Darn was looking forward to the next 10,000 posts.:twisted:
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Appliances are optional in the Home Inspection Checklist: checklist-8a.pdf (98.5 KB)
**Being serious here checking appliances is perhaps more important in relation to the hookups than the actual appliance.
Hard to see that kitchen exhaust flap functioning if you are not for instance running the micro or rangehood.
What about the gas range as far as pulling it out to see if it needs anti-tip devise and gas valve which to metal are (SAFETY CONCERN) ?
I doubt ignoring the unmount dishwasher with no airgap is wise since a loose appliance can cause movement leaking and does anybody like bacteria on dishes ?
So we can forget about checking to see if there is a flap gasket on the disposal or bare conductors powering the thing under your wet cabinet as well.
You can add Florida to your list. Either they will adopt the current proposal, or “another proposal” which is the FABI SoP, CoE.
I Do inspect all of these items. But I can’t see any legitimate reason of adding it to the SOP.
Unless I missed it, you forgot laundry room, machines & mechanicals.
Same here, as long as I deem them safe to operate.
My biggest issue at times is tying stuff together.
Exterior-wall covering -missing mortar
Different sections but the issues at the ceiling are caused by the exterior wall covering as example.
That is when you must either do something like
(see) exterior -wallcovering
Or do a narrative explaining the tie in.
That is an easy example however it can get little more complicated.
The room by room guys must go through hell with that stuff
or they are simply documenting single items and not giving solid advice on implications and results.
I’m a room by room guy.
Personally I don’t care how a defect came to be. I just report what I see, recommend repairs & move on.
I have found you can drive yourself crazy trying to figure out how some defects came to be. For example, you find reverse polarity in the living room & an upstairs bedroom. Are they connected? It could be a junction box, it could be the panel or at the individual outlet.
Is this something we all agree on???
Your example makes more sense than your general policy of avoidance.
Will explain soon as I get to a keyboard
OK so Kevin…
You do room by room.
You see a stain under the bathroom toilet for the first floor .
Once at the first floor bathroom you notice the toilet is loose with high levels as indicated by use of a moisture meter.
According to what you stated above you would Have a (Basement room category) and under (ceilings) would type (observed staining).
You are now at the first floor and under (Bathroom) would type (loose toilet).
Can I assume you would not make a statement in regard to the loose toilet causing the ceiling stains at the basement ceiling ?
Even if you have movable ceiling tiles and can plainly see the wetness at the subfloor ?
The leak has caused multiple defects. Here is what I got.
Unless I see the toilet leaking at the wax ring area, due to a loose toilet, I would not assume, at least not in writing, that this is the cause of the leak.
What if the toilet is cracked & leaking in an area not visible? I know it’s a stretch, but it is possible.
First I would call out the loose toilet - which would be in a sub category for the first floor bathroom. If I viewed standing water from the bathroom, I would call it out as a leak around the toilet where it’s attached to the floor - which would still be under the toilet section of the report.
Second I would call out wet, stained & moisture damaged sub-flooring materials viewed under the first floor bathroom toilet area - which would be in a sub category for the basement.
Third I would call out wet, stained & moisture damaged ceiling materials viewed under the first floor bathroom toilet area - which would be in a sub category for the finished basement areas.
I hope this helps explain my methodology.
How’s that for a policy of avoidance?
Man “o” live.
Ever think of running for politics ?
Where’s that Larson guy ?