Kevin, I plan to gently pry up shingles per the new SOP requirements but I will be judicious about it. If the shingle fights back at all I will simply disclaim that I checked a representative sample. If it does lift readily I will inspect it but say no more about it in my report, i.e. I will not specify I sampled the shingles. I suspect there will be a flood of “review by qualified roofer” recommendations over the next few months. I’m also betting quite a few HI’s will not pry up the shingles and will simply take their chances.
Here’s the good thing…the one inspector that was responsible for that new SOP requirement ends his Advisory Committee term next month and will be replaced by a new face. I’m hoping that will lead to that SOP requirement being rescinded in the future but, even if it is deleted, it will be a year or so.
I am considering a global disclaimer that I will not pry them up due to potential damage. Especially in the winter, thought about it a lot lately in freezing temps when the shingles are rigid and hard to even lift at the edge of the roof. I would rather put it in my PIA that I depart from the action, than take my chances.
The thing that gets me is that we know that ALL the shingles on the roof are not likely to be perfectly nailed. Otherwise we would not so often see the random exposed nail in a field on the roof. Looking from the attic generally says that they are not exactly nailed right either.
But what is the reasonable recourse? So I happen to pry up a shingle that shows improper nailing by a little bit. Are they all like that? Does that mean I should pry up every one? Where do you draw the line? So whether or not I recommend review is based on chance - which shingle I pick? What is the roofer going to say? I just don’t understand how this helps my client.
Theoretically, the issue with your plan is that since you, as a normal matter of course, have decided to not follow the SOP and disclaim that item in your PIA then you are supposed to communicate that to the client at the 1st available opportunity, i.e. the initial telephone call. That’s to give the potential client the immediate option to call another inspector if he so desires. Sucks doesn’t it?
So following your thought on it Michael (which sounds reasonable and better than my idea after your response,) if you try and it resists, wouldn’t it be better to state that you tried and the shingles could not be pried up without damage than to say nothing?
Either way how do you prove you checked? how can you prove that you tried and it resisted? Short of taking a picture of the raised shingle for every report. What is an acceptable representative number?
So how does this get enforced? Some problem occurs with the roof years later and someone come in and claim a nailing problem?
Those are all good questions that I don’t know the answers to. That train of thought though has been the underlying issue with that section of the new SOP since it was first drafted months ago. There’s a remote chance that the proposed Commentary that the Inspectors Advisory Committee is starting to work on will address this but that’s months away at best. The HI is responsible for determining what a representative sample is so I plan to define that as something like 2 shingles per major slope of roof or something like that until something more definitive comes from TREC.
I’m all for walking the roof when safe, but if that is the intent, that should be the requirement.
Since I started using IR I am not sure I think that walking the roof is the be all end all of inspecting the roof. It is only a part of the process. I find leaks all the time with the IR and you cannot see any problems from the roof. The problem is hidden by the shingles.
It would seem that you could check the shingles from a ladder on the edge.
I’m wondering if this is relevant to a post I made elsewhere in this forum. Are you finding leaks in the field? I am when chasing leaks that aren’t visible, and nothing appears wrong with the shingles.
Thanks Mike. Pretty vague, but I suppose that might work in your favor also. Once you’ve lifted two shingles, unless they’re right next to each other, you’ve done a random sampling. Of course no one wants to damage even two shingles.
Seems like state requirements that require an inspector to damage private property without the permission of the owner wouldn’t carry much wieght in court. Then again I guess it’s not court you’re worried about. That worry would be a hearing before the board at which your license might be atr risk.
There must be a natural law requiring every committee to have at least one idiot.
Yep, and that one committee member is now at the end of his term and will be replaced next month. I’d apply but it requires 5 years as a licensed Texas inspector and I only have 4.5 years. I might apply anyway .
The CertainTeed Shingle Applicator’s Manual recommends slicing through the adhesive strip with a knife when shingles are impossible to pry up. It’s then a matter of adding a few dabs of sealant with a caulking gun before you leave to re-seal shingles.