requires that the manufacturer's instructions be followed *in addition to* the code provisions. Prior to 2003, the code specifically said that staples were an acceptable fastener. After 2003, the reference to staples was struck. If he feels that there's a conflict within the code on this point, he might well remember this section:

RI02.1 General. Where, in any specific case, different sections of this code specify different materials, methods of construction or other requirements, the most restrictive shall govern. Where there is a conflict between a general requirement and a specific requirement, the specific requirement shall be applicable.

Besides, Pabco's instructions specify nails.

This is referenced in Ch 9, Code Section 905.2.5, ASTM F1667. Chapter 1 is where the standing reference to follow manufacturer's instructions are.

Really? Where? The only thing that I could find doesn't apply to this situation at all:

Exception: Where enforcement of a code provision would violate the conditions of the listing of the equipment or appliance, the conditions of the listing and manufacturer's instructions shall apply.

Besides, Pabco's installation instructions specify nails.

We also spoke to Kevin Olson at Pabco's Corporate Offices and were told that even though the industry is moving to nailing, stapling is an acceptable application for Pabco's Premier 30 year roof shingles. We were given a name if Brandon wishes to talk with them: Sid @ 1-800-426-9762, Pabco Corporate Office.

It might be useful to point out, though, that the very first sentence in Pabco's installation instructions is, "Always follow local building codes."

I'm not surprised that Pabco allows staples, but it is odd that their installation instructions only refer to nails. So I called Sid to ask him about it. He said, "We used to comment on staples in our instructions but since the model codes have been requireing nails, we took the reference to staples out because we don't want to appear to be recommending something that's contrary to the code." When discussing staples, he said, "If the staples are installed properly in normal wind areas, they should be fine." And I agree with that. The only thing is, I've rarely seen staples installed properly.

Perhaps at this point, it might be interesting to send Sid some pictures.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[Jim Katen]

Originally posted by Brandon Whitmore

And here is the reply I received from the roofer?.

Hi Brandon, Thank you for the info. I will read this over so all my i's are dotted and t's are crossed on my next roof. I believe I used Pabco Premier. I get my materials from Dallwig Bros. This was the first chimney I've flashed that was over 30" wide thats why I didnt know about the special flashing.

Oh dear.

Most re-roofs that I roof I replace the flashing the way it was. Now I know. I went back there today and fixed the flashing along side of the upper skylight, cut back the over lapped shingles, checked and fixed more staples at seams, installed the storm ring for the heat stack, caulked the seams on the two vents, and caulked the staples near the lower skylight flashing plus I added a step shingle along the lower side wall. The seller has pictures to show my repairs and my guarantee that the roof will not leak. My standard is 12 months. Considering the last winter storm we had I believe its passed its first and maybe last big test for leakage. The shingle warranty is always there too so now that I can assure the installation is good we'll be ok. I appreciate your time and heads up for the building codes.

He sounds very inexperienced. But he also sounds like a nice guy. I hope he buys himself a nail gun and learns some more about proper roofing.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[Brandon Whitmore]

Jim,

I got my report sent out around 11:30 last night, so I didn't have time to look into this matter. My intention was to do all of the leg work today.

Imagine my surprise when I jumped onto TIJ and found that you did all of my homework for me. Let me know where to send the check:), otherwise, I guess I'll have to buy you a drink some time..... Thank You

I am starting to wonder if home inspectors are really the generalists.............

[Brandon Chew]

And here is the reply I received from the roofer?.

Hi Brandon, Thank you for the info. I will read this over so all my i's are dotted and t's are crossed on my next roof. I believe I used Pabco Premier. I get my materials from Dallwig Bros. This was the first chimney I've flashed that was over 30" wide thats why I didnt know about the special flashing. Most re-roofs that I roof I replace the flashing the way it was. Now I know. I went back there today and fixed the flashing along side of the upper skylight, cut back the over lapped shingles, checked and fixed more staples at seams, installed the storm ring for the heat stack, caulked the seams on the two vents, and caulked the staples near the lower skylight flashing plus I added a step shingle along the lower side wall. The seller has pictures to show my repairs and my guarantee that the roof will not leak. My standard is 12 months. Considering the last winter storm we had I believe its passed its first and maybe last big test for leakage. The shingle warranty is always there too so now that I can assure the installation is good we'll be ok. I appreciate your time and heads up for the building codes.

Tread carefully here. It seems to me like he wants you to "bless" his work on the roof. A series of expectations are being set that could leave the inspector holding the bag:

• After the roofer made his repairs the inspector said it was "ok"
• The roofer thinks he's only liable for his work for one year
• The roofer thinks if any leaks develop after 1 year that the manufacturer will take care of it (they'll only cover a defect in the shingle and will punt installation problems)
• If those are "25-year shingles" the homeowner expects the roof to be leak-free for 25 years...

Just giving a heads up, if not to you, then to other folks who may be reading this thread. I'm sure you'll do your best to re-shape those expectations before you're finished with this one.

I am starting to wonder if home inspectors are really the generalists.............

I don't understand why many inspectors sell themselves short, by calling themselves "generalists". We are experts at what we do: performing observations, evaluating, and reporting on the condition of the visible and readily accessible systems and components in the home.

[Brandon Whitmore]

Tread carefully here. It seems to me like he wants you to "bless" his work on the roof. A series of expectations are being set that could leave the inspector holding the bag:

After the roofer made his repairs the inspector said it was "ok"

The roofer thinks he's only liable for his work for one year

The roofer thinks if any leaks develop after 1 year that the manufacturer will take care of it (they'll only cover a defect in the shingle and will punt installation problems)

If those are "25-year shingles" the homeowner expects the roof to be leak-free for 25 years...

Just giving a heads up, if not to you, then to other folks who may be reading this thread. I'm sure you'll do your best to re-shape those expectations before you're finished with this one.

Hi Brandon,

Thanks for the heads up, where were you several years ago.[]

PS: I can't wait to see his sealant he gooped over all of the butt joints, cobbled up repairs at step flashing areas, etc......

Anyone want to take any bets on who will be to blame for causing a stink after the re- inspection?

[Brandon Whitmore]

Oh yeah, shouldn't there be some rule prohibiting re- roofing over completely black plywood roof sheathing (with some white fungal matter thrown in)?

The attic spaces lacked any sort of proper ventilation system on the previous roof. The residual fasteners were heavily rusted, and plywood was slightly deteriorated. I couldn't find any delamination, but there was probably about 75% moldish coverage with a slight soft feeling to the plywood.

The attic is adequately ventilated now (only thing done right), and the new fasteners are shiny new looking inside the attic.

[HOTWATERHEATER]

done several with-in-the last year inspections in high wind texas, staples used on numerous houses, the irc code is vague and possibly including staples not saying it and allowing it to fall on manufacturers instructions. so that being said you are there to report about the condition of the property at the time of inspection if you choose to call out staples as a defect , have your ammo ready to load, or your realtor will beat you to the draw and they usually blow from both ends. the simplest cya answer i agree with is mr scott patterson. see what say, say what you mean, mean what you say

[Brandon Whitmore]

Great....

I get to do a re- inspection on this house, and guess what the only item is that they want inspected? Yep, that dang roof. I even sent them an e- mail letting them know there is no way I would sign off on that installation. I guess they trust me to just tell them that it will be mostly OK-- arghh.

So we are down to an argument over the cricket installation. The roofer just contacted the city plans examiner who told him a cricket is not required. He is basing it on IRC '06 R102.71, I wish I could copy/ past that reference but can not.

I am not so sure I agree with the examiner's interpretation of the code on this one. Anyone have an opinion. The roofing section says that re- roofs must comply with chapter 9. Here is the code reference for the cricket requirement (thanks Jim): R905.2.8.3 Crickets and saddles. A cricket or saddle shall be installed on the ridge side of any chimney or penetration more than 30 inches (762 mm) wide as measured perpendicular to the slope. Cricket or saddle coverings shall be sheet metal or of the same material as the roof covering.

So, what do you guy's think?

[Bill Kibbel]

Bold and underline added by me.

R102.7 Existing structures. The legal occupancy of any structure

existing on the date of adoption of this code shall be permitted

to continue without change, except as is specifically

covered in this code, the International Property Maintenance

Code or the International Fire Code, or as is deemed necessary

by the building official for the general safety and welfare of the

occupants and the public.

R102.7.1 Additions, alterations or repairs. Additions,

alterations or repairs to any structure shall conform to the

requirements for a new structure without requiring the

existing structure to comply with all of the requirements of

this code, unless otherwise stated. Additions, alterations or

repairs shall not cause an existing structure to become

unsafe or adversely affect the performance of the building.

I disagree with the plans examiner. Is the examiner's opinion in writing?