"Defect Recognition & Report Writing" online course

This thread is dedicated exclusively for those students currently enrolled in the InterNACHI course titled, “Defect Recognition and Report Writing.”

Upon successful completion of this 8-hour course, the student shall learn how to identify the common defects found in a home inspection and to develop comments and narratives in writing an inspection report.

And, in keeping with InterNACHI’s commitment to Continuing Education, this course is open and free to all members, and can be taken again and again, without limit.

Students are free to pose questions and comments here and join in the conversation with other students. The thread will be monitored by the course instructor.

Contact: Director of Education, Ben Gromicko ben@internachi.org

Inspector training courses: www.nachi.org/education.

Thank you.

Thanks also Ben I will go through it in the winter time.:cool:

Excellent course so far. Maybe an hour into it.

This is question 3 on the quiz:

T/F: Quoting building codes in a narrative is not a very good idea.
False (correct)

Should read “is a very good idea” if the answer is false, or the answer is true with the current wording.

1 Like

How do you know what the answers are?

Hit view quiz results

WTF. I have taken like 20 classes and I did not know there was a button for that.

For the quizzes, not the exams.

OOOOH. Let’s pretend this conversation never happened

I would consider not quoting building codes in any form of a narrative unless you are also a licensed building contractor. Of course we (you) rely upon the building codes throughout your inspection but not being a licensed contractor (assumed) might make you suject to cross-examination under certain circumstances. Reliance upon facts you examine are what of importance, not what you are basing those conclusions upon. Experience here is the dictate. Heavy reliance on codes is a matter of fact, but not a material fact that the client should rely upon.

1 Like

Photo 19 in the Exterior section contains the end comment, “Recommend replacing or re-anchoring the lag screw.” When do I recommend something be fixed by a specialist, and when do I recommend it simply be fixed? My line of thinking is that since this is listed as a potential safety hazard, I would recommend a specialist fix it rather than the handyman homeowner. Or does “potential safety hazard” cover it?


Oh, here’s the entire comment, referring to the photo where what appears to be a wrought iron fence is coming loose from the brick veneer:

Defect: Lag screw pulled loose, possibly due to inadequate anchor or sleeve causing potential safety hazard. Recommend replacing or re-
anchoring the lag screw.

Condensation from inside the home can enter the roof cavity due to a poor installation of vapor barrier.

I will begin this course on Monday. Nice to see it offered

Looking forward to this course.

Quoting code opens a can of worms that I prefer to leave unopened. There are other ways of describing why something is a safety or structural defect that are just as effective. The problem with code is that a house only needed to meet the code standards that were in effect when the house was built. If work was done to the structure after that time then for the most part that work and only that work needed to meet the newer code in effect at the time of the newer work (I realize that there are many exceptions to that last statement.)

If for example a home was built in 1993 and has had no additional work done to it since then is it not in code compliance because it does not meet 2012 standards? Can they be cited for not being in compliance by a local code official? For the most part the answers are no and no.

By citing code in a report we give the impression to the prospective buyer that the house is not in compliance which does not fall under our SOP as a home inspector and is not necessarily true. The other thing to remember is that code is the minimum standard in effect at the time of work. Nothing more, nothing less.

It is better to use a phrase like ‘such and such does not adhere to standard building practice’ rather then citing code when describing why a defect is a defect in your opinion.

With that I am off to do this course and find out what Ben’s take on this is.

Yep. I used “not built to today’s building standards.”
Legal Counsel wrote a great, short article about home inspectors and code at
http://www.nachi.org/codecertifiedwarning.htm. I highly recommend reading it.

Kenton Shepard helped write this informative article: http://www.nachi.org/writing-report-narratives.htm about “quoting code” in your report narratives.

Fireplace 1 - …or a maximum of six inches away from flu, (?)


Starting the defect recognition course.

starting course