Originally Posted By: John Murray This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
pdacey wrote:
I'm actually surprised that everyone pushes down on the door. I put my toe at the front of the stove so it won't slide and I pull on the stove from the top at the back. I think pushing on the door runs the risk of breaking the door or the hinge. Especially on the older models.
I think we're all surprised that someone stands on the door as well!
What would happen if you reported that the stove did not tip
over upon testing and a heavy kid or mentally challenged adult
used the door as a ladder and it tipped?
Would you in any way, be responsible now?
Are you able to inspect the bracket mounting bolts to see if
they are appropriately fastened/in good condition and the leg
is properly attached to the bracket? Are you able to inspect the
condition of the mounting leg to see if is appropriately attached to the oven? Did you put a laser on the stove to see that it is not sloping
dangerously towards the front?
Isn't there a risk of breaking the mounting bracket or oven
leg when testing?
I know some oven doors could not withstand a lot of weight but,
on the other hand I'm sure others can!
Next will be mandatory fridge condensation pan, microwave leak,
R12 leak, Fridge wheels/level fridge, coffeemaker safe temp, icemakers, oven burner hazard etc, etc. tests!
I think I'll pass on testing this!
Originally Posted By: Blaine Wiley This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
. Discoloration around burners on stove top, needs service by an appliance company.
All of y'all write that stuff up too?? 
I don't check here for the anti tip device because it isn't required in new homes here. I did check for them on new homes in VA where they were required. If I have a buyer with children, I mention it to them and leave it up to them. As a parent, I know that most parents child proof their homes with outlet covers, stove anti tip thingies, door knob covers, hearth bumpers, burner covers, etc. I didn't. My kids each put a key in an outlet once. They are very careful around outlets now. They always used chairs to climb on cabinets. With all of that safety stuff, it is still a miracle that any of them make it to 21, there is still only ten million other things that can get them.
I better not ramble any more, some guys will tell me I have too much time, right Dan
Originally Posted By: dfrend This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
LOL, yeah Blaine, get to work.
Seriously though, I can understand why anyone would not check them as an inspector. But, aren't installers supposed to install appliances acording to manufacturer instructions? And if so, wouldn't that make their installation a requirement? I am not saying the inspector must check this, but do we not check that other devices and components are installed correctly?
I am still reading up on this, never checked for them myself. Just interested to see opinions. And waste all my time.
Originally Posted By: Mike Parks This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
1st I rarely delete my post unless they harm someone.
2nd I let my posts stand so that if I am incorrect or harmful to anyone they can continue to be rebutted.
3rd I mean nothing 'funny' about the death.
4th I did to mean funny on the fat comment.
My point is that we can not protect the public from being 'stupid'.
PS Thank you for the respect. It is nice that we refer to someone as Mr. when we disagree. Mike is all that is needed when refering to me. Again I understand why the Mr. was added.
Originally Posted By: pdacey This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
John Murray wrote:
I think we're all surprised that someone stands on the door as well!
What would happen if you reported that the stove did not tip
over upon testing and a heavy kid or mentally challenged adult
used the door as a ladder and it tipped?
Would you in any way, be responsible now?
Are you able to inspect the bracket mounting bolts to see if
they are appropriately fastened/in good condition and the leg
is properly attached to the bracket? Are you able to inspect the
condition of the mounting leg to see if is appropriately attached to the oven? Did you put a laser on the stove to see that it is not sloping
dangerously towards the front?
Isn't there a risk of breaking the mounting bracket or oven
leg when testing?
I know some oven doors could not withstand a lot of weight but,
on the other hand I'm sure others can!
Next will be mandatory fridge condensation pan, microwave leak,
R12 leak, Fridge wheels/level fridge, coffeemaker safe temp, icemakers, oven burner hazard etc, etc. tests!
I think I'll pass on testing this!
I agree, BUT, it's part of our SOP from the Texas Real Estate Commission. I have to check for it and comment if it is missing. There are a lot of things we have to do in TX that most of you would go screaming into the night about. Click on the link
Originally Posted By: gbeaumont This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Chris Butler wrote:
Ok, the HI would probably be definitely named as well. He probably would be found liable in a court of law. Depends on state and judge though also.
But HI's are treated as professionals and thus are considered experts and it should have been noted.
Now, say the HI does denote the deficiency and still get sued, it would probably be settled out prior to trial, as the plaintiff has other fish he or she can go after. What the losses would be are unknown, the HI though would be out $1,000.00 though versus $40,000 - 100,000 at least and probably more considering the case.
So there you have it even though (Except in Texas) there is no requirement to test the anti tip feature I think we all should take an exta 30 seconds to look at this issue and move another step closer to protecting our clients and lowering our liabilities.
Originally Posted By: gbeaumont This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Hi Todd,
thanks, of the members who took the poll 70% had either never check this feature or had never thought about checking this feature 
If you extrapolate those figures into our wider membership that means I only have to convince another 1809 members, to start checking this as part of their regular inspection.
Regards
Gerry
BTW, the best bit about doing this job is learning something new every day
Originally Posted By: John Bowman This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Chris Butler’s answer is one reason I keep a lawyer on retainer. Instead of taking the initiative to fight back on these claims the Insurance Company just pays out.
Chris's statement say in effect, what the heck, I know that the Inspector denoted it in his Inspection Report, but, hmmmm let's see. I know! I'll settle for $1,000.00 the Inspector's Insurance Premium will go up, no wait a minute, its another law suit claim, that could count against all Inspectors E&O.
My statement and comment in General. There has got to be a better way. It's time for the E&O Carriers and Home Inspectors to start fighting against these petty claims. Quit paying them out. Wouldn't your Insurance Dollars be better served to you as Home Inspectors, if the Insurance Companies took a little initiative and fought these frivolous law suits, instead of paying them out, making a reputable Home Inspector look guilty and then increasing his rates.
Originally Posted By: gbeaumont This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Hi John,
much as hate to see this get into an insurance debate, the highest cost that any insurer has in our business is not paying out on claims, it is defending frivolous claims. Your suggestion of having our insurers fight every claim (at $40-$100K a pop) would put all our insurance costs through the roof. I do agree with you however but the issue is with Tort Law not the insurance carriers.
John, please do me a favor and if we want to have an insurance debate, please concider starting a new thread to talk about it further.
Originally Posted By: Ryan Jackson This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Hi guys. We actually talked about this subject in our department staff meeting today. We were debating about whether or not a new house should get a certificate of occupancy before a range is installed for this very reason. We decided that the building could get a final without one, but we also decided to make a note of it on our inspection report that it had not been installed. Sorry, I know you guys are HI’s and I’m a city inspector, but I wanted to throw this in to demonstarte what a hot topic it is.
Speaking of this, my mother is the chief building official of a city in Utah, and she found herself in court over this after an accident happened. 
Originally Posted By: evandeven This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Although I am angered about the lawsuits, after all, if the child was being watched, it wouldn’t have happened, I think that we may want to start checking them. I did it today on a condo I was inspecting with a nearly new range. I took two fingers and placed them on the back of the range and gently pulled forward. It didn’t take much to get it to move forward and nearly fell on my foot!
I have always said that we do not make any money if we are in court.
Maybe testing for these might save someone some money and aggravation.
Just a thought.....
-- Eric Van De Ven
Owner/Inspector
Magnum Inspections Inc.
I get paid to be suspicious when there is nothing to be suspicious about!
www.magnuminspections.com
Originally Posted By: gbeaumont This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Hi to all,
Ryan, how does your juristiction defend that position when the stove manufacturers themselves recomend the installation of this feature ?? if you looked at a heating system for instance that was not installed within the manufacturers guidelines you would flag it, no ??
Eric, I somewhat agree with you, but who educates the parents ?? most buyers are ill-informed, and have no clue to home safety issues that they will sue us over in a heartbeat, so what do we do ?? we educate them and in doing so cover ourselves, no ??
Originally Posted By: dfrend This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Gerry, I don’t think he is saying they give a permit on ones installed wrong. He is saying that in houses where the range has not yet been delivered/installed (ie. a new home) they can pass the final inspection, but they not that it is not installled yet.
Originally Posted By: John Bowman This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Just a thought.
This is a subject of great concern to many. Has the NACHI Safe House Campaign considered creating "Tip Sheets" that could be copied off the Internet so that Home Inspectors could hand them out to prospective buyers with their report.
Originally Posted By: dfrend This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
We have several partners who have these sheets. The Home Safety Council has a good one, but it does not include this. I have emailed them about it. And we are developing a sheet of our own in partnership with some others.
