Please help get rid or the picture requirements for wind mits.

You did.

Gross inaccuracies can be seen with photos, especially when compared to statistics, that is why they are required and why reports are categorically rejected and re-inspection is a growing segment.

  • While I don’t always agree with Mr. Meeker’s point of view, I firmly believe he has the right to his opinion and to attempt to help shape professional destiney. I commend him for attempting to change something in a wind mitigation inspection that he believes is unnecessary and possibly dangerous. The love it or leave it comment uncalled for.

I thought you were agreeing with me.

I do believe proper pictures/evidence with a survey will result in no re-inspection. Saving us all money. I do agree that it can be falsified.

He does not attend the meetings in Tallahassee and most times he is preaching to the Choir. He should be telling the proper powers. Not the inspectors who are following the rules and accepted standards. He hijacks everyone else’s threads. He then insults all others in the industry because they do not want to follow what he believes to be the best coarse of action. I understand where he is coming from(even if he does not believe it).

The best coarse of action is to tell inspectors what is currently expected of them. Change the requirements from the top(form makers). Any other way just makes the profession look foolish.

I Just do not believe it should be the determining factor on weather they get the discounts they deserve or not.

I have seen clips, wraps, shiners etc. I used to carry a monocular for identifying these things. I simply do not believe we should go crawling around up there for the perfect photo. I personally think photographing trusses is a difficult and useless practice as well. It is about as useful as photographing a zircon on a wall with a + on it.

It would at least help somewhat to actually prove things if we video taped the whole inspection. Then they could see what we do but that is even tougher.

It all boils down to the fact that we are the professionals paid to do the verifying. When we say so they client should get what we say. If the insurance companies have a problem they can have a re-inspection on their dime.

I could go thru a stack of wind mits and flag them just on the info I see and probably catch more bullsh-t than most of the underwriters.

Does anyone have the letter that states if the insurance company does not trust the results then they have to pay for a re-inspection. Heck does anyone even remember what I am talking about?

I do not attend the meetings because I have never seemed to be able to get the kinds of changes I want or to have things go the way I think they should.

I do however have the time to voice my opinion here and hopefully someone that does have the power to affect change may see this and agree.

I would be willing to bet if we had a petition or something with thousands of signatures something may get done.

I do not know how to create a legal online petition but would be willing to help anyone that knows how to do it.

I personally feel the need to at the least speak up when I see something I do not agree with. A great many just stand by and say nothing which leads the powers to be to believe that most folks agree with what is going on.

Requirements are requirements. It seems there have been changes and as I read your posts, the requirement for pictures increases your potential for injury or death. Charge accordingly.

There are more costs to business than mileage, equipment, paperwork and time. This is one of those costs that only you can determine. What is the cost of your own potential disability or demise?

While you claim you do this for the client, that is misleading. You are running a business and the ultimate goal is to make money. The client doesn’t just get a one time savings for the wind mit. Their savings are made each and every time they make a premium payment for as long as they own the home. They could save thousands of dollars over the time they own the home.

If you charge more, you might get fewer jobs. That does not necessarily mean you gross less over a year. You may gross the same but work less which means you also have less potential for injury / death. Only you can determine your own value and worth. Personally, if what you say is true, I would not be risking my life and livelihood for such a small amount of income.

It is not about the money to me.

The client does not get the discount if the insurers want a picture that they deem necessary and do not get it. That is wrong.

The form clearly states only visible and accessible photos are required. The insurance companies are misinterpreting the form.

Re-bar is not visible. Nailing patterns are not visible. Many times nails are not visible, etc…

No where on the form does it say that if the photos are not there the client does not get the credit.

The insurance company is making that up by themselves and no one is doing anything to stop them.

It costs the client money when they do not get what they deserve.

I do not risk my a-s for money. I do it so the client gets what they deserve. It is not necessary for an accurate inspection.

If you are risking your a-s to save money for some unknown person and all you get in return is an increased risk of “death” as you have stated, you need to revisit your business model mission statement. Not just for marketing purposes but for the sake of your own family.

Whether you feel it is necessary or not, if it is currently part of the protocols the client’s insurance company requires, you either meet the requirements (and charge accordingly) or pass.

I do meet the requirements.

The insurance companies do not as they want more than visible and accessible photos and that is ALL that is required.

Yet they get away with it and no one does squat. They pay NO attention to what the form says and are allowed to say and request whatever they want.

That is wrong. Seems simple enough to me but apparently not to most everyone else.

The maximum punishment available as it stands is 1 year jail, 1 year probation and $1000 fine.

I said this before and I say it again:

  • Nothing wrong with pictures showing the roof shape.
  • Nothing wrong with taking pictures from the pull down ladder of: brackets, plates, H clips and any other accessible attributes
  • Nothing wrong with snapping a few pictures of the truss system.

The problem is when you have to go into an attic through an inside scuttle hole in the middle of the house where you can hardly see anything and yet you are force to scan a truss member to identified a nail and spacing at a >112F full of fiber glass loose insulation up to the Yinyin and try to snap a picture of a hurricane clip 20 feet away cover with fiber glass loose insulation. Not mentioning looking for a shiner to show a nail. That is when it gets dangerous.

Who is to benefit? The guy sitting in A/C drinking coffee and looking pictures. He is probably laughing about the stupid inspector that took the obscured picture. What about our client? He is probably at lost trying to figure out if the inspector will be coming down from the attic into his living room.:roll:

This requirement shall change. If being licensed by the state does not mean anything then why are we paying to be licensed??? No credibility??? So, we call this a proffesion?? Industry??

I do agree with The Meeker 100%;).

“THE MEEKER FOR PRESIDENT”

WOO HOOO well said.

Now how do we get it done?

I climb through 3-4 attics every day doing home inspections for the past 20 years. Never even came close to having an accident. Not sure what is so dangerous about climbing through attics. I think a lot of inspectors don’t climb the attics because they just don’t want to. They are hot this time of year I’ll give you that. Some people pay money to be in a sauna, we get paid for it.

To prove something to a person behind a desk? It is simply not enough gain for the risk. Why do you feel it is necessary? If you just observe it and note it why is that not enough?
You are the professional expect assigned to verifying the hardware. What you say you see is enough for me. Are you involved with re-inspections?

No I won’t get involved in re-inspections at any price. We only do wind mits with home inspections and I just don’t see the big deal about taking some photos and putting them in with the report. That’s why I charge them good money, I do it for my customer. In this world you have to prove everything, no one is as good as their word any more ( sad but true). Just my humble opinion.

I do not accept that.
I am as good as my word. At least I always try to be.

The chance of a underwriter catching an error based on photo are slim to none.

The only time that happens is when an inspector has no idea of what they are doing.

We should not have to pay that price.

Three to four attic a day. Wow, that is a lot of inspections in one day. I assume you have help to get them done so fast. FYI - there is another post on this board that was recently put up by another very seasoned inspector. He just fell though his first ceiling. If is only a matter of time. it happens to everyone.

I agree sjohnson Their is a home inspection school offering basket weaving classes for inspectors that are worried about killing them selfs by walking in the attic to take a picture or look for a shinner. I can think of over one hundred thing that are more dangerous in the construction field that is for me that I work in it every day and design over 75% of the jobs that I supervise.

**Steve, you must be an ATTIC guru:roll:. Acording to your numbers you have visited 29,200 attics in your 20 years of inspecting. That is if you do 4 attics a day. You probably live inside an attic:roll:. Tht’s a heck of a life style. **

**We need somebody like you to teach us a class of walking inside an attic without getting hurt or falling through the rafters inside a living room. **

“SAFE ATTIC PRACTICES”