Can’t find a nail to photo? Just carry a battery powered 4" rip saw to cut a groove in the top truss cord at 1 7/8" below the sheathing. Make sure to document how you ascertained the nail size. Probably a good idea to staple your buisiness card there too and the date you did it. Saves the attorney a lot of time. I have done quite a few of these and have never seen one yet where at least the nail didn’t split the cord somewhere. It is sometimes difficult and time consuming.
Brian’s previos post is correct. When performing a wind mit inspection the only attachment that matters would be roof too exterior wall. Without having construction documents there is no way to determine that an interior bearing point has an associated uplift value that would require a resistance connection, and besides that it would then become a code inspection and not an insurance inspection
I say[size=2], [/size]
That is why home inspectors should not have been licensed to do home inspections without being able to prove a proficiency in structural framing methodology and a knowledge of building codes. With proper knowledge it is impossible too come out of an attic without being able to identify a nail size. You just need to know how and where to look
For curiosity sake;
What year was the home built and when was it re-roofed?
Well hell Mark, let’s tell them to look at the site installed hip attachments and where the sheathing has two pieces seamed on one truss. Then again we do have those pesky thermal barriers that I remove and replace. Staple gun and duct tape anyone?
I think it is a injustice to tell a person who has straps with 3 nails that they can’t meet the single wrap category because they have a total of 3 nails and not 4. This is just another way of the insurance companies take away credits and create higher premiums.
The form doesn’t state “minimum of 3 nails ON ONE SIDE” it says, “minimum of 3 nails**, (COMMA)** wrapping over and securing with a minimum of 1 nail”. The key word in all of this is the comma (,).
Personally, I believe this whole strap concept was derived from the code (what else did they have to go by?) and the underwriters are taking it a step further and too many inspectors are just accepting it and not standing up to the underwriters.
The code requires an engineer to determine the uplift, lateral and shear forces for securing the trusses to the wall. Too many nails in such a small area (3.5 inches) reduces the structural strength of the truss, thus allowing it to fail easier. I’ve seen trusses fail (split) because of too many nails. It happens.
Stick together and stick to the form and give your clients the credits they deserve as per how the form is written. (Key point in the wording is the “comma”)
Explain it to your homeowner that the form says “Minimum of 3 nails, comma”. Because when the time comes and a underwriter (who knows nothing about construction) is sitting at his computer tells the homeowner that it doesn’t meet the strap credit because he only has 3 nails, you will give the homeowner a fighting chance. Without that knowledge, we as inspectors are allowing them to rewrite the form to meet THEIR needs and we’re doing a injustice to the homeowners.
This reminds me of the BS of telling a homeowner that their brand new tile roof doesn’t meet the wind mit credits. Key word in that category is “OR”. Of course it meets the 2001 FBC! It has to meet it in order to be installed on their roofs! Just another way they take away credits and create higher premiums. Don’t let it happen!
No matter what you feel. If you try to submit a wind mit and it does not have 3 nails on one side and at least one on the other it will be rejected. The form speaks of 2 minimums. The first minimum is 3 nails on one side the second minimum is 1 on the other side. I agree that the customer is getting screwed. This is a major reason for re-inspections.
If you all wish to stick together on something make it that we only supply photos of visible and accessible features. No nail size photos no dumb a-s marking of truss photos, no photo of zircons on the walls etc…
If you notice you will never find any pre Andrew homes that meet the nailing requirements for wraps. The wrap battle is not a battle that will be one under the current form.
Mike,
Maybe your using a different form than I am, but I still don’t see the wording “3 nails on one side”. I’m using rev 02/10.
I’ve talked with homeowners that have told me that they DID get their credits with a minimum of 3 nails (as the form states). Although two of them said they had to threaten to have their lawyer look into the matter, and the underwriters backed down. I heard the same kind of story in regards to a 2001 tile roof credit.
Interesting how that happens. Things that make you go Hmmmmmm.
I wouldn’t be surprised that if they keep doing this kind of stuff to people they’ll find a class action lawsuit on their hands.
Kris,
First minimum Metal Straps must be secured to every rafter/truss with a minimum of 3 nails,
Second minimum
[size=2]wrapping over and securing
to the opposite side of the rafter/truss with a minimum of 1 nail.
The way I see it that equals 4.
The OIR should have to answer simple questions like these but they will not.
What everyone should practice and remember is to only do what you feel the form states you should do.
Good luck to us all.
[/size]
Mike,
As most of us are aware, thegnerally accepted practice is a tota of four nails — ie – 3 on one side and one on the other. That is what i look for to give a credit as a wrap. That is what Bill York taught. However, my personal opinion is that te form is ambiguous as to the number of nails, and could be interpreted as a TOTAL of three, one of which must be on the opposite side. When i find the later, i call it a clip and put a BIG note on the form.
I used to agree but learned quite a while ago that it is a battle that cannot be won by us.
The whole form sucks even more than the first one and if they ever change it it will likely even be worse. Maybe if we sign our initials on every page 3 times and submit a movie documenting everything we do the reports will magically become more accurate.
The problem is that the people who write and consult for the form and try to tell us how to perform the inspections have never been in an attic.
True that Mike…:roll:…true that!
This is where I think every inspector goes wrong. We do not give credits. We only report on what is visible so the insurance company can give the credit. Every credit that they give must be backed up with proof - a picture, permit, or NOA. Whether the form is correct or incorrect (and we know it is not right) our job is to report and back up what we check under each heading. While not black and white in our eyes, it is pretty much black and white in the eyes of the insurance companies. They want to cut back on discounts and this is how they are doing it. I always explain to my clients that it is not us giving or denying a credit. It is the insurance company. I think many of you are making way too much out these inspections. A lot of you have probably made a lot of money doing them. It is time to stop bellyaching and get on with life. Too much time and effort is spent on moaning and groaning for something that now brings in an average of $75 per inspection (these days).I don’t know about you, but I have better things to do.
Its time to start putting posts pertaining to these inspections so everyone can get them right rather than all of the complaining I see on this board. You guys need to remember, the DBPR, Citizens, all the other insurance companies, Realtors, etc. are reading what you are writing. Is this how you want your profession perceived in an open forum?
Fact is the powers to be, not us need to pony up. Sorry to disagree but the reality is that OIR can hate me all they want, it’s their form it says OIR at the top. They need to make determinations. They need to tell the inspectors how to proceed. The inspections are being done in a manner which lacks any congruety which makes sense since there has never been any. The rules are continnually changing.
Time for them to accept and PAY the enginneers to develope a comprehensive instruction criteria and a new report that represents the interests of the homeowners, insurance Cos. and inspectors. I want to scream it at the top of the highest building. I know that viewpoint may alienate some but I prefer to deal in reality. The form currently in use is inaccurate, improperly worded, lacks sense of reason and denies the ability of seasoned inspectors to make any judgements based upon observation. Last time I checked that was in fact what people hired me to do.
It is normal inspection practice to report what is seen, note the deficiency and move on. The final decision is that of the underwriter and nobody else. Don’t get too involved in trying to interpret what the intent might or might not be. Observe, note and move on.
Brian,
I agree with you 100%. I just think that most of the inspectors are going about it the wrong way. This is a public forum. Some of the posts on here are absurd the way they are written and the attitude that they display.
Aubrey hit the nail on the head in the post above this one. Regardless of any outcome on this report. It is our job to report and move on. Yes, they need to be more defining, and yes, people are losing discount they should be receiving because of ambiguity on the reports. But the way to change it is not through name calling and an “I know it all attitude”.
FYI - I do not think you have ever posted on what I am talking about. Your posts have been reasonable. Our next step should be to set up a meeting with the OIR to have a discussion of how to change the form.
I bet when and if they do change the form they will only make it worse. I am basing my opinion on their history. I bet all the places we now have to write the address and sign and initial have really helped stop fraud.:roll:
Our best bet is just to hope they leave us the hell alone and maybe they should enforce that only visible and accessible things need photos.
I bet when and if they do change the form they will only make it worse. I am basing my opinion on their history. I bet all the places we now have to write the address and sign and initial have really helped stop fraud. :roll: They need to start enforcing that only visible and accessible items need to be photographed.
Took a while to find the York Class instructions regarding Citizens Ins. :shock:
