Originally Posted by roconnor
*As an SE called in to do evaluations on framing, as well as doing inspections on residential/commercial buildings, I can say without a doubt it sounds like you are opening up a huge can of worms and probably will end up on a slippery slope with a pit at the bottom.
In addition to far exceeding any HI SOP, what industry standards would you compare those readings to? Is the equipment calibrated to recognized procedures? What is the exact loading on the floor at the time of the inspection/measurements so those readings have meaning? There is also the potential legal issue of keeping a consistent level of inspection for all the systems/components of an inspection.
As an HI instructor also, I understand your delima as to where to draw the line as to calling for further evaluation or not. But there is no simple solution to get a more definitively answer to possibly “flexible” floors short of doing engineering deflection calculations. You should have one or two SE’s you are familiar with in your area that you defer to for evaluations, and I would recommend discussing your inspection procedures with them.
Flexibility of floors is just another item in a very long list of things where experience and working with specialists you may recommend over time is the answer.
JMO & 2-nickels … *
Originally Posted by roconnor
P.S. Even if you do come up with something to assist with your inspections, I wouldn’t put anything even close to that in a written report … :shock:
(I pulled this from the other post with the hope that we can all get on this one.)
Thank you Robert.
Perhaps I am not an SE (Structural Engineer) because I don’t think of things in the way you (or they) do. A Pharaoh once said “build me a pyramid!” (this could have started with "In the beginning A Pharaoh …) Can you imagine all the reasons given why this could not be done? (assume they didn’t mind having their heads separated from shoulders.)
This is not to make light of your thoughts! I have not considered these things. None-the-less I have to assume that if the way I feel about my ‘belly jiggle’ when I walk a floor can predict a problem fairly well, then a light-weight, easy-to-use laboratory prooven tester ought to do it better. Right?
Of course, you are aware that the MOE of a structural component can be determine without the benefit of
“stress tests.” I now realize that in my aforementioned proposal I have used the word “system” when I should have used the word “area.” That is “Floor area” rather than “Floor System.” Would this make a difference?
Let me explain. The marble I now carry in my pocket (thank you Kevin P. Mc Mahon) would take me to the floor’s lowest spot and here the tester would present an MOE value directly below the test - up to 18" depth (or 45.72cm). If I move two feet away and I cannot get a similar reading I have reason to suspect a problem (remember I don’t pull out the tester unless I feel it will tell me something - meaning I have considered the immediate environment.) How about a sill plate? Many times one side of it is exposed and does not look good. My tester will tell me how this spot compares to a spot a foot or six inches removed.
Rather than to say “Why?” I have chosen to say “Why not?”
You can find from my posts to other threads that I shutter at anything that will put my “liability” to challenge. However, I (apparently) have more tolerance for this when it is “MY IDEA.” This is exactly why I put this proposal to our membership - I have chased bad ideas before, i.e., back in 1971 I was going to add a touch-tone memory to a telephone (I knew how to do it) and my friends said “that’s a crazy notion, no one would want it …” and only five years later someone brought the first to market. So, on this one, give me some credit here - I didn’t ask my friends!
Back to the liability thing. Someone within these threads revealed that a Home Inspector was, or is being, sued for a ridiculous amount of money because the inspectors “mold tests” indicated to the a client that his investments in repairs were not needed. This too is beyond the HI SOP but many inspectors offer the service with anticipated risks. If we look at the depth of understanding we seeks, as industry specialist, most of us perform substantially above the standers (but occasionally miss a simple thing.) So why is a CMI needed - or even certification or licensing for that matter? Isn’t it true that if we perform to the level of the SOP’s most of us ‘jack of all trades’ would perform adequately with a “Handbook” and a relatively simple form. **The qualification for a *CERTIFIED Home Inspector ***should **require: 1) a MINIMUM of twenty-years of hands-on ‘Trades’ experiences, and 2) test completion to show command of the Handbook. That is it. **Wisdom is not gained from a book and we don’t want to compete with young folks who are looking for an “easy” job. When we are fifty years of age and are being replaced by the young strong guys, the HI industry utilizes our life experiences in a way not appreciated by employers who need the fast and strong. Why is our door open to the young with insufficient intuition? Age discrimination you say? Then lets consider strength and speed discrimination. Why not?
Okay, back to the point: “the litigious among us.” There is blatant incompetence which I expect to be accountable for. All other things are covered my our contract with our client. Disclaimer, disclaimer, disclaimer… Still not infallible. Maybe some of us just take ourselves too seriously, pretending to place genius before our clients. (There is always someone smarter, bigger, wiser…) This guy should be sued. I have driven the Freeways between the length of New Hampshire to Jacksonville Fl, through all the southern states to Ca, to WA, to Montana, to Colorado. If these are driven at five miles over the speed limit I bet you have a 99.99999999…% chance of NOT getting a speeding ticket for your five miles over the limit. And, similarly, if you do not insult your client and performed an honest home inspection to the best of your ability, I bet you would have equal chance of NOT finding yourself in a court room. Joe Ferry - is this true?
So, in conclusion, the Floor Area test is a simple “relative” test that I would gamble would not put me in a court room and would provide a client powerful information to consider in a home inspection. (I can hear Realtors pounding their collective jaws as I speak.) Yet, if a Realtor is buying a property for his personal investment I bet he would call me rather than is reliable HI that he sends his clients to.
Robert, as a Structural Engineer wouldn’t such a tester be invaluable in your service and potentially save you time during evaluations and reduce the possibility of finding your company in a court room if used appropriately?
(Sorry - lot’s to consider here, appreciate everyone’s help.)