Class Action Suite Against Universal

Something must be done to stop those idiots from picking and choosing what they want to accept on Wind Mitigation inspections.

Those idiots had a picture with a 6 inch ruler on top of showing 8D nails and will not accept it as nailing pattern proof.

If anyone ever wants to sue them count me in. The OIR should make them accept what is sent when it is obviously good.

Remember when they bi-ch that if they do not accept your forms then they must send someone out on their dime.

Remember you are not their slaves or do-boys stand up for yourselves and do not take their cr-p.

Are they questioning the size of the nail or the pattern?

They are saying the photo is no good for question 3.

I think it is crazy as many times I cannot find a shiner.

What about the safety factor involved in getting these asinine photos?

We put out names on the form and we say so, so that should be good enough. What the hell can they really tell from a photo anyhow.

Universal is pretty much the only company I have a problem with and I believe they need to be stopped.

That still doesn’t answer my question. Is it the size of the nail or the spacing?

I am not really sure the lady was not specific.

There must be some very good framers down there. I see shiners all the time up here.

Did you include a photo of the spacing with the form?

It was a 6 inch ruler on top of shiners, which I consider better than unknown marks on trusses with a ruler or tape on it. at least you could see they were big nails spaced at 6 inches or less.

I guess sooner or later you are going to learn that what you consider is only valuable to you.

Yeah I guess the idiots at Universal know much more about construction than I do :roll:

As long a Yes-Men keep jumping through their hoops they will keep playing Bossman.

I for one do not take their cr-p and they can send out a guy to re-inspect on their dime because I have done what is required by the form.

Enjoy the new stream of income it is oh so great.

What are you going to do when they want you to go back and you have done your report as the Oh Mighty York has instructed you to do and they still have a problem?

I would suggest filing a complaint with the OIR first.

Last time I tried I was sent the memo about the meeting on 9/22/10 I have not tried again since.

I am just curious why everyone seems to kiss their a-ses "Universal"and go above and beyond what is required by the OIR.

I have never gotten a decent response from the OIR on any occasion I have contacted them.

They make no decisions about field related questions and they do not even tell you who ends up writing the forms. They never answer any questions about what means what with the form. I have not found them of any use thus far.

Do what other inspectors do, advise the client not to use Universal.


Have you ever considered you are doing them wrong?

The several times I have encountered Universal, they were nice, straight forward and we agreed on the correct answer.

Im not taking sides on this one, but…If you are performing the inspection in accordance with industry standards and documenting each mitigation feature properly, there should be no reason for having any issues with underwriters. The extra documentation and data verification can be challenging, but the extra work on the front end can eliminate any future issues that might arise from discrepancies later on.

I use a 16 inch ruler against the markings on the truss. I try to avoid taking pictures of multiple shiners and submitting them in the report. taking a picture of a 6 inch ruler against nails that are not even in the truss might not be what they are looking for.

You need a picture of a shiner and picture of markings with spacing, both with a ruler. The form states: **one photo documenting the existence of each visible and accessible construction or mitigation attribute marked in Sections 3 through 9 must accompany this form. **

Yes yes, I agree you are correct. That is what I do and have not had any problems. two separate photos (actually I usually take multiples just so I dont have to make a trip back out or “fudge” a photo by using one from another inspection) One photo of a shiner against a ruler and the appropriate photos of the marked trusses
I think what Mike is saying is instead of marking the truss where the nails are and taking a picture, he submitted a picture of multiple shiners against a ruler, and did not follow the common practice of taking the time to mark the truss with a sharpie and photographing the marks against the ruler.

I can certainly understand them kicking the report out if after 5000 reports all looking the same way with the same procedure, one comes across the desk that looks different and is marked the same as the rest.

When we have been questioned by the underwriters at Universal, they have always been very professional and asked specific questions and stated exacted what they wanted.

It is always easier to be nice and get the work done right the first time. we use a stanley tape on the marks and/or shiners depending on the construction.

I have always learned to not bite the hand that feeds you. Also, you may not have to worry about then much longer as it is apparent that they are getting out of single family homes and will only be handling condos.

Pictures required for RDA: 1. thickness of roof deck. 2. Length of nail. 3. Picture of marks for field nailing with tape measure. 4. marks for edge. 5. picture showing at least 4 were checked… Follow this, and they should not bust your balls

All good points. Thanks for everyone’s opinions. I just feel that If I am there and I do the inspection if I take a picture of something and say it is so that seems to be enough for everyone EXCEPT universal.

I get 2 kinds of calls from insurance companies.

1 calls saying they did not get the pictures. cause is customer faxes them report and did not send.

2 calls from universal saying photos are not good enough for one reason or another.

I get no other complaints from any other company.

I do not remember the clients name but this is how apparent the nails were. see attached. the first photo send was of a better looking area with the ruler clearly showing spacing. I would say the photo clearly shows a uplift resistance of 182 or greater.

My point is Universal should not be the ones saying what is acceptable and what is not the OIR should.

I have not heard back yet so the second attached picture may have done the trick.

As someone said earlier do what other inspectors do recommend another company.

If anyone asks who I should go with my answer would likely always be ANYONE BUT UNIVERSAL.

They are not the hand that feeds me.

By the way I almost never hear from the underwriters they complain to the agent I send them another photo or something and that is it. They are just the biggest and really only company I would call a pain in the a-s :mrgreen: