2 Strap Clips Embedded? How To Enter On 1802?

I have an 1982 building with 2 Strap clips, one on each side. How do I enter on the 1802? These should be better than 1 3 nail clip? Check Attachment pictures.



I only see two nails in those straps in both photos. Doesn’t matter how many connections are on one truss unless they both wrap over the top and have the 2/1 nailing for each strap (double wrap). Those photos would indicate the “toe nail” second box selection.

By the way, are they doing these in NY now??

Should be …Could be…

But ain’t.

According to the insurance idiots… SORRY TOENAIL.

If they are on both sides of all the trusses, I would mark them clip. How do you know they are not one strap bent in a “U” embedded in the bond beam?

I doubt it would stand to a re-inspection, but hey you wrote the course so go for it :slight_smile:

Me if I cannot prove it I do not say how do I know it does not.

That’s just me I only provide the proof I have.

Sorry John, but the underwriter would have something to say about marking that connection a clip.

The photos look like an area of a flat roof rafter connected to the truss system. There may be two straps at each location for the roof connection, but they still only have 2 nails in each – toe nail by definition on the 1802. I have never seen or heard of any framer or masonry contractor bend a strap into the bond beam, and it would be nearly impossible to get the underwriter to accept that description.

Bending it was a joke, but I would still suggest marking clip. The underwriter should discuss with their engineer and the engineer should agree.

by the wording it appears it does meet the criteria on the form. I fail to see how this would be any different than a diamond clip. It would actually be better.

We report what we see we should not be making decisions on what we think.

I guess you were just joking about that too?

I want to agree. But there is this…

“Minimal conditions to qualify for categories B, C, or D. All visible metal connectors are:
Secured to truss/rafter with a minimum of three (3) nails…”

To me, this means each metal connector must have at least three nails to be considered Clips or better. In this situation, even though there are 4 total nails per truss, each metal connector has only two nails.

That’s what is says .
No doubt about it.
Seems easy to me :slight_smile:

Not fair or right BUT easy.

I can not tell you what every insurance company would except, but some of my sources say “clip”.

Some of your sources may say clip, but I doubt an underwriter would agree.

I would read it the same way Mr. Wagner did as only having two nails in each strap, which makes it a toe-nail. I can only verify what I see. Now, if this was some sort of “V-strap” and it could be proven, then it would be a clip.

In the real world, it is probably stronger than a clip and equal to a single wrap, unfortunately, the insurance companies do not live in the real world! :mrgreen:

Getting back to the OP, these photos only show two separate RTW attachments on the flat rafters - both toe nail selections. Everybody is assuming there is a another strap on the other side of the truss due to the written description (and John is ASSUMING that it is single strap with two exposed ends)…where is the photo of the other strap end on the opposite side of the truss? Just sayin…

This is why there are so many problems and NO ONE WILL EVER BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE for fraud or falsifying reports because EVERYONE just makes it up and interprets it however the hell they feel at the moment.

How about as I have said 1000 times you just answer the questions on the damn form and do nothing more than it asks.

That is your ONLY job.

You do need to assess the condition to be able to answer the question correctly. Photos only reinforce your assessment and should be required. The carriers/OIR tried that “taking the inspector’s word for it” approach and it failed miserably. In the insurance world it is “worst case scenario until proven otherwise”.

I’ll agree to disagree with you. Photos are dangerous, especially looking for a shiner which should not exist. We should be taken on our work as ANY OTHER PROFESIONAL is and when it appears those of us are acting un-professional they should be punished JUST LIKE ANY OTHER PROFESION.

Home Inspectors are not taken as professionals BY MANY “NOT ALL” because they continue to be bullied and accept whatever crap is thrown their way.

Yes Sir Mister insurance company. Whatever you want Sir.
Now may I please have some more work Sir.
Thank you Sir.


Only I stood up to protect Inspectors and our Clients when it came to all these new forms. Most others caved and kissed A ss. Sad but true.

I didn’t give in and it cost me 70k in lost income. But I can sleep at night and have recovered very nicely. I don’t need dishonest insurance agents in my life.

You need to re-read my first response.

I was offering an answer, like it or not. That is my answer. I did not assume that there was a bent strap in the bond beam, just pointed out you do not know if that it the case either.

Eric, some of my sources are bosses to the underwriters. Unfortunately they will not post here and do not want to be identified with the people on this message board.

I would mark the roof-to-wall attachment as clip, and note under the image “clips on both sides of all trusses(if that is the case) with two nails each.” I would also have an image from both directions showing that they are on both sides. I would also explain it to the the client, so they understand the ramifications. I would tell them that the re-inspector probably could not think and would change the “form.” So if they had an agent, my office would point it out to them and they would “check” with underwriting. On several occasions I have had a discussion about similar issues with the underwriter directly.

To overt all you could just look to see if they missed a truss and then mark as needed. It is highly doubtful that all of the trusses have two metal attachments to begin with.

But you do as you please.

Until your sources make a post, as far as I am concerned, they do not exist. At least as it pertains to this discussion. :wink:

Now, to the form:

To qualify for a clip:

Secured to truss/rafter with a minimum of** three (3) nails,** and
􀀀 Attached to the wall top plate of the wall framing, or embedded in the bond beam, with less than a ½" gap from
the blocking or truss/rafter and blocked no more than 1.5” of the truss/rafter, and free of visible severe
It must meet both. According to “the form” five straps with two nails in each one, would still be a toe nail, according to the form.

􀀀 B. Clips
􀀀 Metal connectors that do not wrap over the top of the truss/rafter, or

You can write everything you want and hope the underwriter understands it, and just so you are clear, I agree with you, it should be a clip, in the real world. Unfortunately, the form clearly states there must be three nails in whatever type of metal strap it is, to be considered a clip. I am pretty certain that a re-inspector would mark it a toe nail 10 out of 10 times.

Unless there is a new definition of the word “three”.

I will tell them that when I talk with them next. :stuck_out_tongue:

for the record there are four nails in the metal connectors to the truss, based on this scenario.