Originally Posted By: roconnor This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
This subject comes up some times, so I thought I would start a topic on the overall safety of fused type service panels and copy some of my previous comments here.
IMHO there is nothing wrong with an older fused panel itself. Some electrical professional say that the older fuses are actually more reliable than breakers, and I agree with that (does FPE ring a bell ... lol.). They are just not as "convienient" or tamper resistant as breakers.
The problem is that the typical 60A fused service panel capacity usually just isn't enough for a modern home, and they tend to have potentially serious problems with double lugs and overfusing (or even worse the old penny in the socket trick). I have seen overloaded fused panels with melted wires and such that I can't believe didn't burn the house down (yet!) ... 
I would usually look for a panel with 100A minimum, or 150A for a somewhat larger home (and that upgrade should be considered). But assuming a small home without a lot of modern equipment or HVAC load, and no indications of overloading, I would at least recommend that the Type-S Fuse Adapters be installed. These are special adapters inserted into the fuse socket that will only then accept the correctly sized Type-S fuse ... helps to prevent the "Harry Homeowner" fix, so they will hopefully call a sparky when things start getting overloaded and fuses start blowing ... 
Just my 2-nickles.
-- Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee
I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong
Originally Posted By: rray This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
The problem with fused panels here is that there are a bazillion insurance companies that won’t even consider issuing insurance if a fused panel exists on the premises, with an interesting caveat: they don’t mind the disconnects at the cooling condenser being a fused switch.
Originally Posted By: jpeck This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
rkirk wrote:
The problem with fused panels here is that there are a bazillion insurance companies that won't even consider issuing insurance if a fused panel exists on the premises, with an interesting caveat: they don't mind the disconnects at the cooling condenser being a fused switch.
That is because fuses, even Safe-T-Fuses, are so easy to tamper with.
Some breakers may be unreliable, but it is hard to tamper with a breaker (with bother, it won't trip anyway if it is an FPE or Zinsco ), but a fuse is real easy to tamper with, and is done all the time.
Typically, the fused disconnect at the a/c has cartridge fuses, not screw-in fuses. Yes, you can insert a piece of pipe in place of a cartridge fuse, but that is usually done by the service technician, not the homeowner. With screw-in fuses, it's usually the homeowner who tampers with them.
Originally Posted By: jmyers This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Russel,
I have just come across my first case where the fused panel was in outstanding condition and the insurance company would not give the client home owners insurance until it was replaced.
I suggested that she have the electrician that worked on the panel (there were a few small problems with it) write a letter stating that this panel was safe, in good working condition, recently inspected and compliant with all the current electrical codes.
It really is a shame because the panel was in really good shape, not overloaded or overcrowded. Probably one of the finest installations I have seen to date on a fused panel.
Now the delimma I am having is should I start calling them out for replacement since some insurance companies will not insure the home owners? I should be there to protect them, correct! My next thought would be, am I increasing my liability recommending replacement with a breaker style panel? It would seem to me that if that anything went wrong with the breaker panel, I would get at least part of the fall.
Originally Posted By: rray This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
jmyers wrote:
I suggested that she have the electrician that worked on the panel (there were a few small problems with it) write a letter stating that this panel was safe, in good working condition, recently inspected and compliant with all the current electrical codes.
That typically doesn't work here because the insurance companies know about the shortcuts that one can take to get those circuits working again when there is a fuse involved.
jmyers wrote:
Now the delimma I am having is should I start calling them out for replacement since some insurance companies will not insure the home owners? I should be there to protect them, correct! My next thought would be, am I increasing my liability recommending replacement with a breaker style panel? It would seem to me that if that anything went wrong with the breaker panel, I would get at least part of the fall.
Well, that would have to be your call for your state with advice from your attorney and your E&O insurance provider.
Jerry Peck and I, I think, have banged heads over the "recommend replacement" issue. I'm in a state where many of the areas that I inspect are licensed activities, e.g., plumbing, electricity, roof, etc. Therefore, as a home inspector who is not licensed to do anything, I cannot under any circumstances "recommend replacement" in those areas. For example, here's what is in my report for roof:
Quote
Roof covering appeared to past the end of its useful life. Overall deterioration of roof covering. Shingles were curled, cracked, damaged, or torn. Granules were missing and the asphalt base was visible. Manufacturers consider each of these problems as signs of age. Collectively, they indicate that leaks could develop at any time. Roof covering may need to be replaced; home inspectors are not qualified as roofing contractors under California law and thus do not make a definitive assessment as to whether or not roof needs to be replaced or whether or not it can be repaired. Recommend having roof inspected by a qualified roofing contractor before close of escrow and following his recommendations. Also refer to ?Your roof? in Section II for more information.
Unquote
For fused service panels, I have this:
Quote
Circuit protection appeared to include fuses. Some insurance companies are declining to provide homeowner?s insurance if fused electric panels are present. Fuses also indicate an older panel which may not be up to current standards, and which might need to be upgraded depending on Client's needs (computers, televisions, etc.). Recommend contacting preferred insurance company BEFORE CLOSE OF ESCROW to ensure that appropriate homeowner?s insurance can be obtained on the structure. Recommend further evaluation by qualified electrician for upgrade options.
Unquote
Originally Posted By: jmyers This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Russel,
Actually this was an outstanding example of a fused panel. It did not need any shortcuts, not really sure I if know what you mean by that.
Anyway, it did need to be brought up to current standards for the grounding, gfci protection and three prong outlets area. Other than that it was fine.
That is an interesting paragraph, do you mind if I change it a little and incorporate it into my report?
Originally Posted By: rray This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
By shortcuts, I mean the propensity to replace the fuse with a penny or, in my younger days, with tons of aluminum foil, when a fuse was not handy. It’s tough to go to Home Depot at 3:00 in the morning when the fuse blows, and once the non-standard rigging is in place, one usually forgets about it until the place burns down.
As far as my paragraphs go, they are useable by any and all. That's why I started the report writing thread. If it's not already there, it eventually will be.
Although I know there are lots of reports out there on the Internet, and I have downloaded many of them myself (except Jerry Peck's; still have never had the time, even with broadband, to get his report to finish downloading), the problem with those reports is that one never has the time to sit down and read through the whole report and absorb what the individual paragraphs say. My purpose is to post my attorney- and insurance-provider-approved paragraphs little by little so that the information is more easily absorbed. I'm definitely not saying that my way is the only way, only that I have gone to great length to write my paragraphs and then have sought appropriate counsel to make sure they meet County of San Diego and State of California requirements to provide both information and disclaiming, as necessary.
Originally Posted By: roconnor This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Russ … Good point about the insurance. Same thing happens sometimes with older AL wiring [even with the better COPALUM connected copper pigtails].
I like your report paragraph in general. But in JM's case the wording probably is a little strong. And for a stretched panel, I would use stronger wording. Plus I would recommend having the Type-S tamper resistant fuses installed as a minimum. One of the pitfalls of having standard paragraphs, but its a good starting point ... 
JM ... I'm curious if having the Type-S fuses installed would have made a difference.
-- Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee
I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong
Originally Posted By: jmyers This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Robert,
I believe this is really coming down to a point where the insurance companies have written all the policies they intend to write for the year and if they take any more they are going to be the perfect situation for them, or they just are not going to write them.
In the three years that I have been an inspector, this was the first time this happened and I have found some in really poor shape.
I don't want to change my report and recommend replacement but I am there to protect my clients. I can not see making them pay the better part of $1,000 for replacing the panel protecting them.
I liked Russels idea about informing them of the potential problem but I really doubt that many would follow through. On that other side of that argument, I really don't want to recommend replacing the panel.
I am just torn between the two sides of this issue. 
Originally Posted By: rray This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Joe, they kind of have to follow through unless they are buying the place with their own cash. If they are financing it through a mortgage or trust deed, they can’t close escrow without insurance. So my intent is to let them know that there could be problems getting insurance. Don’t wait until the last minute to get all your ducks in a row, 'cause if you do, escrow might be extended, possibly costing everyone additional money. Realtors love it when you help them help their Clients close escrow 'cause those all-important commissions hit their bank account that much sooner.
Originally Posted By: dlabrake This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
I think our jobs are to identify the condition of the components and not get concerned with whether or not an insurance underwriter will insure the house. If we are accurate in our evaluations and reports, and recommend that they check with their insurance company, we have covered ourselves.
The underwriters change their rules based on loss and income ratios. This can be seen in roof coverages, with different companies having different rules.
You job is to identify the component and any possible safety concerns. If you feel the installation is well done, you have a responsibility to report that, and also provide an advisory that this type of older electrical service is below tadays standards. You could recommend that they contact a licensed electrician about the costs for upgrading.
Don't get into a "recommend replacement" mode due to insurance companies. Their rules are driven by profit margins, our rules are driven by safety.
Give a fair inspection and provide a recommendation that they check with the insurance company. This is almost a standard recommendation on any roofs now, however it never changes my evaluation of the roof.
Originally Posted By: rray This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
dlabrake wrote:
our rules are driven by safety.
I'l respectfully disagree with that statement, although I do understand that I am not a typical inspector. However, my inspections are driven by many factors, only one of which is, of course, safety. Maintenance, however, is another major factor in my eyes. And it doesn't help anyone if I know something about insurance companies and how they treat my inspection reports but don't convey that information to anyone. First and foremost, I believe that I am there to be helpful, and I will do anything that is legal and ethical, and does not cause any legal or ethical concerns (interpretations notwithstanding), to help my Clients, including going out to drink a margarita with them and discuss their home inspection reports "off the record" and out of the purview of their Realtors, or with their Realtors, as the case may be. I've done them all.
Originally Posted By: jpeck This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
dlabrake wrote:
I think our jobs are to identify the condition of the components and not get concerned with whether or not an insurance underwriter will insure the house.
I you know the insurance company is not going to insure it without the fuse panel being replaced, you are doing your client a disservice by not letting them know it.
Quote:
If we are accurate in our evaluations and reports, and recommend that they check with their insurance company, we have covered ourselves.
That is not what we are hired to do. Our clients are paying us to "protect ourselves"? I don't think so. We are hired to advise our clients the condition of the house and what it needs.
Quote:
You job is to identify the component and any possible safety concerns.
So, you are doing a "safety inspection"?
Quote:
If you feel the installation is well done, you have a responsibility to report that
No, there is no obligation to report that. The HIs obligation and responsibility is to advise their client the condition of the house and what, if anything, needs to be done. Your client is not likely to really care about an older installation being well done, but they will definitely care whether or not they can get insurance after they close. THAT could be a major problem for them.
Quote:
Don't get into a "recommend replacement" mode due to insurance companies. Their rules are driven by profit margins, our rules are driven by safety.
Here it is again. A "safety inspection"? But let your client hang because they can't get insurance after closing? Insurance companies will write a binder so they can close on the mortgage, then no fulfill the binder when it runs out in 30-60-90 days because things like the fuse panel does not meet their requirements. YOUR client NEEDS to know of this. The HI needs to be able to withstand pressure from agents and be able to tell their clients that the fuse panel will likely need to be replaced, otherwise they will likely not be able to get insurance, and they need to find that out BEFORE closing.
Russel,
Have we agreed before, or is this the first time? 
Originally Posted By: roconnor This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
jmyers wrote:
I liked Russels idea about informing them of the potential problem but I really doubt that many would follow through. On that other side of that argument, I really don't want to recommend replacing the panel.
I am just torn between the two sides of this issue. 
I hear ya there Joe, and thats part of the reason for the post. Some would probably say that if you just "observe and report" you have done your job, and you can not protect someone from their own stupidity. But there are shades of grey in that black and white statement.
I think someone could honestly just make a mistake with the standard edison base plug fuses, installing one with too large a current rating for a given circuit/wire without truly realizing the potentially hazardous situation created. But if the panel has the Type-S rejection base plug fuses (the adapters are very easy to install), then it can't be inadvertently overfused. If someone then puts a penny or aluminum foil in the socket they really should know they might be doing something hazardous ... then they are on their own ...
And with the insurance, I am not aware that it's a widespread position that a policy can't be issued just because there is a fused type panel alone, especially one with the tamper resistant fuses. They can always call someone else who might be more reasonable. Thats one of the things that makes this country great.
-- Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee
I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong
Originally Posted By: Bob Badger This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
I just found the trip times and currents interesting for breakers and fuses.
Someone else happened to have looked up a Square D 30 amp breaker and found that the trip curve for that showed it would trip at 37 amps some time between 70 seconds and never. 
This is based on a 40 C ambient (breaker) temperature out in a cold garage the current would be higher or time longer.
For the 20 amp fuse the time curve for that shows 30 amps 100 seconds to never till melt out.
I did happen to pick a time delay type fuse, I am sure a one time fuse would be different.
Originally Posted By: roconnor This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Your right … I wasn’t looking at the trip curve for a Type-SL time delay fuse, which is really made for circuits with motors and can handle a higher load. But the fuse trip curves seem to have well defined trip times for a given overload.
– Robert O’Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee
I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong
