I conducted a wind mit on a house that was full gable -EXCEPT-…
a flat roof porch appears to have actually been tied in but a little hard to tell. (Add-on?) Firstpic is the edge where the flat roof merges with the standard roof. Second pic is the tie-in inside the roof. A little hard to see, but the flat roof beams appear to be resting on the header, but not directly tied to the main roof trusses. My partner and I feel like the main roof deck was cut back at the edge just enough to tie in the flat roof. If I factor in the flat roof as part of the structure, it is not a hip roof. If I consider the flat roof unattached to the main roof, it is full hip. Any opinions on this?
First of all, if the main roof was gable, what difference would it make for roof shape determination? Second, that is a structurally attached porch roof. The rafters of the flat roof are installed over the bearing wall.
your trying too hard to give credits ( which you don’t do - the insurance company does) write what you see and move on. That is structurally attached, period. Writing it any other way is insurance fraud
1 Like
I agree with both Brad and Bill. Too often inspectors are caught up in the agony of wanting to help their clients attain the best possible “position” with regards to insurance discounts. We all wish everyone we visit were able to receive a discount from their insurance carrier. But the fact is everyone won’t and it truly isn’t our job to decide either. It happens to us all. It’s human nature.
But, certain circumstances are just simply beyond our control and we can’t allow our emotions to interfere with reason and the facts at hand. At that point you (we) need to stand back and acknowledge we’ve done the right thing and performed to the best of our ability.
Bert
Excellent point Bert, I want to see my clients all get credit, but it is truly impossible. The fact is you have to observe and report what you see. You don’t want to get caught up in giving credits and falsifying the report. There are some wind mits that I do, that really I know in my opinion get no credits, but I just provide my clients with the best customer service experience. Also, never explain what credits they are getting to your client. Just tell then what you found such as 8D nails, Clips ect… Good Luck:D
Thank you all for your replies. First, obvious error-full HIP. Second, getting credit for my client was secondary in nature to really understanding the rule here… The flat roof section supports shown in the photo are resting on the bond beam. To get the supports through the main roof the contractor appears to have trimmed away about a foot of the roof deck at the lower edge. The supports do not appear to be attached to the trusses.
Structurally attached?
Now if this was terminated at the fascia and did not disturb the main roof, structurally attached?
Thanks again everyone.
John
If the contractor trimmed away at the foot of the roof deck you can no longer say that the house is built to code. From your description it looks like you have another unpermitted addition which now opens up another whole can of worms. Did you just do the wind mitigation on this or did you do the home inspection also
wm only
Either way that probably does not meet the Florida building code. Knotless April permits and head engineering reports on file. I’m sure a lot of others on his board will disagree with me but that but there should be no credits for question one question two on the win mid form and probably on the strapping also. I personally would walk away from that one
Well it looks like there is nothing left to say 
from your post:
“My partner and I feel like the main roof deck was cut back at the edge just enough to ((((tie in))) the flat roof”
Looks structurally attached to me.
Your question now should be:
If you have determined that the flat roof is tied in,
and being that the flat roof is toenailed, does that flat roof
toenail change roof to wall connection on the entire house?
That is if the trusses are clipped or wraped.
I Can see maybe a wrap or clip in the pic.