[FONT=Arial][size=1][size=3]This is from a recent report:
“The roof of the home is 17 years old and has deteriorated. The shingles are bowing and crumbling and there are multiple moisture stains in the roof decking. It is recommended that a licensed roofer be brought in to evaluate and replace the roof of the home.”
[size=3]This always irritates me. The inspector [/size][/size]does a great job, but why does he say that a roofer needs to be brought in to evlauate and replace the roof. He has already evaluated the roof and said it needs to be replaced. Those three words should be left out, IMHO.
I completely agree! This gives me heartburn as well!
We are being paid $400/ 1,000sf (hopefully) to do what? Recommend somebody else evaluate what you’re there to evaluate?
Your job is to observe and report.
Your job is not to determine what will and will not be replaced, whether the client should or should not buy the house etc. (this is actually a violation of ethics and SOP).
This type of wording comes from “inspectors trying to cover their asses”. The opinion is that if they bring in a specialist (because they consider themselves a generalist) they are no longer responsible for the component.
In your comment, the last sentence is what I was substituting… I usually call for “repair or replacement” because sometimes things can be fixed. Case in point, my own HVAC. My inspector said it needed to be replaced. But when I moved in, my HVAC guy kept them both running with normal maintenance for several years. I’ll concede that with a roof, there would be very few if any roofers who would take on the liability of repairing, when they could easily justify a replacement.
Depends. Here in California, where roofing contractors are licensed by the State of California, and home inspectors are not, I could be subject to severe civil and/or criminal penalties for practicing in a profession that requires a license. So if I find roofing problems, I’m going to call for “further evaluation by a licensed roofing contractor.” A licensed roofing contractor should not rely on anything by a non-licensed individual in any other profession; therefore, he should do his own evaluation, i.e., “further evaluation” beyond the non-licensed individual’s evaluation.
Part of the roofing contractor’s evaluation might also be what is required to replace the roof, the time frame, the cost, different options on types of roofs, etc. That definitely qualifies as “evaluation.”
I’ve evaluated the roof and found it to be in need of repair…get it fixed.
Now…a 1/4" horizontal crack along the west wall of the foundation is indicative of serious structural failure and should be evaluated by a professional licensed engineer to determine whether or not a repair can be effectively implemented.