House Detective: Making the Most of Home Inspection

The House Detective:  by Barry Stone, Certified Home Inspector

Dear Barry:  I am a real estate broker and am trying to resolve a difference of opinion between my plumber and my favorite home inspector. The inspector routinely cites water heaters that are installed without a drain pan, especially when the water heater is on a raised platform in a garage. He says a pan will prevent water damage if there is a leak. The plumber says there is no code requirement for a pan. Who is right, the home inspector or the plumber?  Leila 

Dear Leila:  Your question raises two separate issues. The first involves the plumbing code – whether or not the code actually requires a drain pan under a water heater. The second issue is the wording in the home inspection report. Did the inspector say that a drain pan is required by code or merely that a pan is advised to prevent water damage?

First, let’s look at the Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC). According to UPC Section #510.7: “When a water heater is located in an attic or a furred space where damage may result from a leaking water heater, a watertight pan of corrosion resistant materials shall be installed beneath the water heater with a minimum three-quarter inch diameter drain to an approved location.”

This requirement names two situations where a drain pan is required under a water heater. The first in when the fixture is installed in an attic. Why a person would install a heavy water heater in an attic is a challenge to common sense, but that is not relevant to this discussion. The second and more pertinent situation is when a water heater is installed in “a furred space where damage may result from a leaking water heater.”

A “furred space” is a wall, ceiling, or floor surface that has been extended with additional construction material. An example of a furred space is a raised platform in a garage, on which a water heater is installed. When a water heater leaks onto the wood and drywall of the platform, moisture damage is likely to occur. To prevent such damage, a drain pan with a ¾-inch drainpipe is required by code.

Most home inspectors do not specifically cite building codes in their reports. Instead, they disclose conditions that are defective, unsafe, or that pose potential problems. Regardless of whether your home inspector mentioned the plumbing code, the recommendation for a drain pan under the water heater was valid, and the plumber should be made aware of section #510.7 of the code.

Aside from code requirements, it is hard to understand why a plumber who is installing a water heater would choose not to include a ten-dollar pan under the fixture. Sooner or later, nearly every water heater ends up leaking. A drain pan, known in the trade as a “smitty pan,” is very cheap insurance when you consider the costs of repairing and replacing damaged building materials, not to mention the potential consequences of mold infection. Instead of debating what is or isn’t required by code, plumbers should recommend smitty pans to all of their water heater customers and should agree with home inspectors who recommend drain pans.

The House Detective:  by Barry Stone, Certified Home Inspector

Dear Barry:  Our home inspection is scheduled for next week. This is the first time we’ve bought a home, and we’re not sure what to do and what not to do. Our agent says it’s not important for us to attend the inspection, that we should just wait for the report. But we’re uncomfortable with that advice. There are so many things we want to ask the inspector. What do you recommend?  Annamarie

Dear Annamarie: Your agent is not giving you good advice. The importance of attending your home inspection cannot be emphasized too strongly.

Too many homebuyers miss a great opportunity by being present at their home inspection.  Sometimes this is unavoidable, due to geographical distance.  But whenever possible, buyers are strongly urged to participate in the inspection process.  Being on site during the inspection, viewing specific conditions in person, consulting with the inspector, asking questions, and obtaining advice greatly magnify the benefits to you, the buyer.

A home inspection is a fact-finding mission in which the inspector is your hired advocate. You and the inspector should jointly engage in the discovery process.  Both of you are there for the same reason – to learn as much as possible about the condition of the property.

Prior to the inspection, most buyers make a purchase offer based upon a 15-minute walk-through or run-through.  At that point, they know very little about a very expensive commodity.  The home inspection provides buyers their only opportunity to slowly and methodically view and consider the object of their investment.  During the inspection, they have hours to voice questions and concerns as they evaluate their prospective purchase.  Buyers have even been known to discover defects the inspector might otherwise have missed.

Buyer attendance also enables the inspector to explain the meaning and importance of each condition noted in the inspection report.  When buyers are not present at the inspection, conditions noted in the report must be read and interpreted without explanation.  Lacking a verbal review of the findings, a buyer may over-react to minor disclosures, while failing to appreciate the importance of more serious ones.  The on-site review provided by your inspector may be the most informative aspect of the entire home inspection process.  When circumstances prevent buyers from attending the inspection, a telephone conference with the inspector is strongly advised.

The House Detective:  by Barry Stone, Certified Home Inspector

Dear Barry:  I sold my house five months ago. The buyers hired a home inspector, and I paid for the repairs that they requested. But now they’re complaining about electrical problems that were not reported by their inspector. They say some of the wires in the service panel are too small for the circuit breakers. I disclosed every defect I was aware of and cooperated with the findings of their home inspector. Am I now liable for problems that turned up months after the sale?  Beejay

Dear Beejay: The electrical problem in question is called “over-fusing.” It is a common defect that should have been found by the buyers’ home inspector, and that is whom they should be contacting. They shouldn’t fault you for not disclosing the problem because it is not something that would be recognized by the average homeowner, unless the owner was an electrician or building inspector.

Over-fused circuits can function for years without any adverse consequence. However, in the event of a circuit overload, they can cause a fire. Therefore repair is recommended. The solution is to have an electrician replace some of the circuit breakers.

As for making peace with the buyers, ask yourself if you would have paid to repair the problem if it had been found by the home inspector. If the answer is yes, you might consider paying for the repair just to maintain good relations. Or you could offer to split the cost.  Still, the buyers should call this to the attention of their home inspector.

Air Quality Question

Dear Barry:  We have been renting a home for about one year. During this time we’ve noticed something that worries us. If we leave a glass of water on the table for a few hours, it turns dark in color, and the moisture on the outside of the glass leaves a black ring on the table. Besides this, the return air grills for the heating and air conditioning system are covered with a black, oily soot. This can’t be good for our health, but we don’t know where to turn for help. What do you recommend? Ralph

Dear Ralph: These are serious symptoms that could pose a hazard to you and your family. The first thing that comes to mind is a combustion or venting problem with one or more of the gas-burning fixtures – the furnace, water heater, or the kitchen range. You should have all of your gas fixtures checked by the gas company. If this does not produce an answer, a licensed heating and plumbing contractor should be employed by your landlord. In any event, you should notify the landlord of these conditions as soon as possible.

If no problems are found when the gas fixtures are evaluated, an environmental inspector should be hired to determine what contaminants are in the air. If you use a fireplace or wood-burning stove, have it checked by a certified chimney sweep.

The House Detective:  by Barry Stone, Certified Home Inspector

Dear Barry: You often recommend hiring a home inspector when buying a brand new home. If a home has just been inspected and approved by the building department, what’s the point of hiring a private home inspector?  Jim

Dear Jim: The answer to your question is worth repeating. Here are the five essential differences between a municipal inspection by the local building department and a private inspection by a qualified home inspector:

1.  A building inspection is strictly for building code compliance, but it is possible for a home to be poorly built and still comply with code. Home inspections deal with all kinds of substandard conditions, including those that do not involve code, such as poorly fitted doors, poorly mitered trim, missing tile grout, missing shelves in cabinets, sloped floors, loose toilets and faucets, etc.

2.  A building inspection usually lasts about 15 to 30 minutes, while a home inspection lasts from 2 1/2 to 4 hours. This is because many more things are inspected and tested in the course of a home inspection.

3.  Building inspectors simply look at the completed construction. They do not test the operational condition of fixtures and appliances. Faucets are not turned on, drains are not tested for leaks, appliances are not operated, smoke and carbon monoxide detectors are not tested, and so on.

4.  Gas and electrical services to a home are not turned on until the final inspection is completed and the home is signed off. The building inspector can approve the appearance of the wiring and gas piping, but nothing is tested as part of the final inspection because you cannot test fixtures without gas or electricity. Home inspectors arrive when utilities have been turned on. They plug testers into outlets to ensure grounding, correct polarity, and ground fault protection. They operate built-in fixtures and appliances such as dishwashers, garbage disposals, lights, ceiling fans, exhaust fans, electric ovens, garage door openers, and more. They also test the gas-burning fixtures such as forced air furnaces, water heaters, gas-log fireplaces, and cooking appliances.

5.  Building inspectors perform a walk-through inspection only. They do not crawl through subareas or attics, and they do not walk on roofs. Home inspectors do all of these things, enabling them to identify construction defects that routinely go unnoticed during a municipal inspection.

Veteran home inspectors know that all brand new homes have defects of various kinds, usually minor but sometimes major. Examples include broken roof tiles, missing roof flashing, attics without insulation, furnaces improperly installed in attics, congested drainpipes, drains that leak, non-tempered glass next to bathtubs and showers, inoperative GFCI outlets, ungrounded outlets, drain vents that terminate in attics, chimneys in contact with combustible materials in attics, loose safety rails, disconnected air ducts under the house, PVC discharge pipes on water heater relief valves, and this list could go on and on.

These are the reasons why people who buy brand new homes should hire an independent home inspector. A home inspection gives homebuyers the best opportunity to take advantage of the builder’s warranty. Bypassing an inspection leaves undisclosed defects to be discovered at a later date, after the builder’s warranty has expired.

The House Detective:  by Barry Stone, Certified Home Inspector

Dear Barry: We hired a home inspector before buying our home, but he dismissed a defect that has now become a problem. In the room below the master bathroom, there were water stains on the wall around a drain cleanout. We asked the inspector about it, and he said it wasn’t a problem. At the time, the stains were dry because the house had been vacant for months. But he didn’t even run water in the shower or sink and didn’t even mention the stains in his report. After we moved in and began taking showers, the wall surface became wet. The inspector now says that it was not his responsibility to figure out if the leaking would continue in the future. Besides this, the seller says that she never had a leak while she lived in the home. This seems unreasonable and unfair. What can we do?  John

Dear John: If the seller denies having known about the leak, she may or may not be telling the truth. There is probably no way to prove or disprove her position, so that issue may be a stalemate. The problem with the home inspector, however, is another story and involves three main issues:

1)  It is understandable that an inspector might fail to notice a leak or evidence of a past leak, but to dismiss an issue that is specifically pointed out by a buyer is inexcusable. If your inspector didn’t want to test for leaks, he should have recommended in his report “further evaluation by a licensed plumber.”

2)  Testing showers, tubs, and sinks with running water is normal operating procedure for a home inspector. The idea that a home inspection would not include a routine test of the plumbing fixtures is untenable. An inspector who won’t turn on faucets or test for leaks should find another line of work.

3)  Now that the leak has been affirmed, the inspector needs to be accountable for his failure to provide disclosure. All inspectors miss some defects, regardless of their levels of competency. But an inspector who will dismiss this kind of situation, without assuming some degree of responsibility, is not a true professional.

Hopefully, the repair is not an expensive one. Have it evaluated by a licensed plumber. Hopefully, it is a minor repair issue that will not involve great expense.

It would also be wise to hire another home inspector for a second evaluation of the property. Additional defects will most likely be discovered.

The House Detective:  by Barry Stone, Certified Home Inspector

Dear Barry: In one of your articles, you said, “The essential purpose of home inspection is to disclose property defects.” If that is true, why don’t home inspectors use the top tools of the trade, such as thermal cameras, borescopes, and moisture meters? In my opinion, most home inspectors are retired general contractors with a lock on Realtor referrals. I am a new home inspector, but I provide a far more thorough inspection than my competitors who don’t use specialized testing equipment. The problem, however, it getting real estate agents to refer me to their clients They all seem to use the same few home inspectors who have been here forever. Can you offer any help on this?  Mark

Dear Mark: When I said that the essential purpose of a home inspection is “to disclose property defects,” I did not mean that the purpose is to disclose every possible property defect. If home inspectors intended to disclose every possible defect, thermal cameras, borescopes, and moisture meters would definitely be needed, as you suggest. But even then, the inspections would not be complete. To provide disclosure of all possible defects, inspectors would need to take air samples for mold, to place test canisters for radon gas, and to sample various materials for possible asbestos fiber and lead content. But that’s not all. Home inspections would not be complete without a structural analysis of the foundations, which would require that the inspectors be licensed structural engineers or that they subcontract with a structural engineer on every inspection. Inspectors would also need to take core samples of property sites to ensure geological stability and to evaluate subsurface water drainage characteristics based upon soil composition. This, of course, would require credentials as a licensed geotechnical engineer. Homes would also need to be tested for electromagnetic fields, for soil contamination, and for off-gassing of synthetic compounds such as urea formaldehyde.

This list could be expanded almost indefinitely if the essential purpose of a home inspection was to disclose all possible property defects.  In truth, home inspections are preliminary visual inspections, not techically exhaustive evaluations. A home inspection is analogous to the routine annual phyical that you receive from your doctor. Family physicians don’t do EKGs or CATSCANs as part of an annual exam. Instead, they look for indications that such tests might be necessary.  If critical symptoms are observed, they refer you to specialists. In the same way, a competent home inspector is looking for conditions that might warrant further evaluation by specialists such as plumbers, electricians, geotechnical engineers, or registered environmental assessors.

It might surprise you to know how very thorough many home inspectors are in their forensic duties; how able competent home inspectors are to find significant defects without the use of sophisticated testing devices.

As for referrals by real estate agents, there are many reasons why agents recommend particular home inspectors. Some refer the inspectors they believe will provide the most thorough disclosure, while others refer inspectors who are not so thorough and are perceived as less likely to scare away their buyers. Either way, it takes persistent marketing to develop a base of agents who will routinely recommend you to their clients.

The House Detective:  by Barry Stone, Certified Home Inspector

Dear Barry: We are in escrow to buy a home. When we made our offer, there was an attractive concrete walkway in the front yard. Since then, the sellers hired a contractor to inspect the septic tank. The contractor had to cut out two sections of the walkway, but when he replaced the pieces, he set them in a way that is uneven, unsightly, and could cause someone to trip. Now the sellers and their agent say it is up to us to replace the damaged pavement because temporary removal was required to meet the terms of the sale. Do we really have to fix this ourselves, or is it the responsibility of the sellers?  Misty

Dear Misty: The sellers and their agent are entirely out of bounds. You made an offer to purchase a property in the condition that existed when it was marketed. Since the offer was accepted, that condition was adversely altered by contractors who were hired by the sellers.

The excuse offered by the sellers and their agent is entirely unacceptable. Suppose the sellers’ chimney sweep had damaged the roof? Would that also be your problem? What if the sellers’ painter had cracked a window? Would you be required to replace the glass? In this case, the sellers had to hire a septic contractor. The performance of that obligation did not license them to denigrate the property at your expense. Either the sellers or their septic contractor should restore the property to the conditions that existed when you made your offer. Your agent, not theirs, should step up to the plate and demand that this be done. Hopefully, you have your own agent in this transaction.

Dear Barry: When we bought our house, the home inspector said he could not open the damper in the fireplace and suggested we have it checked further. We probably should have taken his advice but did not. Recently, we used the fireplace for the first time, and our teenage son had no problem opening the damper. The fireplace worked okay, but on a rainy day the brick firebox became wet. Now we’re wondering why the home inspector was unable to open the damper and whether leak repairs are covered by the home warranty policy.  Mike

Dear Mike: Your son would most likely prevail against the home inspector in an arm wrestling match. Be that as it may, leaking at the chimney top apparently caused rusting of the damper hardware, causing the damper to stick. The resistance was too much for the home inspector but not for your son. To prevent further water intrusion and rust, a chimney cap should be installed. It is unfortunate that caps are not required on all masonry chimneys.

You should also follow the home inspector’s original recommendation and have the fireplace system fully evaluated by a qualified professional, such as a certified chimney sweep. And make sure the chimney cap is the type with a four-sided spark arrestor.

As for home warranty coverage, that will depend upon the fine print in the policy. Warranty companies typically exclude pre-existing conditions.

The House Detective:  by Barry Stone, Certified Home Inspector

Dear Barry: When we bought our home, we hired a home inspector who was recommended by our real estate agent. The inspection report contained what appeared to be two minor disclosures: “minor lean to the home” and “some minor seepage in the basement during heavy rain.” The only recommendation was “monitor for further movement.” After we moved in, the rains came, and none of this turned out to be “minor.” For nearly three months, we had a foot of water in the basement. The contractor we hired found that the house is leaning nearly 9 inches. Leveling the home and fixing the drainage will cost many thousands of dollars. We do not believe our home inspector did a competent job. Instead, he portrayed major defects as no big deal. Who is liable for the repairs, and what can we do about it?  Tim

Dear Tim: There are two problems with the disclosures in the home inspection report: 1) Conditions such as leaning of a building and water intrusion in a basement should not be presumed to be minor; and 2) Such conditions warrant further evaluation by qualified experts. Faulty drainage should have been reviewed by a geotechnical engineer. Leaning of the building called for analysis by a structural engineer. What you needed was someone who is licensed in both fields of engineering.

Instead of recommending that you “monitor for further movement,” the inspection report should have said, “Further evaluation by a qualified, licensed engineer is recommended prior to close of transaction.” Your home inspector’s job was to point out significant defects and to make appropriate recommendations. Building settlement is obviously a major concern, as is water intrusion into the building. Determining the extent of these issues was not something to be done by monitoring movement after you purchased the property. You were in the process of making an important purchase decision. That was why you hired a home inspector. He should have considered this when making his recommendation.

Your home inspector may be liable for faulty disclosure, depending on the inspection contract that you signed and pertinent laws in your state. An attorney should evaluate those issues.

The sellers of the property may also share some liability. If they lived in the home for more than a year, they were probably aware of the drainage problem in the basement and should have disclosed it. And here’s a question for your real estate agent: Was this the most qualified inspector the agent knew? Some agents recommend the best home inspectors; some do not.

The House Detective:  by Barry Stone, Certified Home Inspector

Dear Barry: We bought our home about four months ago, and now have a big, undisclosed problem. The house is very old and was completely renovated; not by the person who sold us the property, but two owners previous to them. Our Realtor advised us to check for permits at the city hall, which we did. The city showed us copies of permits for the electrical, plumbing, and mechanical work. But we did not notice the absence of signatures on the permit records. We didn’t know that people could apply for permits and never call for inspections. Our second mistake was buying the property without hiring a home inspector. We’d like to blame someone for this mess, but I suppose the lesson here is “buyer beware”. What should we do to get all of this straightened out?  Alison

Dear Alison: Some home inspectors routinely advise buyers to verify the sign-off on building permits. This is because many people have taken out permits for additions, renovations, remodels, and even new construction, without ever calling for an inspection. Municipal building departments don’t check up on every property that has an outstanding permit because many permits are issued without work ever being done. This makes covert work, without inspections or signoffs, an easy sleight of hand. Unfortunately, the victims are the unsuspecting buyers who are easily fooled by the display of an unsigned permit.

At this point, you need to know what is right or wrong with the work that was done. A qualified home inspector can help you find those answers. This, of course, should have been done before you purchased the property. Unfortunately, too many buyers find reasons not to hire a home inspector.

After you review the findings of the home inspection, arrange for the building department to inspect and approve the renovations. But be prepared for anything. This process could be quick and easy, or it could be complicated and expensive, depending on the style and approach of the municipal inspector. For example, the inspector could order you to remove drywall to expose the piping and wiring within the walls. Hopefully, the corrective work, if any, will not be too costly or involved.

After the corrections are completed and signed off, you’ll know that the renovations are safe and in compliance with code. When you eventually sell the property, you can do so without fear of undisclosed defects.

The House Detective:  by Barry Stone, Certified Home Inspector

Dear Barry: The home that I’m buying has been vacant for two years, and the sellers have not been truthful about its condition. Their disclosure statement says the furnace is in perfect working order, and they listed no other defects. Last week, I called the gas company to turn on the service and to light the furnace. They red-tagged the furnace as “inoperable” and said they had previously informed the owners of this problem. They also told the owners that the copper gas piping needs to be replaced. The sellers have now agreed to replace the gas lines, but they want me to replace the furnace at my own expense. What should I do?  Diana

Dear Diana: Aside from the debate about who should pay for a new furnace, there is a larger question that involves trust and credibility. The sellers have demonstrated the intent to misrepresent the condition of the home, to conceal the fact that the furnace is defective and in need of replacement. This opens the door to additional uncertainties. What other disclosures might they also have withheld? Possibly none, but now you have to wonder.

Another consideration is this: A home is not a legal dwelling unless it has a functional heating system that complies with minimum standards, according to code. From that perspective, the sellers should pay a qualified contractor to replace the furnace, to make the home a livable dwelling before they sell it.

If the home is a particularly good deal, you might be willing to accept it in as-is condition, without replacement of the furnace as a precondition. That is an investment decision you will have to make. But before you proceed with the transaction, be sure to hire the most qualified and experienced home inspector you can find. The sellers are clearly not providing disclosure. Therefore, you need an advocate who definitely will.