evandeven
(Eric Van De Ven, CMI)
December 15, 2011, 12:05am
21
rmurphy1:
So far I have not had any blowbacks by documenting Peel and Stick in this manner (knock on wood), But I don’t put it beyond the realm of possibility.
Now, the new form states that “Any documentation used in validating the compliance or existense of each construction ir nutugatuib attrubyre must accompany this form”
What do you think the chances are the underwriter will focus on the “Any”? Since I am not using documentation to verify the existance of Peel and Stick, but visual and photographic evidence than I don’t need documentation to accompany the form, right?
Strange on how the underwriters have a perculiar way in understanding their own requirements…Take the Citizen’s Roof Condition Certification…Their own documents state that if a ROOF is over 25 years old, then you need an inspection report stating the life expectancy of the roof. But they don’t seem willing to take anything proving the roof is not 25 years old - (Receipts, permits, etc…) They seem to intrepret this to mean if your HOUSE is over 25 years old you need an inspection stating the life expectancy of the roof. Go figure!!
The simple answer is that the who process is a scam… which it is.
rmurphy1
(Richard Murphy)
December 15, 2011, 12:10am
22
As I told Meeker - A camel is a horse designed by committee! Or another thought to ponder…Ever hear of Green’s Law of Debate? It says that “Anything is possible, if you don’t know what you’re talking about!”