Roofing issues. Please give feedback

Agree but it depends how it’s written (and this is something I POUND, POUND, POUND into my inspector’s head’s daily) is that when you cite a specific problem with a system you are also saying - EVERYTHING else is PERFECT (can you tell this struck a nerve? LOL :slight_smile: )

I’m too lazy to comb the whole thread but I believe OP said the callout was specifically just for delamination.

4 Likes

That is what he said. He also said the inspector missed areas with “no shingles at all”. Really?

Hmmmm,…OP joins an hour ago and comes in throwing an inspector under a bus. Sorry, this does not pass the sniff test.

2 Likes

I dunno about that. I guess I would need to see an example.

The only photo you have shown so far is an incorrect Valley. Where’s the shingles with delamination issues?

2 Likes

Well this was supposed to be a chance for the other inspectors to catch some things that were missed and hopefully maybe learn a thing or two. I included the backstory for reference and it quickly became about the backstory instead of the roof. I have a copy of the other report but didnt think it proper to share that. Since I am perceived as the “new guy” ( I have been a member for awhile and an inspector for three years) I just didnt partake in the forums because , well, this exact thing.

Let me share the things I found and maybe it will help you.

  1. Valley is installed incorrectly even to the untrained eye
  2. The shingle overlap is not correct. It is exposing the nail line (where fasteners are supposed to be). Since there are no fasteners visible, one can assume they are higher. This is incorrect because there are two layers to an architectural shingle and they overlap at the nail line so the fasteners goes through both layers. This is a blow off concern in windy areas. I am in Montana and that is an I90 wind rating.
  3. Given just those two findings, the manufacturer will not warranty based on installation error.

Brian- If you need proof here you go

An example that was the inspiration for a chapter in my book and one that I lived through was an inspector calling out 2 damaged heat ducts in a crawl space. Buyer negotiated a few dollars, closed on the house and called out the HVAC guy a few months later. Tech got down in the crawl and fought his way to the back better than my guy and found more. Turned out the bill was for 6 damaged ducts and the buyer wanted the $1000 dollars from us (me). I tried to argue but in the end refunded the fee because we backed ourselves into a corner by specifying EXACTLY which ducts were damaged. Once that was done we implied all the other ones were fine.

Had my inspector just said there are damaged heating ducts - further evaluation, etc., etc. we would have been fine. Specifying exactly what needs to be repaired/replaced is toxic. We have nothing to gain and everything to lose. Get the pro onsite to determine the extent of the repairs and associated costs (a disclaimer that is now on the front all our reports). Nobody is actually doing that before closing these days. Inspectors could protect themselves sooooo much better with just a bit of tweaking in how things are written. I get so emphatic about this because no matter how often or loudly I scream about this I can still pick up a report and find dangerous specificity. Sure, there are times when being specific is fine but most times it’s not. Another one I harp about constantly is ungrounded or mis-wired outlets. One or two? Fine, specify which ones. Beyond that, it’s more than a fluke and you’ve got a drunk electrician or a homeowner trying to be an electrician. Add in furniture blocking things and there’s no reason to specify certain outlets unless you have a really good caveat about not testing them all.

In the end no one notices the little nuances we use to protect ourselves so we should use them to our advantage at every opportunity.

7 Likes

Excellent points! Good examples…thanks.

3 Likes

Sorry if I got the wrong impression. I do not take throwing another inspector under the bus lightly. We have enough people trying to do that as it is…like everyday of our lives.

You may have been here for awhile…but this is all the information we have. If you stay away because you do not like being challenged, well…

image

1 Like

I guess if you had challenged my post on a factual level things would be different. You chose to come at me instead of looking at the roof pix and then when I showed you what you doubted you conveniently do not mention it. Did you learn anything from my description or do you know all that already? Whether I am new to the forums or a veteran, my post is factually correct. You made it personal.
Best of luck in your future

Just for clarity, so I will mention it now. Was this the areas of missing shingles?

For the record, it is common for this forum to be hit by “this inspector missed this and this”…gotcha moments…from people from god knows where? Sometimes it is angry buyers fishing for ways to gain an angle to sue the inspector. Sometimes it is chest beaters. All hit pieces with bad intentions.

You joined an hour before this post was generated…So you can bet I am going to flush that out if I can. Not personal. Welcome to the forum. I never commented on the roof defects because I did not feel it necessary to qualify myself…and I still don’t.

2 Likes

Hi John Lewis,
Welcome to the forum. Its good to have another member with roofing experience to join the discussions. Do you have any pictures of any of these areas with no shingles at all? It seems incredible that anyone would miss that.

3 Likes

I agree with Scott.

4 Likes

Roofing.
Observation: California-cut valley. Shingles from the smaller roof slope are installed across the valley onto the adjacent slope.
Poorly administered California-cut valley.
Recommend: A licensed roofing contractor reinstall roof valleys properly to insure the roof covering is water tight and remains water tight for the life of the roof material.

1 Like

I noticed that also.

2 Likes

As a roofer with a million miles, you can claim and do whatever it is you desire when doing the install. However, if the manufacturer of the shingles used does not approve of such method… the warranty is void, and you open up yourself to a lot of exposure should there ever be a concern and or a leak in the valley. Also, who is then to guarantee the roof, the roofer? for 20 years? The roofer, most roofers, are gone with the wind once paid. Let’s be honest about it – no roofer [I know of] will ever admit to having roof leaks, yet roofs leak all the time all over the country.

https://www.gaf.com/en-us/document-library/documents/productdocuments/residentialroofingdocuments/shinglesdocuments/designershinglesdocuments/valuecollectionshinglesdocuments/camelotiiformerlycamelot30documents/R__136_Valley_Flashing_Options_.pdf

4 Likes

Im not sure if you are agreeing or? Either way, you link states California Valleys are fine. The bleeder valley is just that. Good reference for a visual for the term used. One thing I pride myself on is the ability to offer the best warranty by the manufacturer. This requires I follow all the install recommendations.

You, above, made a claim that you either installed and or approve of woven valleys using laminated shingles. Now, you are saying otherwise? Ya, I’m not sure, too, you sound confused. Re-read the thread from above. A “Californian” valley is not a “woven” valley. I’m beginning to question your million mile roofing experience.

@jjonas will show up anytime now to set the record straight up in here.

3 Likes

With my stronger glasses, I think you are right, Scott.

Mea Culpa. :man_shrugging:

2 Likes

I bet you can see it without your glasses! :upside_down_face: But the second pic! look at that one.

Still need my glasses, Simon. :man_shrugging: