Preston, please read this from the 1802 form again…
Roof Covering: Select all roof covering types in use. Provide the permit application date OR FBC/MDC Product Approval number OR Year of Original Installation/Replacement OR indicate that no information was available to verify compliance for each roof
covering identified.
A. All roof coverings listed above meet the FBC with a FBC or Miami-Dade Product Approval listing current at time of installation OR have a roofing permit application date on or after 3/1/02 OR the roof is original and built in 2004 or later.
Please tell me where it says "all roof covering were inspected" or ***“have a final inspection”***?
This isn’t a question of how someone runs their business. This has to do with providing factual information that is being asked on this form. It doesn’t ask for our opinion on legitimacy of the roof covering. There’s no room on the form for opinion. It is fact based.
Responded without reading your reply Eric. Well said. I too understand what Preston is saying but, there’s just no room for that on the form and quite frankly, we don’t need to start adding clauses and exceptions to this form. That’s what the OIR will do as they see fit.
Basically, the underwriters have chosen to read more into the form than is really there. So, the inspectors are cowing down to them and allowing them to get away with not issueing credits where credits are due.
It will probably take some attorneys losing credits to dispute this in a court of law for anything to change. The form is quite clear and we provide the information, the underwriter CHOOSES to require more. Again, this is where having a roofing license comes in handy.
At any rate, this alone looks like a good reason to reconstruct the form AGAIN in a year. That and the less than 3 nails in a clip issue (where’s the research on that).
Ok let me ask you this. A client has a pile of rated storm panel shutters but no mounting hardware around openings, are the openings protected? What does the form say?
If you want to venture off into left field…I can go there just as well as anyone.
Getting to the original post, I believe that the multiple choices were put there for the very situation we are talking about. To give the homeowner options on how to get discounts, that they are entitled to.
If we are going to start making those determinations, I think as a group, we will find ourselves in trouble. I think that we should put down on the form what it asks and positions that we can defend, should the need arise.
But again how does the roof meet FBC with no inspections? How do you know it was even replaced? I have seen roofs done in the 90’s in PBC that look almost new. It is not intent and I am not here to argue with any of you. I asked the shutter question because it is the same.
Good discussion. carrying it further: How does the roof meet FBC with an inspection? Did the govment inspector park on the job site during the roof replacement to verify renailing and spacing of nailing for the roof deck, verify underlayment and fastening methods, and finally- attachment of ALL shingles per product approval? OR- Did the govment inspector do a drive by after roof was complete (with permit) and pass the inspection? If yes, does that make it FBC compliant? The only difference between compliance and non compliance it that the govment inspector drove by the completed jobsite and then closed out the permit? If that is the procedure for FBC compliance, aren’t we, as retail inspectors, doing more than that now to ensure compliance with govment regulations/specifications/standards/protocols and all other bureaucratic bs? The point being, this whole thing is bureaucracy run amok and out of control. The insurance industry, OIR, and the govment are the new “organized crime” and we, the people, are an easy mark.
Im pretty sure the updated york course allows for product approval verification to give the FBC equivelant, ill check my reference material later… but im pretty sure
If a permit was pulled and you mark FBC without a final you may be incorrect.
Was the roof actually done? Was the whole roof done? Did they fail the inspection because their brother brought shingles from Oklahoma and they are not approved(happened plenty in 2005)? Was the deck re-nailed, is the underlayment proper? Did they properly nail the shingles? This is just a few questions. A roof can not meet building code if it not properly done, it is really that simple, that includes paperwork.
Now I know there was times in areas where it was all done correctly and the JHA dropped the ball. I use my BEST judgment. I also explain to a client without the proper paperwork the results of my inspection can be disputed(credits taken away, for those that still think we give credits:p) We had many inspections that were not properly finalized after hurricanes for many reasons.
If I follow some of the logic on the other side and just go by the permit application date then, you should tell anyone who is not getting FBC credit to spend the money, pull a permit and not do anything else. If you have a permit number you should be good, right?
Many that do the re-inspections will tell you that the credit will be removed if the paperwork is not in order. Homeowners and contractors must learn that following the rules will save them aggravation in the long run. Don’t blame the inspector blame the HO and contractor who did not follow through. You can not(in most instances) prove beyond any doubt that a roof meets FBC after the fact, but you can make sure that the paperwork proving it should be was done.
All that being said, if you can not get the info needed via permit, do it via product approval.
im just citing state approved reference material, ( as i remember it). I will check later. Rather than trust someone’s opinion on an internet message board, a certified source holds more weight. I would not say that york is all knowing, but I would say that his material regarding this subject is more reputable than jibberjabber in a chat room.
Preston, I think the question actually transcends the issue with an expired or not final permit. The question is more of an interpretation of the 1802 and if it is to be taken literally or on face value. And, whether we as inspectors are to begin making determinations on the intent and content of the form. Clearly, our role is not to do that but to merely fill the form out to the best of our ability and use any and all facts made available to us, be it by the homeowner or through our own research.
Personally, I believe that as Eric has already mentioned in a previous post, the reason you have choices under question#2 on the form is precisely to allow different avenues for a homeowner to qualify for said discounts.
Are we to make those determinations? No! Is the underwriter to make them? Yes! And that is the whole point here as I see it. You, I, York, Eric, John, or anyone else for that matter, cannot make the call. It is made by the underwriter based on the facts as we present them on the form and in the pictures we provide. Will The product approval number or the FBC equivalent be enough for the underwriters even after knowing the permit expired? We don’t know. So, why would we pass judgement and say no by not marking the form based on what we do know? As simple as that. We don’t provide credits and we don’t remove credits. That’s it.
Before you and Preston wander aimlessly off into left field …
As I said at least twice in this very thread, it doesn’t meet FBC for the simple reason that the first thing that has to be done is a permit must be pulled and everything that goes along with it, including, the final inspection.
The form has two other possibilities in order to qualify and if it meets one of them, it should be given credit. And again, we are not in the business of giving credits. From what I see and what the form asks for, here is the answer. You may have to give more so be prepared to do so.
So now, here is a question for you?
The house has been re-roofed in 2008. There is no product approval available but, there is a closed permit. So therefore, it must meet the FBC, right?
See the pictures below and tell me emphatically that it meets the FBC…or any other code for that matter. What do you mark on the form?
As to your shutter question, the picture of no hardware will end the discussion and answer the question. Obviously not and since whatever method you choose, if it cannot be attached, it won’t count and according to the form, you have to mark undetermined. I don’t know if you get a credit, nor do I care.
Getting back to the original question, the form asks for proof, that proof, according to the form, is the permit application date. If the insurance company decides to pursue it further, I know my clients will have been forewarned.
speaking of that, I did an inspection last month and while doing the permit search, the permit had expired. I told my client, they informed the bank (foreclosure) that they would not buy the home until it was corrected. It got corrected and all is well. I just finished the wind mitigation report today!
I think the main issue is that the form is still “a work in progress”, until they finally eliminate it.
Here are some other questions. For single panels, do you check each and every panel for numbers and do you count the panels or install them to make sure that all of the glazed openings are covered? Do you make sure that all of the hardware is present?
I think some things, you just have to take on faith.
I know you’re intentions have and always will be to help Preston. You along with many others have consistently demonstrated that. I for one am very appreciative for it. Unfortunately this discussion regarding the 1802 although very much needed and warranted, will not end here. Reason for that is the form itself, whether intentionally or not, leaves a few “grey” areas. I suspect we will see a revision in the near future and just maybe some of the very items we’ve been discussing here will be clarified further and hopefully resolved.
