Jay Neal of Florida Association for Insurance Reform (FAIR) Needs a better understanding of the issues regarding the 1802 form and the reinspection program. He is looking into collusion and the way certain entities are changing the way the form is interpreted making retail inspections wrong. Hence the stronger need for reinspections.
He needs you guys to speak up and defend the retail market and clients who are losing their wind mit credits.
I have a meeting with counsel Friday to look at legal options. We are a long way from having a clear picture of this issue. Any assistance you can provide is appreciated.
Jay Neal, JD, MBA
Executive Director
Florida Association for Insurance Reform www.floridainsurancereform.org
888-745-5551 X112
This may not be an answer your looking for but there isnt much of a difference. I have personally performed a lot of reinspections and we do a large volume of retail inspections as well. All completed the same. Actually the only difference is a certain reinspection company I worked for would force us to give credits to a homeowner when they did not qualify. This was because of uneducated auditors within that company.
I would think it would be very easy in this case - just take the two wind mits and compare them side by side. If they do not agree / not the same, they why are they different. Isnt that why we take the pictures (sorry Mike)
I thought there were all kinds of problems with the 1802 and the reinspection program.
I know that they need to be done right regardless of who performs them but when the rules are constantly changing and the reinspectors are the only ones with the new rules…who benefits.
What difference does it make if a clip has 2 nails or 3
Nobody has come up with the study that 3 is better.
Give me examples. To me those don’t count because if you ever took a wind mit course even years ago, you would have learned that. What you check on the form due to the wording is a business decision. If you wake up one day and say “I am going to start doing wind mitigation inspection as of today and don’t need any training” well guess what? You will do them wrong, or I’m sorry, different then someone with current training.
Here’s what I am saying…only the reinspectors know what is acceptable. Classes don’t mean a hill a beans…I’ve done Nachi,York’s and MSF. Every course has it’s interpretation of the form…Each teacher has his interpretation…Each inspector has his. The only right way is I.D’s or some other WCE.
The new 1802 leaves little room to give credit due to interpretation which just might be the demise of WCE’s. Unless of course a new rule pops up that keeps them in business.
I believe that you have correctly identified one of the main problems with the wind mitigation scheme (not counting the collusion and racketeering issues): Until the program has mandatory standardized training for ALL licensees conducting wind mitigation inspections as well as the underwriters who are reviewing our work product, the “high error rate” will continue.
The issues you describe have been rendered mute by the new language in the current wind mit form.
Prior issues of interpetation and contradiction between the definitions’ on the 1802 and specific company policies or educational program providers did exsist. Mainly in the definition of the CLIP attachment. However, this has been settled by the new form which clearly defines what is and isn’t a CLIP.
The real proplem with re-inspections is how a small percentage are performed. Example: Locating a 8d nail. This one item can be the difference b/n an A or C rating. A private inspector may walk a little farther in the attic and look a little harder to locate an 8 d nail. The private inspector has a responsability to the homeowner to document all the potential credits they deserve.
The re-inspector on the other hand, has no responsability to the homeowner. If the open the hatch and see staples everywhere. They walk away and the client looses policy discounts and the WCE say theres a descreptancy.
That is a big problem because no matter how many say they find a nail on every home, and by the way, that just indicates sloppy work, in reality, you shouldn’t be able to determine what type of nail is used.
The question itself is contradictory to the year of installation/permit application date/noa section of the form.
They should do away with this section next and just go by the year of replacement/original installation.
According to the study below, holding power of 6D and 8D nails six inches apart appears to be doubled. I’ll have to find the actual apa study. Hud Roof Connections
I found one the other day, 2006 reroof renailed with 6d. I don’t care who you are and how much you want to say that you can’t have any missed nails, that view is not realistic. I can tell you that as a licensed GC and Building Inspector that no matter what you will find a certain area with a missed or split nail that is either not seen of overlooked. That is just the reality of it. Around 4000 wind mits and can’t remember not finding one, even on 6" T&G
I would have to agree, but let me ask you this…if you did reinspections would you do it the same? Citizens does not penalize the inspector if they find the credit. I can tell you all of ours are done the same.
You sure the 6D wasn’t from the original install and you couldn’t find the 8D nails?
While on vacation at the Father in laws, I just happened to go and check some of the homes in the development as he was in charge of the whole project. There was no ceiling and it was just walls and decking. out of ten houses, not one was visible.
Mainly because my fiL checked them all before the city inspector showed up.
So as a building inspection, did you just let them pass?You know, the blatant code violation?
Nope but as having experience on 3 different ends (HI, GC, and code inspector) I can tell you that there are areas to find them as an HI. In life sometimes you have to be realistic and trust those that can give you info from many different angles. Telling everyone that it is a code violation and if you find one then the code inspector blatantly overlooked it is a statement you should second guess before making it. It also tells the HI inspectors out there to not do there job properly as they should and will not find it. Thats a joke IMHO. You are one of the smartest guys on this MB, I am surprised that you think like that.
I can tell you that there are areas to find them as an HI. In life sometimes you have to be realistic and trust those that can give you info from many different angles. Telling everyone that it is a code violation and if you find one then the code inspector blatantly overlooked it is a statement you should second guess before making it.
No,it is the job of the code inspector to find the violation, just like it is our job to find deficiencies. It isn’t my fault that the city inspectors don’t have the time, or aren’t paid what they worth, or a host of other excuses that I hear.
To quote a certain NFL head coach, “Do your job”!
Do you think I would put myself in the position of, well, I didn’t have the time or you are not paying me enough, so, I am only going to do half the job?"
The answer is no.
It also tells the HI inspectors out there to not do there job properly as they should and will not find it. Thats a joke IMHO. You are one of the smartest guys on this MB, I am surprised that you think like that.
Where did I say that?
It is each inspectors job to do the best they can, what they feel safest and comfortable with.
I am pretty sure I have only had two homes where I didn’t find nails that missed the truss. What I am saying is that had others done their jobs properly, this conversation wouldn’t be taking place.
Speaking of which, “shiners” , as used by the OIR, Citizens, and others,is a misnomer.
Pictured is a “shiner”. At least when I was in my twenties and it was my job to pull out said shiners!:mrgreen:
Not sure how that has anything to do with the re-inspection programs Preston…Unless your affiliated with these programs? However,I have no doubts that anything you sign your name to will be done correctly.
“…if you did reinspections would you do it the same?”
Yes, I would do them the same. But I’m a full time professional inspector, not an out of work landscape architect or builder that would rather be remodeling homes or planting flowers. I considered these programs and decided that I was better off not getting involved
The re-inspection program is completely flawed for the reasons I described and are clearly detailed in the ID memo that John posted. The re-inspectors are disgruntle and being shafted by the system they participate in.
Honestly Preston, do you think that ALL of these re-inspectors really care to crawl in that attic and check the back side of trusses for nails?..
When they can see nothing but staples from the attic hatch?..
Even though a new roof was installed in 2008?
I know for a fact that there is one re-inspector that won’t…And next week I’ll be re-inspecting him…Because it was one of my inspections… And I have pics of 8D nails… When everything gets to Citizens, that re-inspector will be even more disgruntle! :twisted:
Jay, I cant tell you ehat all inspectors do. As I stated to Eric earlier I offer insite to other based on my educated experience in many different aspects in the field. Does not mean I think I know everything nor does it mean i think i know better. Just means I have experiences to offer a different view than some others. I personally believe the reinspection program is needed and if all those that disagree with me performed 50 reinspections I can say the would agree. Doesnt mean there are not error.
Also in regards to thr memo post…they should be investigated
Agreed, Reinspections are an important part. The present re-inspection system is flawed. The biggest flaw is the absences of an obligation to the homeowner. The details of the memo should be investigated.
