Wind Mit Scenario 1

[dquigley (Dennis P. Quigley)]

I thought it would be a good idea to discuss different scenarios that we come across performing wind mitigation inspections. Here is the first.

A local contractors turned in a wind mit yesterday, the facts are as follows:

• All windows (except garage door glazing) had storm protection in the form of panels.
• The garage door was as per photos.
• House was built in 1986

The contractor marked “E” All Glazed Exterior Openings are fully protected at a minimum with impact resistant coverings and/or impact resistant window units that meet the requirements of one of the standards listed in answer “A” of this question (large missile - 9 lb)
Is this correct?
If not, what should have been marked?

[wsiegel (William E. Siegel)]

Should have marked J. This is why we have the problems that we have.

[gbell (Greg Bell, Sr CMI)]

@wsiegel

Should have marked J. This is why we have the problems that we have.

I agree with J. We need to have one set of standards taught to the inspector. Just because you have a license doesn’t mean that you know how too perform a wind mit.

[dquigley (Dennis P. Quigley)]

Even after I explained to my contractor friend that the garage door needs to be included as an opening, especially with glazing — and showed him on the form under “9. Opening Protection” where it explicitly refers to garage doors — He still didn’t get it. He doesn’t own a Zircon and does not verify or photo any product approval. He performs around 10 -15 wind mits a week. I can’t imagine how a report like this would be accepted when the attached pictures clearly indicate that the form has been incorrectly filled out. Guess i’ll see this one on the re-inspect.

[jknight (Jeffrey R. Knight)]

@dquigley

Even after I explained to my contractor friend that the garage door needs to be included as an opening, especially with glazing — and showed him on the form under “9. Opening Protection” where it explicitly refers to garage doors — He still didn’t get it. He doesn’t own a Zircon and does not verify or photo any product approval. He performs around 10 -15 wind mits a week. I can’t imagine how a report like this would be accepted when the attached pictures clearly indicate that the form has been incorrectly filled out. Guess i’ll see this one on the re-inspect.

Dennis,
What insurance company is he doing these for or is he doing it under Inspection Depot or some other management company ?

Good idea of maybe throwing out a Wind Mitigation type question at least once a week on this thread and to see who all agrees on what should be said and how the new form should be filled out based on it…How about a discussion on tile roofs maybe as the first one.

[dquigley (Dennis P. Quigley)]

@jknight

Dennis,
What insurance company is he doing these for or is he doing it under Inspection Depot or some other management company ?

It is not a re-inspection, it was done directly for a HO — Not sure what insurance company.

Good idea of maybe throwing out a Wind Mitigation type question at least once a week on this thread and to see who all agrees on what should be said and how the new form should be filled out based on it…How about a discussion on tile roofs maybe as the first one.

ok – roof tile and maybe a quiz on determining roof shape (measuring gables) - feel free to suggest any specific scenarios

[mmeeker (Michael Meeker, CMI)]

@dquigley

Even after I explained to my contractor friend that the garage door needs to be included as an opening, especially with glazing — and showed him on the form under “9. Opening Protection” where it explicitly refers to garage doors — He still didn’t get it. He doesn’t own a Zircon and does not verify or photo any product approval. He performs around 10 -15 wind mits a week. I can’t imagine how a report like this would be accepted when the attached pictures clearly indicate that the form has been incorrectly filled out. Guess i’ll see this one on the re-inspect.

Hopefully with how strict things have gotten he will get more bounced back than he gets accepted.

j is my answer as well. :mrgreen:

[jdeese (Justin G. Deese, HI517)]

This is a good question

And the answer is that the Garage door “windows” should be counted as glazing.

It has been brought up that technically the “windows” in garage door panels are not glass and should not be counted.

However all training, Bill York’s class included, say that these windows are in fact considered glazing.

The appropriate answer would have been “J”

[dbonner (Dennis Bonner)]

There are impact rated(glazed) garage doors as of two years ago.

[dquigley (Dennis P. Quigley)]

@dbonner

There are impact rated(glazed) garage doors as of two years ago.

Thats why I showed the inside tract of the door. Its pretty obvious that this door is not one with impact rated glass.

[jmurray4 (Jay C. Murray)]

My clients(agents) are more worried abot reliable inspections than lower rates. They have figured out that is better to have the customer swallow a higher rate than deal with the truama of a rejected inspection.

This guy will eventually get hammered.

[dquigley (Dennis P. Quigley)]

@jmurray4

My clients(agents) are more worried abot reliable inspections than lower rates. They have figured out that is better to have the customer swallow a higher rate than deal with the truama of a rejected inspection.

This guy will eventually get hammered.

I agree that he will eventially be on the “do not use” or “do not accept” list, which I hope happens sooner than later. My whole purpose of the exercise is to help educate those willing to change their ways by reading the responses of more experienced inspectors. Since there is no book of correct answers given to us by the OIR, we need to essentially derive at our own best guess using reasoning and logic. Through the process of ellimination, we can at least, as a minimum, agree on what selections cannot be correct.

I believe that in the near future, Citizens for one, will possibly not accept WM inspections from individuals that they determine, through review of reinspections, have repeatably submitted erroneous reports. It only makes sense to illiminate those that cost them $ by granting unsubstantiated credits

[dquigley (Dennis P. Quigley)]

Move on to Wind Mit Scenario 2 – after reading this one

[dbonner (Dennis Bonner)]

@dquigley

Thats why I showed the inside tract of the door. Its pretty obvious that this door is not one with impact rated glass.

If its obvious, then so is the anwser to your question