A Discussion About Elective Modifications

[Neal Lewis]

I was taught to classify these things as "Elective Modifications" and then clearly explain the definition of the term in my scope of work.

Kevin

Kevin, I'm just curious about the elective modification; I've never heard that one before. What is the definition of it?

[RichNSpect]

I was taught to classify these things as "Elective Modifications" and then clearly explain the definition of the term in my scope of work.

Kevin

Kevin, I'm just curious about the elective modification; I've never heard that one before. What is the definition of it?

Neal:

The question of how to best address conditions which met residential building practices and standards at the time of original construction but which would not meet current standards or requirements if the same home were constructed today is a challenging one.

The term "Elective Modification" is designed to address such conditions. It's a designation given to items, systems or components that would not meet current construction standards.

Example:

Your inspecting a home built in 1950 and note that all of the electrical outlets at the Kitchen counter top are not GFCI protected. There are many Inspectors that would report this as a "deficiency" and will label it as a "repair" item. But, is it truly a repair item?

We should not hold a house that was built in 1950 to today's construction standards. So, the term "Elective Modification" or "Elective Upgrade" would be better suited in this case.

Elective Modification: The outlets at the Kitchen countertop are not GFCI (Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter) protected. This is not in accordance with Generally Established Building Practices, and it is recommended that the outlets be upgraded to GFCI protected outlets.

Here is the brief definition I use in my Glossary:

Elective Modification: Information regarding a System or Component which is provided solely as a courtesy to Clients for their consideration as part of any upgrading and maintenance program they may choose to implement. Elective Modification conditions are not Adverse Conditions. Elective Modifications should be performed by Qualified personnel in accordance with all applicable industry standards and governmental requirements.

However, I do explain the term in depth in my scope of work.

Kevin

[ghentjr]

Elective Modification: The outlets at the Kitchen countertop are not GFCI (Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter) protected. This is not in accordance with Generally Established Building Practices, and it is recommended that the outlets be upgraded to GFCI protected outlets.

Kevin

Whatever you want to call it, the paragraph above is, in my opinion, a condemnation of the 1950's electrical outlets. Saying it is "not in accordance with GEBP's leads the reader to think it is a problem. You are recommending a repair. (This is the same as reporting it as a deficiency). In fact, they are a requirement in new construction, not a generally established practice. We have to learn to speak people speak, not inspector speak.

"When the house was constructed GFCI protected outlets were not invented. They are now required in new construction and you should consider an upgrade for improved safety."

My 2 cents.

[RichNSpect]

Elective Modification: The outlets at the Kitchen countertop are not GFCI (Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter) protected. This is not in accordance with Generally Established Building Practices, and it is recommended that the outlets be upgraded to GFCI protected outlets.

Kevin

Whatever you want to call it, the paragraph above is, in my opinion, a condemnation of the 1950's electrical outlets. Saying it is "not in accordance with GEBP's leads the reader to think it is a problem. You are recommending a repair. (This is the same as reporting it as a deficiency). In fact, they are a requirement in new construction, not a generally established practice. We have to learn to speak people speak, not inspector speak.

"When the house was constructed GFCI protected outlets were not invented. They are now required in new construction and you should consider an upgrade for improved safety."

My 2 cents.

Neal just asked what the definition of the term and I posted a response. We can agree to disagree.

However, I'm NOT condemning the outlets and certainly not recommending a repair! Nor am I describing a deficiency. I recommended an "Upgrade."

Generally Established Pratices change over time and such changes are reflected in differences in homes built during different periods. Just as vehicles which met automotive industry practices and U.S. Department of Transportation requirements at the time of original manufacture are not required to be brought into conformance with current practices and governmental requirements unless specific modifications are performed on them, neither are homes which conformed to Generally Established Pratices and applicable building regulations required to be continually modified to meet current Generally Established Pratices and applicable building regulations. Typically, changes in such practices and requirements for both

vehicles and homes reflect modifications in manufacture, construction, function, and use.

Your description of the issue works just fine. Different styles that's all

Kevin

[RobC]

With something that has the potential bad affect as this, you won't be able to convince me to not be direct about it.

I understand I don't rule anything. However, I think that sometimes stronger words are needed. This is one of those cases.

The percentage of my business from referrals of clients is growing. I see no reason to change my game plan.

The beat around the bush wishy washy mush mush try to make everyone happy is not a part of my business.

I find the facts, state them as they "need" be, then move on.

It's working for me.

Me too!

Good call and well written recommendation.

[kurt]

......elective modifications.......sounds so technical and inspectorly.......

How about "Items No One Knows or Cares About Unless I Say Something"

Any way you cut it, telling folks to put in protective bollards around gas equipment is smart. I personally have seen a half dozen conflagrations resulting in total property loss caused by autos hitting gas meters adjacent to driveways. Not in the driveway, just adjacent.

I think it's helpful for folks reading reports to tell folks what's what. Instead of elective modifications, I think a simple statement like .....

"The gas equipment is immediately adjacent to the driveway; I'm aware of a half dozen disasters caused by folks driving into gas equipment in situations precisely like this one. You should install protective bollards around the equipment; it's the smart thing to do, regardless of what the goofballs @ People's Gas might say. I mean, they're the incompetents that can't even figure out their own codes and safety systems; do you really want to take advice from those folks?"

(Peoples Gas is the Chicago natural gas vendor.)

Yes, I actually wrote that one time when a Peoples Gas monkey was trying to pull rank on me. I rattled off the half dozen disasters they allowed to happen with their equipment. That always gets folks attention.

[ghentjr]

......elective modifications.......sounds so technical and inspectorly.......

it's the smart thing to do, regardless of what the goofballs @ People's Gas might say. I mean, they're the incompetents that can't even figure out their own codes and safety systems; do you really want to take advice from those folks?"

Soooo that's how you got on their speed dial? I love it.

[RichNSpect]

......elective modifications.......sounds so technical and inspectorly.......

Thanks, Kurt! I appreciate the compliment I mean, I am a Professional Inspector, so I should be "Inspectorly." (is that even a word?)

We are all going to write in different styles. In the Washing DC area where I conduct business, I don't believe I could get away with using the term "folks" in my Inspection Reports. I have completed Inspections for Presidential Candidates, Congressman, CEO's of Major Corporations, Lawyers, Doctors, etc. I agree that the report does not have to be a thesis, but should be professional.

The Report we deliver to our clients is of the utmost importance. It's really our final work product, so it should reflect our professionalism. Furthermore, I don't know if you were serious or not, Kurt, but discrediting another organization in a Professional Home Inspection Report to make a point is not a very nice or professional thing to do, regardless if the statement has truth or merit.

Just my take, though......

Kevin

[Jim Katen]

If its dangerous, I say fix it. There is no "recommend" about it. If they choose to ignore my direction, that's their business.

That's how I think about it.

I would take a little softer stance on this issue. I agree that the meter needs to be protected from physical damage, but would not call this out as a "mandated" repair.

So, does your report actually contain things called "mandated repairs?"

I was taught to classify these things as "Elective Modifications" and then clearly explain the definition of the term in my scope of work.

Just curious. Who taught you that?

It seems to me that, as home inspectors, we really can't "mandate" anything. About the best we can do is recommend. So I'm left wondering what the difference is between a mandate and a recommendation. I mean, the buyer is going to repair what he wants to repair and not repair what he doesn't want to repair. In my mind that makes every one of our recommendations elective, doesn't it?

While many things we (Inspectors) come across in the field could be classified as just plain common sense, we should keep in mind that we are not there at the property to perform a "code compliance" or "safety" inspection. Assuming that we are there do conduct a Standard Inspection, of course.

What does that mean, exactly? Does it mean that you ignore issues just because they're addressed by the building code or because they're unsafe?

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[Jim Katen]

Elective Modification: The outlets at the Kitchen countertop are not GFCI (Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter) protected. This is not in accordance with Generally Established Building Practices, and it is recommended that the outlets be upgraded to GFCI protected outlets.

Kevin

Whatever you want to call it, the paragraph above is, in my opinion, a condemnation of the 1950's electrical outlets. Saying it is "not in accordance with GEBP's leads the reader to think it is a problem. You are recommending a repair. (This is the same as reporting it as a deficiency). In fact, they are a requirement in new construction, not a generally established practice. We have to learn to speak people speak, not inspector speak.

"When the house was constructed GFCI protected outlets were not invented. They are now required in new construction and you should consider an upgrade for improved safety."

My 2 cents.

Neal just asked what the definition of the term and I posted a response. We can agree to disagree.

However, I'm NOT condemning the outlets and certainly not recommending a repair! Nor am I describing a deficiency. I recommended an "Upgrade."

Um, yes you are. It's that part where you say, ". . . it is recommended that the outlets be upgraded to GFCI protected outlets." Or do you believe that because you use the passive voice for this recommendation that no one can tell it's you that's doing the recommending?

Generally Established Pratices change over time and such changes are reflected in differences in homes built during different periods.

What's a "Generally Established Practice" and why is it capitalized? How is it different from a code provision? Give some examples.

Just as vehicles which met automotive industry practices and U.S. Department of Transportation requirements at the time of original manufacture are not required to be brought into conformance with current practices and governmental requirements unless specific modifications are performed on them, neither are homes which conformed to Generally Established Pratices and applicable building regulations required to be continually modified to meet current Generally Established Pratices and applicable building regulations.

Who's talking about "required?" Oh, right, you have "mandates" in your report. Maybe that's the problem. If you view your report as only containing recommendations, this whole this-is-required-and-that-isn't issue just melts away. You then get to make simple, straightforward recommendations and your customers get to decide which to implement.

Typically, changes in such practices and requirements for both

vehicles and homes reflect modifications in manufacture, construction, function, and use.

Yes, and vice-versa. Things change. So what? The electricity doesn't care about the fine distinctions that you invent in order to avoid using the dreaded "code" word. It bites people regardless of the age of the house or the Generally Accepted Euphamisims or whether you call something a mandate or an elective.

Why is it necessary to make up special words & phrases for a home inspection report when we have access to the entire rich vocabularly of the English language?

Is it really that difficult to simply describe a condition, explain the importance of that condition, and make a recommendation about it?

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[Jim Katen]

. . . We are all going to write in different styles. In the Washing DC area where I conduct business, I don't believe I could get away with using the term "folks" in my Inspection Reports. I have completed Inspections for Presidential Candidates, Congressman, CEO's of Major Corporations, Lawyers, Doctors, etc. I agree that the report does not have to be a thesis, but should be professional. . .

And there's the rub. I'm always amazed at what home inspectors think "professional" means. They seem to think that it means you have to use fancy words, made-up definitions and, generally, confuse the heck out of the reader.

I'm also amused that you seem to think that a certain class of "important people" expect or deserve one of these "professional" reports. There's a certain unspoken classism there, don't you think?

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[RichNSpect]

So, does your report actually contain things called "mandated repairs?"

No, what made you ask me that question. You should be asking that question to others in this thread. Please re-read my comments.

Who taught you that?

A very well respected (retired) Inspector with over 30 years experience who helped in the original ASHI SOP.

It seems to me that, as home inspectors, we really can't "mandate" anything. About the best we can do is recommend.

I agree!

So I'm left wondering what the difference is between a mandate and a recommendation. I mean, the buyer is going to repair what he wants to repair and not repair what he doesn't want to repair. In my mind that makes every one of our recommendations elective, doesn't it?

Technically, yes, you are right. All of our recommendations could be considered elective. However, we also have the power of choice in the words we use to describe a defect. Which one of the following recommendations would you guess a client would take action of first, keeping in mind these are just examples:

1. There is evidence that the gas fired Hot Water Heater in the Basement is spilling flue gases at the draft hood (back drafting). This is a very serious issue that should be corrected as soon as possible. I recommend Corrective Action by a Qualified Contractor.

2. A section of the Brick Veneer cladding at the front left corner of the home (facing front) has deteriorated mortar joints. I recommend repair or replace as needed.

If you were the reader, which on would you consider "elective?" Both are recommendations, no?

A "Mandate" is.......you HAVE TO do this, whereas a "Recommendation" is.......you SHOULD do this. Pretty simple.

HAVE TO: obligation springs from circumstances or external rules. Something has to be done, whether the speaker likes it or not.

SHOULD: is used to give advice. No obligation here, rather a recommendation from the speaker.

What does that mean, exactly? Does it mean that you ignore issues just because they're addressed by the building code or because they're unsafe?

No, it simply means that I do not inspect for Code Compliance. Do you inspect for code compliance or cite code in your inspection reports?

Kevin

[RichNSpect]

Jim,

First of all, I can't keep up with all the "quoted" comments you have posted. It would seem that you have some axe to grind in picking apart my comments and quote bits and pieces. Why not just write one response. That would be a lot simpler.

Furthermore, I suggest you read my comments carefully before responding. Please point me to where I said I made any type of "Mandates" in my reports.

I merely provided opinions and methods in which I employ in my business. Thanks for the critique.

Kevin

[Jerry Simon]

1. There is evidence that the gas fired Hot Water Heater in the Basement is spilling flue gases at the draft hood (back drafting).

Kevin

Just curious...why do you write that way? What is preventing you from saying "The water heater is backdrafting"?

I had some moron with about thirty years inspecting experience tell me to write that way, that it wasn't my place to "make the call". So much for experienced teachers. (To be precise, he told me to say: "It appears the water heater is backdrafting.")

Do you also write "There is evidence the wall receptacle in the bathroom is wired with reversed polarity."?

[RichNSpect]

. . . We are all going to write in different styles. In the Washing DC area where I conduct business, I don't believe I could get away with using the term "folks" in my Inspection Reports. I have completed Inspections for Presidential Candidates, Congressman, CEO's of Major Corporations, Lawyers, Doctors, etc. I agree that the report does not have to be a thesis, but should be professional. . .

And there's the rub. I'm always amazed at what home inspectors think "professional" means. They seem to think that it means you have to use fancy words, made-up definitions and, generally, confuse the heck out of the reader.

I'm also amused that you seem to think that a certain class of "important people" expect or deserve one of these "professional" reports. There's a certain unspoken classism there, don't you think?

- Jim Katen, Oregon

Wow, and you came to that conclusion by reading a post on a message board. That's pretty astute of you. However, you don't even now me!

You are making a lot of assumptions into what I'm thinking or not thinking. Seeing as we have never met and live 1000 of miles from on another, that is very "wise" of you.

All of my clients deserve to receive a professional written report regardless of social or economic status.

Kevin

[Jerry Simon]

All of my clients deserve to receive a professional written report regardless of social or economic status.

Kevin

Well, if there's no difference, why did you attempt to differentiate *your* clientele? Just askin'...

'Course, only the last example in *your* clientele list has ever earned any of my respect. The rest I don't even consider to be "folks". But that's just me.

[RichNSpect]

What's a "Generally Established Practice" and why is it capitalized? How is it different from a code provision? Give some examples.

It is capitalized because it is used as a Glossary Term in my Inspection Reports.

Generally Established Practices explained:

Your Inspector may bring to your attention and discuss certain Elective Modifications of original and functioning installations and assemblies of Systems and Components that you may wish to consider implementing as part of upgrading your home. These Elective Modifications may exceed some of the building and construction standards that applied at the time of the original construction of the home. The differences between any such original building and construction standards and current standards do not constitute "deficiencies" in the subject property. Elective Modifications should be performed only by Qualified parties in accordance with all applicable industry standards and governmental requirements pertaining to permits, codes, ordinances, and regulations.

Any oral statements made by the Inspector pertaining to Elective Modifications or any inclusion in the Inspection Report of information regarding Elective Modifications shall be deemed to be informational only and supplied as a courtesy to you and shall not be deemed to be an amendment to or waiver of any exclusions included in the "Home Inspection Authorization and Contract and Scope of Inspection."

Generally Established Practices change over time and such changes are reflected in differences in homes built during different periods. Just as vehicles which met automotive industry practices and U.S. Department of Transportation requirements at the time of original manufacture are not required to be brought into conformance with current practices and governmental requirements unless specific modifications are performed on them, neither are homes which conformed to Generally Established Practices and applicable building regulations required to be continually modified to meet current Generally Established Practices and applicable building regulations. Typically, changes in such practices and requirements for both vehicles and homes reflect modifications in manufacture, construction, function, and use.

Inclusion in the inspection report or oral statements made by the inspector regarding any Elective Modifications refer to specific conditions at the subject property which may differ from those in a newer or different home because the subject property was constructed when earlier and/or different building/construction practices and standards applied. Elective Modifications information may include, but is not limited to, information regarding GFCI, AFCI, and grounding-type receptacle outlets; smoke detectors; safety glass/glazing; stair, balcony, and deck guardrail openings; kitchen receptacle outlet circuits; and back flow prevention for hose faucets. The exclusion of any Elective Modifications information from the inspection report shall not be deemed to be an amendment to or waiver of the scope of the inspection on the part of the inspector or the inspection company.

The inclusion of any written information in the inspection report or oral statements regarding any Elective Modifications is informational only and supplied solely as a courtesy to the Client for their consideration to aid in planning for any overall upgrading and maintenance program they may choose to implement for the subject property and such inclusion shall not be deemed to be an amendment to or waiver of any specific or general exclusion contained in the inspection contract and agreement or the written inspection report.

A Home Inspection is not a "safety inspection." A Home Inspection is not an inspection to determine compliance with any governmental codes, ordinances, regulations, or rules; Homeowner Association (HOA) requirements or rules; HOA Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC and RS). The purpose of a professional home inspection is to provide information to clients, to alert them to certain Adverse Conditions, and to provide clients with recommended actions to address such Adverse Conditions - it is not to "protect" Clients from Adverse Conditions or from the actions of other parties. The information gathered during a professional inspection and documented in the Inspection Report will allow Clients to make informed decisions regarding the subject property. It will permit them to protect themselves.

Elective Modifications do not refer to Adverse Conditions in the applicable Systems or Components. Any Elective Modifications which a Client chooses to implement at any time at the subject property should be performed only by Qualified parties and in accordance with all applicable standards and governmental requirements pertaining to permits, codes, ordinances, and regulations as well as in accordance with all HOA; CC and RS, or other requirements when and where applicable.

Any specific requirements pertaining to Elective Modifications may vary based on the age of a given dwelling and specific current jurisdictional requirements as well as requirements which may have been applicable at the time of construction of the dwelling or at the time of the installation or construction of a specific device or assembly. All decisions regarding the choice to address any Elective Modifications which appear in this report are solely those of Clients and should be based on Clients' assessments of their own specific interests and concerns.

It's not the only way, it's just a way

Kevin

[Jim Katen]

So, does your report actually contain things called "mandated repairs?"

No, what made you ask me that question. You should be asking that question to others in this thread. Please re-read my comments.

Why should I ask others? I know what their reports contain. I don't know what your's contain. So, I take it from your answer that the strongest classification of recommendation in your report is an "elective modification?"

Who taught you that?

A very well respected (retired) Inspector with over 30 years experience who helped in the original ASHI SOP.

I thought as much. For the record, pretty much no one I know respects him to any high degree. My own opinion is that he's an insufferable blowhard who's responsible for continually recharging most of the home inspector folklore out there.

It seems to me that, as home inspectors, we really can't "mandate" anything. About the best we can do is recommend.

I agree!

So I'm left wondering what the difference is between a mandate and a recommendation. I mean, the buyer is going to repair what he wants to repair and not repair what he doesn't want to repair. In my mind that makes every one of our recommendations elective, doesn't it?

Technically, yes, you are right. All of our recommendations could be considered elective. However, we also have the power of choice in the words we use to describe a defect. Which one of the following recommendations would you guess a client would take action of first, keeping in mind these are just examples:

1. There is evidence that the gas fired Hot Water Heater in the Basement is spilling flue gases at the draft hood (back drafting). This is a very serious issue that should be corrected as soon as possible. I recommend Corrective Action by a Qualified Contractor.

2. A section of the Brick Veneer cladding at the front left corner of the home (facing front) has deteriorated mortar joints. I recommend repair or replace as needed.

If you were the reader, which on would you consider "elective?" Both are recommendations, no?

Well sure. I'm glad to see that we seem to agree that spelling out a condition is better than giving it a silly classification such as Elective Modification.

BTW, I'm really mystified about why you're able to write perfectly understandable posts on this board but then slip into sentence fragments such as "I recommend repair or replace as needed," when you give reporting examples.

Also, why do you capitalize things like water heater, basement, corrective action, & qualified contractor?

A "Mandate" is.......you HAVE TO do this, whereas a "Recommendation" is.......you SHOULD do this. Pretty simple.

HAVE TO: obligation springs from circumstances or external rules. Something has to be done, whether the speaker likes it or not.

SHOULD: is used to give advice. No obligation here, rather a recommendation from the speaker.[/b]

Well, sort of. Since home inspectors can't mandate squat, shouldn't it just be off the table for discussion?

What does that mean, exactly? Does it mean that you ignore issues just because they're addressed by the building code or because they're unsafe?

No, it simply means that I do not inspect for Code Compliance. Do you inspect for code compliance or cite code in your inspection reports?

I regularly use the code as a reference source for my opinions and I sometimes cite it in footnotes to back up my recommendations. This technique works very well. But you didn't answer my question. What does it mean to not inspect for code compliance (it isn't necessary to capitalize those words, btw)? Surely you must at least consider the provisions of various codes, otherwise you wouldn't know what is and isn't considered a generally accepted building euphemism.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[RichNSpect]

All of my clients deserve to receive a professional written report regardless of social or economic status.

Kevin

Well, if there's no difference, why did you attempt to differentiate *your* clientele? Just askin'...

'Course, only the last example in *your* clientele list has ever earned any of my respect. The rest I don't even consider to be "folks". But that's just me.

Why have you jumped on the band wagon of critiquing everything I say here?

Differentiating my clientele was not my intent. I'm sorry I don't meet your standards.

Kevin

[RichNSpect]

1. There is evidence that the gas fired Hot Water Heater in the Basement is spilling flue gases at the draft hood (back drafting).

Kevin

Just curious...why do you write that way? What is preventing you from saying "The water heater is backdrafting"?

I had some moron with about thirty years inspecting experience tell me to write that way, that it wasn't my place to "make the call". So much for experienced teachers. (To be precise, he told me to say: "It appears the water heater is backdrafting.")

Do you also write "There is evidence the wall receptacle in the bathroom is wired with reversed polarity."?

If I know for certain that a system or component is defective in any way, I will say that. Certainly you would agree that there are times where there might be evidence of a defect or deficiency, but you cannot confirm your findings without further "technically exhaustive" or "destructive testing."

What technique or testing device do you use to confirm that a hot water heater is backdrafting? Do you carry and use a combustion analyzer? Do you conduct a "worst case depressurization" test in the combustion appliance zone using a manometer?

There are times where it's black and white and there are times where it's grey. For the record, I try limit the use of the word "appears." It infers doubt in the readers mind. It says that I did not know one way or the other and a lot of beginning inspectors use it frequently, myself included (when I was new).

Kevin

[Jim Katen]

Jim,

First of all, I can't keep up with all the "quoted" comments you have posted. It would seem that you have some axe to grind in picking apart my comments and quote bits and pieces. Why not just write one response. That would be a lot simpler. . .

Hi Kevin,

I have no axe to grind and I mean no disrespect to you. I just enjoy a thorough discussion of this issue. I use quoted comments because we aren't talking in person. This way, I can plainly address your points one by one. If I don't use quotations, then it's more difficult to follow the conversation.

As for the mandates, you initial post seemed to suggest that you had two styles of recommendation in your reports, mandated and elective. Upon rereading the post, I think you were characterizing others of putting mandates in their reports. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I'm still curious, though, about whether or not you have any recommendations in your reports that are stronger than electives.

Please accept my apologies if I've given any offense.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[RichNSpect]

So, does your report actually contain things called "mandated repairs?"

No, what made you ask me that question. You should be asking that question to others in this thread. Please re-read my comments.

Why should I ask others? I know what their reports contain. I don't know what your's contain. So, I take it from your answer that the strongest classification of recommendation in your report is an "elective modification?"

Who taught you that?

A very well respected (retired) Inspector with over 30 years experience who helped in the original ASHI SOP.

I thought as much. For the record, pretty much no one I know respects him to any high degree. My own opinion is that he's an insufferable blowhard who's responsible for continually recharging most of the home inspector folklore out there.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I have learned a great deal from him. Just as I could learn from you.

Kevin

[RichNSpect]

Jim,

First of all, I can't keep up with all the "quoted" comments you have posted. It would seem that you have some axe to grind in picking apart my comments and quote bits and pieces. Why not just write one response. That would be a lot simpler. . .

Hi Kevin,

I have no axe to grind and I mean no disrespect to you. I just enjoy a thorough discussion of this issue. I use quoted comments because we aren't talking in person. This way, I can plainly address your points one by one. If I don't use quotations, then it's more difficult to follow the conversation.

As for the mandates, you initial post seemed to suggest that you had two styles of recommendation in your reports, mandated and elective. Upon rereading the post, I think you were characterizing others of putting mandates in their reports. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I'm still curious, though, about whether or not you have any recommendations in your reports that are stronger than electives.

Please accept my apologies if I've given any offense.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

Of course I do!

I describe Adverse Conditions and make recommendations accordingly. As far as the sentence fragments in my reporting style, I would agree that I'm still a work in progress.

I used InspectVue and Home Gauge in the beginning of my career, and learned some bad habits in regards to fragmented sentences. Honestly, after conducting well over 2500 Inspections, I feel that I have just touched the surface with respect to being comfortable in writing my own comments.

My report template is filled with that type of stuff and I'm working on refining it.

Kevin

[Jim Katen]

. . . A very well respected (retired) Inspector with over 30 years experience who helped in the original ASHI SOP.

I thought as much. For the record, pretty much no one I know respects him to any high degree. My own opinion is that he's an insufferable blowhard who's responsible for continually recharging most of the home inspector folklore out there.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I have learned a great deal from him. Just as I could learn from you.

Sorry, my humor was too subtle. I didn't mean to impune any particular well respected retired ASHI inspector with over 30 years of experience, I meant to impune them all. My (admittedly too subtle) point is that none of the old farts deserves to be treated with any particular reverence. Just because they say things are so doesn't make them so.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[RichNSpect]

. . . A very well respected (retired) Inspector with over 30 years experience who helped in the original ASHI SOP.

I thought as much. For the record, pretty much no one I know respects him to any high degree. My own opinion is that he's an insufferable blowhard who's responsible for continually recharging most of the home inspector folklore out there.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I have learned a great deal from him. Just as I could learn from you.

Sorry, my humor was too subtle. I didn't mean to impune any particular well respected retired ASHI inspector with over 30 years of experience, I meant to impune them all. My (admittedly too subtle) point is that none of the old farts deserves to be treated with any particular reverence. Just because they say things are so doesn't make them so.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

Aren't you an old fart?

Kevin