Proposed Changes to the Wind Mitigation

[jmurray4 (Jay C. Murray)]

I recently post information on my website regarding the new Wind Mitigation changes being proposed.

Interstingly, I recieved this response from Mr. Darius Grimes, who I understand is a participant in the design of these changes.
I pasted his remarks below.
http://jcmbuildingservices.com/?p=292

Darius H Grimes CRC, CSI-CDT, CWMI August 29, 2011 at 12:05 pm

Jay,
You are correct that the industry is recommending this change based on the fact that a 2 nail clip is only slightly better than toe-nail.
We are also recommending reducing the number of nails in a wrap based on new testing from Simpson Stong-Tie. And the opening protection section is being improved to make sure folks with all glazed openings protected are eligable for credits. In addition we are adding languge to make sure these forms are goof for 5 years as long as no material changes have occured to the structure.
Most changes are positive but we are not trying to reduce rates for consumers with this form, that is not the purpose. The puspose is to match eligible credits with the OIR B1-1699 form adopted by the state. The purpose of the state adopting the 2002 Loss Relativities Study, and the Florida Building Code adding recommendations in the code based on the same study, is to harden Florida’s building stock to reduce damage and loss of housing.
Under CFO Sink the MSFH program was twisted for political purpose into an insurance savings program, that program also was supposed to be about hardening homes.
We have a lot of 2 nail clip homes in our area dating back to the late 1950′s when builder first started using them. The intent of form change is not to help or harm consumers, it is to comply with the OIR B1-1699 form, Florida Statutes, and the 2002 Loss Relativities Study developed by Applied Research Associates. This is based on science and research and the intent of credits has always been to incetivise consumers to harden thier homes, not to merely reduce rates based on exisitng features.
Hope this helps.

http://jcmbuildingservices.com/?p=292

[dbonner (Dennis Bonner)]

So they are allegedly changing the strap nailing requirements because a scientific study was released After the fact , since they have been downgrading straps with three nails for the last three years. Now they are downgrading clips, (with 2 nails) to toenail equivelant based on another study, or what? I dont remember reading about clips with 2 nails being only slightly better than toenails in the 02’ loss study. Its more mental masturbation. IMO

[dbonner (Dennis Bonner)]

You think we could solicit some entity to reinspect all the reinspections for calling all the straps clips? Wait… Whose on first?

[mmeeker (Michael Meeker, CMI)]

They need to take everything off the form that does not result in a discount. The need to ditch the picture requirement mistake they made on the last couple of forms because they are useless dangerous and prove nothing. If we say we observe something and sign our name they should have to accept our professional on site opinion or send someone out their on their dime.

Stop giving the fools at the oir and insurance companies everything they want and set them straight. Give them only what matters.

We should not have to write the address twice on the first page because that is redundant and ridiculous. we should not have to have our initial on each page. I believe most reports get submitted in s single file multi page pdf so all of that is a waste of time.

By the way where does it say we need color photos. How in the hell does that help the idiots.

[jmurray4 (Jay C. Murray)]

**The most interesting of all is the manipulation of the public through increased insurance premiums and Who is reportedly supplying the data. **

---

**The ***"*****the intent of credits has always been to incetivise consumers to harden thier homes". This does not seem to be communicated to the consumer very well. We all see how small the credits have been for gable reinforcement & shutters.

Secondly, Who is suppliying the research that indicates the 2 nail clip is little more effective than toenails? "…based on new testing from Simpson Stong-Tie." Talk about letting the fox guard the hen house. Who makes the new clips the homeowners are going to be encouraged to install? Simpson Stong-Tie!****

[dgrimes (Darius Grimes, CRC1327100, HI859, CWMI)]

Jay,

Thanks for sharing my response on this subject. There is a process for public comments on the form. If you have evidence that there is a reason that clips should not have a minimum of three nails I would suggest that you provide this to OIR but the information should be more than just anecdotal i.e. it will reduce discounts.

As I stated before, the intention of the form is to incentivize consumers to harden their homes and reward that activity with premium reductions.

While many may stand on the sidelines and criticize the process, either fairly or unfairly, there are a handful of dedicated professionals that have been providing public comment and recommendations to improve the form. These experts come from all corners of the industry including building code consultants, insurance, inspection, contractors, engineers, manufacturers, trade associations, and even home inspection associations. With the mountains of documented evidence of fraud and misuse by uninformed, untrained, or incorrectly trained inspectors in the state there was an outcry from everyone to require documentation to support findings and improve accountability in the process. Adding the initials and address to each page was to combat agents, inspectors, and even consumers from mixing pages from different inspections to increase credits. Surely from the standpoint of a license holder you can see how this does at least make it more difficult for your submitted forms to be used fraudulently without your knowledge.

We tried just taking the inspectors word for it with the first 2 page version, this underscored the need to add documentation requirements. If you think this is draconian fine but you should also be aware that this has cost the insurance industry 10’s to 100’s of millions in lost premium. Unfairly damaging an industry with fraudulent or improperly filled out forms by requiring them to accept them on face value is not something I think any of us would support regardless of your particular perspective of the insurance industry.

Again, there is a formal public process for questioning the form language and making recommendations and comments. The entire industry is watching these posts and conversations, I got several calls about Jay posting my comments here from the insurance industry. The result is that the insurance industry is very uneasy with Licensed Home Inspectors because so much of what they see and read in these posts are misguided interpretations based on false knowledge and many posts suggest a strong personal prejudice towards consumers compromising the statutorily required third party independence. If you want the Home Inspection industry to rise to a level of competence we must promote good education and demonstrate competence in understanding the form, the requirements, and the process for performing accurate unbiased inspections regardless of outcome.

The next meeting is September 20th in Tallahassee at the Larson Building, Department of Financial Services Building, Room 216. I will be there in part as a NACHI member promoting a good form and process that is fair to all stakeholders. I guess I should expect to see other members in attendance who are posting strong objections or making representations without evidence that what we are doing is somehow misguided or unfairly biased?

[FONT=Calibri]Darius H Grimes CRC, CSI-CDT, CWMI[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman]FORTIFIED FEHTM Evaluator[/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri]Disaster-Smart Consulting Inc[/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri][email protected][/FONT]](http://www.nachi.org/forum/[email protected])
[FONT=Calibri]www.disaster-smart.com[/FONT]](http://www.nachi.org/forum/www.disaster-smart.com)
[FONT=Calibri]888 WMIT PRO [/FONT]
FONT=Calibri 964-8776[/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri]Cell (850) 748-0565[/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri] [/FONT]

[mmeeker (Michael Meeker, CMI)]

@dgrimes

Adding the initials and address to each page was to combat agents, inspectors, and even consumers from mixing pages from different inspections to increase credits.

You must be kidding me?

I had an Internachi member just cut and paste my signature and all info directly onto his reports. I complained to everyone and absolutely nothing was done. Not by the OIR not by internachi not by anyone. I had the form he submitted “that I did not do and was out of the State at the time” and a letter from the agent he submitted it to. Many say not enough proof but what more could I really have.? Perhaps a video of him committing the crime.

I can see the address helping from mixing pages up the the initials are useless as I doubt very many folks doing inspections put those on by hand. the address twice on page one is redundant.

The photo requirements should not be the difference in weather people get the discounts they deserve or not. Many times as I did in the past I could observe things from a distance with a monocular or other instrument and clear photos are not easy to get. SOMEONE IS GOING TO DIE trying to photograph a nail with a ruler next to it.
Photographing a zircon on a wall proves nothing.
Photographing marks on trusses that may or may not be nails is useless.
What the inspector states in the field is what should matter WE ARE THE PROFESSIONALS not the fools behind the desks.

Prosecute those who commit fraud and quit making honest people do useless and dangerous things. Anytime anyone wishes to discuss this with me feel free to call me at 954-922-0584 anytime after 10:00am and before 6:00pm Mon-Fri.

How about taking everything off the form that does not result in discounts. How about stopping the insurance agencies from using the photos for whatever they want.
How about telling them that nowhere does it state the photos must be in color.

How about having the OIR start a phone line for consumers and clients who have questions. How about the OIR makes a decision when there is a discrepancy.

How about losing the idea of trying to do more than saying 8D or equivalent. It will make no difference so why ask?

How about just stating the actual year built as per the property appraisors network and not try to have inspectors and consumers try to interpret question 1. Here is the year built insurance companies call it what you consider it, quit trying to use inspectors as scapegoats.

How about just saying how many liner feet of a flat roof is attached to the main roof instead of the ridiculous way it is now worded on the form.

Anytime anyone from any of these agencies would like to give me a job as a consultant call me and make a offer.

How about only those who have actually been in attics doing these inspections make the form.

K.I.S.S. should be the motto of the form.

[dbonner (Dennis Bonner)]

Can someone please direct me to the section in the loss study that references #nails and clips? I saw the mention of corrossion, but not #nails in clips or straps. There is a mention that clips are significantly stronger than toenails in there. I did see the Simpson study, but that was after the fact, and was contradictory to the previous “expert” opinions. It would be nice to see actual science behind all the jibberjabber. I hope they dont make the next form as bad as this one.

[jmurray4 (Jay C. Murray)]

@dgrimes

Jay,

Thanks for sharing my response on this subject. There is a process for public comments on the form. If you have evidence that there is a reason that clips should not have a minimum of three nails I would suggest that you provide this to OIR but the information should be more than just anecdotal i.e. it will reduce discounts.

As I stated before, the intention of the form is to incentivize consumers to harden their homes and reward that activity with premium reductions.

While many may stand on the sidelines and criticize the process, either fairly or unfairly, there are a handful of dedicated professionals that have been providing public comment and recommendations to improve the form. These experts come from all corners of the industry including building code consultants, insurance, inspection, contractors, engineers, manufacturers, trade associations, and even home inspection associations. With the mountains of documented evidence of fraud and misuse by uninformed, untrained, or incorrectly trained inspectors in the state there was an outcry from everyone to require documentation to support findings and improve accountability in the process. Adding the initials and address to each page was to combat agents, inspectors, and even consumers from mixing pages from different inspections to increase credits. Surely from the standpoint of a license holder you can see how this does at least make it more difficult for your submitted forms to be used fraudulently without your knowledge.

We tried just taking the inspectors word for it with the first 2 page version, this underscored the need to add documentation requirements. If you think this is draconian fine but you should also be aware that this has cost the insurance industry 10’s to 100’s of millions in lost premium. Unfairly damaging an industry with fraudulent or improperly filled out forms by requiring them to accept them on face value is not something I think any of us would support regardless of your particular perspective of the insurance industry.

Again, there is a formal public process for questioning the form language and making recommendations and comments. The entire industry is watching these posts and conversations, I got several calls about Jay posting my comments here from the insurance industry. The result is that the insurance industry is very uneasy with Licensed Home Inspectors because so much of what they see and read in these posts are misguided interpretations based on false knowledge and many posts suggest a strong personal prejudice towards consumers compromising the statutorily required third party independence. If you want the Home Inspection industry to rise to a level of competence we must promote good education and demonstrate competence in understanding the form, the requirements, and the process for performing accurate unbiased inspections regardless of outcome.

The next meeting is September 20th in Tallahassee at the Larson Building, Department of Financial Services Building, Room 216. I will be there in part as a NACHI member promoting a good form and process that is fair to all stakeholders. I guess I should expect to see other members in attendance who are posting strong objections or making representations without evidence that what we are doing is somehow misguided or unfairly biased?

[FONT=Calibri]Darius H Grimes CRC, CSI-CDT, CWMI[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman]FORTIFIED FEHTM Evaluator[/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri]Disaster-Smart Consulting Inc[/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri][email protected][/FONT]](http://www.nachi.org/forum/[email protected])
[FONT=Calibri]www.disaster-smart.com[/FONT]](http://www.nachi.org/forum/www.disaster-smart.com)
[FONT=Calibri]888 WMIT PRO [/FONT]
FONT=Calibri 964-8776[/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri]Cell (850) 748-0565[/FONT]

Darius,

Thank you so much for coming forward and engaging the NACHI membership on this and other topics related to Wind Mitigations. I believe you are also an active inspector?

I completely agree about the need for photographic documentation of the credits. Even though many here may disagree, I believe that the honor system is inadequate. On a daily basis, I see were previous ratings cannot be substantiated by my inspection. There needs to be some real accountability.

However, here is where I respectfully have concerns with the way previous changes in the wind mitigation have been designed. The predominate roof covering for one. That is written to exclude tile roofs. The Gable end bracing is another, which has no practical financial benefit for the consumer. Hopefully, with positive input from the parties involved in the wind mitigation process we can improve up the earlier forms.

Honestly, Inspectors such as myself have to view these proposed changes with some sense of reservation. Ultimately, we are the ones on the front line of this. We are the ones that receive the calls from homeowners and have to explain the process.

One cannot help but be critical, of changes based on data supplied by the same industry that could benefit from those changes. No different than the Inspector that recommends a repair, and offers to perform those repairs for a fee.

I will be at the September 20th meeting with other NACHI members. I hope to be able to contribute something positive to the process. I look forward to meeting you and others involved.

[mmeeker (Michael Meeker, CMI)]

@jmurray4

Darius,

I completely agree about the need for photographic documentation of the credits. Even though many here may disagree, I believe that the honor system is inadequate. On a daily basis, I see were previous ratings cannot be substantiated by my inspection. There needs to be some real accountability.

Jay you are hurting all of us with this opinion and someone will likely die trying to prove this.

We, well at least many of us are PROFESIONALS and our opinion and word are good because of it.

I agree that there needs to be some real accountability but that will NOT happen unless someone appropriates funds to prosecute those who commit fraud and that is NOT going to happen. THERE IS NO MONEY.

Why punish us all and risk our lives because of them. I have never been one to take away peoples freedoms or rights because of a few dumb-asses or crooks. The OIR should go after those folks and leave us alone. To be in favor of photos and be an inspector is foolish and bad for all of us. I believe you should reconsider your opinion on that matter.

By the way I am not saying do not take or even include pictures. I am just saying they should not be the deciding factor on weather a client gets the credit or not.
To each his own I guess.

[mnieblas (Manny NIEBLAS)]

@jmurray4

Darius,

Thank you so much for coming forward and engaging the NACHI membership on this and other topics related to Wind Mitigations. I believe you are also an active inspector?

I completely agree about the need for photographic documentation of the credits. Even though many here may disagree, I believe that the honor system is inadequate. On a daily basis, I see were previous ratings cannot be substantiated by my inspection. There needs to be some real accountability.

However, here is where I respectfully have concerns with the way previous changes in the wind mitigation have been designed. The predominate roof covering for one. That is written to exclude tile roofs. The Gable end bracing is another, which has no practical financial benefit for the consumer. Hopefully, with positive input from the parties involved in the wind mitigation process we can improve up the earlier forms.

Honestly, Inspectors such as myself have to view these proposed changes with some sense of reservation. Ultimately, we are the ones on the front line of this. We are the ones that receive the calls from homeowners and have to explain the process.

One cannot help but be critical, of changes based on data supplied by the same industry that could benefit from those changes. No different than the Inspector that recommends a repair, and offers to perform those repairs for a fee.

I will be at the September 20th meeting with other NACHI members. I hope to be able to contribute something positive to the process. I look forward to meeting you and others involved.

Well said JC, I only hope that when they are putting the new form together they look a true professionals for advice and block out others.

[mmeeker (Michael Meeker, CMI)]

@mnieblas

Well said JC, I only hope that when they are putting the new form together they look a true professionals for advice and block out others.

Yes I agree. True professionals like Architects, Engineers, and General Contractors. Not hacks from Hialeah that just woke up one day and started calling themselves home inspectors.

Now that is some real experience.:roll:

[jmurray4 (Jay C. Murray)]

@mmeeker

Jay you are hurting all of us with this opinion and someone will likely die trying to prove this.

We, well at least many of us are PROFESIONALS and our opinion and word are good because of it.

I agree that there needs to be some real accountability but that will NOT happen unless someone appropriates funds to prosecute those who commit fraud and that is NOT going to happen. THERE IS NO MONEY.

Why punish us all and risk our lives because of them. I have never been one to take away peoples freedoms or rights because of a few dumb-asses or crooks. The OIR should go after those folks and leave us alone. To be in favor of photos and be an inspector is foolish and bad for all of us. I believe you should reconsider your opinion on that matter.

To each his own I guess.

Sorry Mike, I hope no one ever gets hurt performing a Wind Mit. I just see to much of the fraud and ineptitude. See my earlier post: NAIL SIZE? 8D or 6D? - Florida and SUNachi Inspectors - InterNACHI®️ Forum

In addition to finding a scam inspector to give him the credits he wanted. That homeowner went to great lengths to destroy my credibility with the agent. I saw the pics he provided they were far from acceptable, and of the SAME nail I circled!!! Only his pics were so poor, you could not read the numbers on his tape.

I have no doubt that you are absolutely honest about your wind mits. You are honest about everything else, even when people dislike your views.

I just feel that to a certain degree the pics and reinspections are going to** benifit experienced and honest Wind Mitigators**.

[dbonner (Dennis Bonner)]

Manny is not a hack Mike. He is one of the best inspectors I know and I believe he has a degree in architecture.

[mmeeker (Michael Meeker, CMI)]

Hey now I do not believe I called anyone out by name.

Why would I ? I agreed with him. Matter of fact I did say Architects were true professionals.

Did he infer something about me?

Jay we will just have to agree to disagree with what we believe is good for inspectors and clients.

I also believe you and Most of the guys that take the time to talk here actually are trying their best to do a accurate and honest job.

I just have different opinions about a great many things that a lot of people do not agree with. I tend to see life and the world differently than most.

The problem is with the idiots that do not care enough to discuss and learn things in places like this.

[mnieblas (Manny NIEBLAS)]

@jmurray4

Sorry Mike, I hope no one ever gets hurt performing a Wind Mit. I just see to much of the fraud and ineptitude. See my earlier post: NAIL SIZE? 8D or 6D? - Florida and SUNachi Inspectors - InterNACHI®️ Forum

In addition to finding a scam inspector to give him the credits he wanted. That homeowner went to great lengths to destroy my credibility with the agent. I saw the pics he provided they were far from acceptable, and of the SAME nail I circled!!! Only his pics were so poor, you could not read the numbers on his tape.

I have no doubt that you are absolutely honest about your wind mits. You are honest about everything else, even when people dislike your views.

I just feel that to a certain degree the pics and reinspections are going to** benifit experienced and honest Wind Mitigators**.

I had a county inspector inspect one of my sites the other days and guess what he took pictures of everything for his records or what ever other purpose. This is very true Pictures are worth a thousand words… I take picture of everything when I have my site meetings when sub come back and no that’s not true, I whip out my pics and end of discussion…

[mnieblas (Manny NIEBLAS)]

@mmeeker

Yes I agree. True professionals like Architects, Engineers, and General Contractors. Not hacks from Hialeah that just woke up one day and started calling themselves home inspectors.

Now that is some real experience.:roll:

If you have a problem with me personaly 305-606-6797 I am more of a GC than you will ever be with your license. You are a true sack of …

[mmeeker (Michael Meeker, CMI)]

Bite me Bi-ch.
Anytime any place. Here is my number for you 954-922-0584. Want my address just look it up.

You had you chance to run your mouth to my face at the meeting up North. We even spoke face to face. Funny how you did not run your mouth there. You sure do run it a lot here.

What licenses do you hold again? HACK. If you are so damn qualified how come you have no licenses other than a HI. Oh I guess you just are so good you don’t need them. Sh-t your “Subs” probably have a higher license than you.

Who hired you to be the boss? Family or friend? Or do you pay to use someone else’s license?

I can do this forever or you can just shut up and go away. I like the publicity? Do you?

[mnieblas (Manny NIEBLAS)]

@mmeeker

Bite me Bi-ch.
Anytime any place. Here is my number for you 954-922-0584. Want my address just look it up.

You had you chance to run your mouth to my face at the meeting up North. We even spoke face to face. Funny how you did not run your mouth there. You sure do run it a lot here.

What licenses do you hold again? HACK. If you are so damn qualified how come you have no licenses other than a HI. Oh I guess you just are so good you don’t need them.

You are right I treated you the same way you treated me… I thought you where a professional like and architect, engineer or GC. I think everyone at that meeting thought they where dealing with the professionals. I am sure the powers above are getting a kick at your professionalism here on the MB and take you seriously. I am glad you show your true colors. Who signed of on your experience “YOU REAL HACK” that’s about the only hard part about your “GOD License” I have a real portfolio lets compare recently complete works. Almost forgot try not to get hurt looking for a nail because that is such a dangerous job… I am done with your sorry crying *****. I hope they don’t look at the crap you speak because this will be done for everyone… Best of luck Mr. Meeker I refuse to embarrass us any further in public…

[mmeeker (Michael Meeker, CMI)]

Like I said just shut up and go away.

Quit running you mouth about me with your little innuendos and I will not screw with you.

Fu-k with me and it is on. You should know by now I do not play and will not back down.

As always I never screw with anyone who does not screw with me first. In case you have not figured it out. I do not care what anyone thinks, it does not affect me in the least.

Sorry. It is not hard to have people sign off on experience when you have been in the business your whole life and done just about all there is to do in the business and CAN PROVE IT. Those things are verified and just someone saying so is not good enough.

Maybe someday you will get the real verifiable experience I and others have and you will get that license you are trying to obtain.

If you remember I have wished you luck before in that endeavor.

Goodbye.