House Detective

The House Detective by Barry Stone, Certified Building Inspector

Dear Barry: Is it necessary to get my own home inspection on a newly constructed home, or should the inspection by the city inspector be accepted as adequate? Dean

Dear Dean: Some readers may wonder why this subject, in varying forms, is recurrent in this column. It is because questions about inspecting new homes are asked so frequently and because the answer is vital to anyone who plans to buy a new home.

Experienced home inspectors have learned that all new homes have defects of one kind or another, regardless of the quality of construction or the integrity of the builder. This is because human imperfection prevents anything as large and as complex as a home from being constructed flawlessly.

A commonly held fallacy is that all construction defects will be discovered by municipal building inspectors. This view is highly mistaken, but not because of professional shortcomings on the part of those inspectors. The purpose, scope, time allotment, and procedures for municipal inspections is not the same as for home inspections.

Municipal inspectors inspect primarily for code compliance, not for quality of workmanship. They can cite a builder for improper structural framing or for noncomplying drain connections, but a poorly fitted door, an uneven tile countertop, and slipshod finish work are not included in the list of concerns.

Municipal inspectors rarely inspect an attic or a sub-area crawlspace. They come to the job site with a clipboard and a codebook, not with a ladder and overalls. Construction defects in such areas can escape discovery.

Municipal inspectors typically inspect a roof from the ground or possibly from the builder’s ladder. From these perspectives, roof defects are not always apparent. And final inspections are performed before the utilities are turned on, so municipal inspectors cannot determine if or how well the appliances and fixtures truly work. They don’t test outlets for ground and polarity because this can only be done after the power supply is turned on. Nor, without power, can they test the performance of GFCI or AFCI safety breakers.

The lack of utilities also prevents the testing of plumbing fixtures such as sinks, showers, tubs, and dishwashers, and of gas fixtures such as furnaces, fireplaces, and water heaters.

As repeatedly expressed in this column, those who buy new homes should not forego the benefits of a thorough home inspection. Just be sure to find an inspector with years of experience and a reputation for thoroughness.

The House Detective by Barry Stone, Certified Building Inspector

Dear Barry: I’m a “city boy” who moved to the country about four years ago. My new home has a septic system, something unknown where I previously lived. Can you please give me some information on the care and feeding of a septic system. John

Dear John: Maintaining a septic system is not difficult. The main thing is to protect the bacterial environment inside the tank. This is essential to the decomposition of solid waste. You should avoid draining your laundry into the septic system because some detergents can kill the essential bacteria. You should also minimize wastes that could clog the system, such as garbage disposal effluent or flushed baby wipes.

It is also a good idea to add some bacterial culture about once a year. This is sold in most hardware stores and can simply be flushed down the toilet. And be sure to have the system professionally inspected about every 3-5 years.
A Google search of septic system maintenance will provide much additional information.

The House Detective by Barry Stone, Certified Building Inspector

Dear Barry: What would be the consequences of improving our home without a building permit? The work to be done would include altered plumbing, new siding, new roofing, removing the electric water heater from the outside, installation of a propane water heater on the inside, repairing a sagging ceiling, replacing some windows, and adding an air conditioning system. We’re presently in disagreement as to whether permits are even required for this work and are wondering what we should disclose to buyers when the house is eventually sold. What do you advise? Gaye

Dear Gaye: Your list of proposed improvements and alterations is formidable and, according to the building code, most would require permits. Conducting work of this kind without permits exposes you to legal and financial consequences of several kinds, and these could be magnified by allowing the work to be done by someone who is not a licensed contractor.
If a qualified contractor were to perform the construction without a permit, the majority of the work could be expected to comply with code requirements, even though it would not be legal. But the lack of permits would have to be disclosed to future buyers, and this could significantly affect the marketability of the home. Some buyers would see this situation as a “red flag” and might demand that an as-built permit be obtained from the building department.

With an as-built permit, the municipal inspector could demand removal of drywall to enable inspection of the framing, wiring, plumbing, etc. Costly repairs could be mandated by the inspector, and this might include restoration of the building to its original state.

If a buyer agrees to take the property as-is, even with full disclosure of the nonpermitted work, future discovery of faulty conditions could lead to legal problems, possibly even a lawsuit.

If the proposed work is done by a handyman, rather than a contractor, the likelihood for any or all of the above consequences could be significantly increased. For these reasons, it is strongly recommend that the proposed work be done by licensed contractors and with all of the permits required by law.

The House Detective by Barry Stone, Certified Building Inspector

Dear Barry: Two months after we bought our home, rain runoff from the street drained into our garage and the downstairs floor of the house. Our home inspector made no mention of past flooding, but the neighbors tell us that flooding has occurred during every rainy season for the past several years. Are the home inspector and the sellers liable for nondisclosure? Fred

Dear Fred: If flooding of the house and garage occurred during the time that the sellers owned the property, as stated by the neighbors, then they were obligated to disclose that problem and are liable for failure to do so. The inspector, however, is only liable if there was visible evidence that he failed to notice at the time of the inspection. In most cases, such evidence exists, but there are exceptions, including situations where sellers may have cosmetically masked the evidence.

You should ask the home inspector to take a second look at the property. The seller should be notified of your concerns by certified mail.

The House Detective by Barry Stone, Certified Building Inspector

Dear Barry: We built a new home and installed a ventless gas log fireplace. As we look back, this seems to have been a stupid mistake. Since using the fireplace, a film has been forming on our windows. Our suspicion is that it is caused by exhaust from the ventless fireplace. What must it be doing to the air we breathe? It is too late to add a vent? Deborah

Dear Deborah: Installing a ventless gas log fireplace may have been an “unfortunate mistake,” not a “stupid” one. Most homebuyers, having limited esoteric knowledge of gas fixtures, would have no reason to suspect that a fully approved gas fixture such as this could be problematic or potentially unsafe.

The film on your windows may in fact be a combustion byproduct, and this, as you suspect, could be unsafe to breathe. Until this can be evaluated by a licensed expert or by the gas company, use of the fixture should be suspended, and the pilot (if there is one) should be turned off.

Ventless gas fireplaces operate without a chimney to the exterior of the building. They are designed to produce combustion products that are safe to breathe and can thus be vented directly into the home. The guaranteed safety of these fireplaces has been a subject of ongoing debate between product manufacturers and other experts in the fireplace profession.

The general claim of manufacturers is that ventless gas fireplaces have been designed in such a way that they will automatically shut down in the event of any combustion or venting problem. The opposing view is that regardless of built-in safeguards, there is no such thing in the realm of human invention as a 100% failsafe device. Failure may be extremely unlikely, but it can never be deemed as impossible. When one considers the potential consequences of venting partially burned gas into a home (i.e. carbon monoxide), nothing less than “impossible” should suffice as an acceptable criterion.

Adding a vent to the existing ventless system is probably not possible. Therefore, replacement with a different type of system (such as a pellet stove) may be a prudent alternative.

The House Detective by Barry Stone, Certified Building Inspector

Dear Barry: I’m a Realtor and am having a disagreement with another agent. He insists that home inspectors routinely walk on concrete tile roofs. A home inspector I know says that tile roofs should not be walked on by anyone except a licensed roofing contractor. Who is right, and what is the standard for inspecting tile roofs? Karen

Dear Karen: There is no rule that mandates whether home inspectors should or should not walk on tile roofs. But the standards of practice of ASHI (the American Society of Home Inspectors) and NAHI (the National Association of Home Inspectors) exclude walking on tile roofs as an obligation for home inspectors. The reason for this exclusion is to relieve inspectors from the liability imposed by broken tiles, whether or not those tiles were broken by the inspector.

Actually, it is not difficult to walk on a concrete tile roof without causing damage, but sometimes, regardless of care and caution, damage does occur. And home inspectors who break tiles are liable for the costs of repair or replacement. The other risk assumed when inspectors walk on tiles is the chance of being blamed for tiles that were already broken. This has happened to some inspectors and is one of the reasons that most inspectors refuse to walk on roof tiles.

Tile roofs are usually inspected by placing a ladder against the eaves at various places around the building. When the eaves are too high for the inspector’s ladder, binoculars are sometimes used. Walking on a tile roof admittedly enables a more thorough inspection, but unfortunately, liability pressures have had an adverse effect on the conduct of tile roof inspections.

The House Detective by Barry Stone, Certified Building Inspector

Dear Barry: Whenever you recommend home inspection associations, you specify the American Society of Home Inspectors (ASHI), the National Association of Home Inspectors (NAHI), or a recognized state association such as CREIA. While those organizations are well-known, none can claim to be the top organization in the home inspection industry. NACHI, the National Association of Certified Home Inspectors, is Number One. With nearly 8000 members in the United States and Canada, it is the premier association in the home inspection industry. How about giving NACHI some recognition? Jerry

Dear Jerry: Although NACHI appears to have the largest number of member inspectors, it is not recognized as “Number One” by the majority of established, highly experienced home inspectors. For example, in the county where I reside, there are approximately 30 home inspectors. Of these, only five are listed as members on the NACHI website, and all of these five are relatively new inspectors, with little experience in the profession. This means that a homebuyer who uses the NACHI website to find an inspector in this area would have no access to a highly experienced inspector. If, on the other hand, you would check the website of the California Real Estate Inspection Association (CREIA), you would find a list of 23 inspectors, including the most experienced professionals in the area. If you visited the ASHI website, you’d find 12 members, including several with 10 to 20 years in the business. At the NAHI site, you would find one local member, but that inspector has nearly 20 years of experience. On the basis of these facts, which website would you recommend to a client who was hoping to find a highly qualified home inspector? Would it be ASHI, NAHI, CREIA, or NACHI?

The House Detective by Barry Stone, Certified Building Inspector

Dear Barry: I have several questions involving garage firewalls. What materials should be used to finish a garage firewall? What type of entry door is required in a firewall between a garage and a house? Why are no penalties imposed on home inspectors who fail to report firewall violations? And finally, are sellers required to disclose firewall violations in a garage? Deb

Dear Deb: A garage firewall is commonly covered with 5/8-inch fire-rated drywall, with all seams taped. Wall penetrations such as ducts must be made of metal. A door through a firewall can be a solid core slab door with a minimum thickness of 1 3/8 inches, it can be a sheet metal door, or it can be a 20 minute fire-rated panel door. A fire door must also be self-closing, typically accomplished with a spring hinge.

Failure of a home inspector to disclose a substandard firewall or fire door is often a matter of professional negligence. A common exception would be a firewall that has 1/2-inch drywall only. Unless the edges of the drywall are exposed, it is not always possible to determine the thickness of the material.

Sellers are required to disclose defects of which they are aware. Most sellers, however, have no knowledge of firewall requirements and would be unaware of related violations.

The House Detective by Barry Stone, Certified Building Inspector

Dear Barry: Rainwater gathers on my deck at the beginning of each rainy season, and the pooling remains throughout the season. This problem did not begin until the deck surface was redone about three years ago. Are roofs with negative slope allowed, and will this be a concern when I sell the home? Kathleen

Dear Kathleen: Inadequate slope of flat roofs and of decks is a common construction defect. Although it violates the building code, it is generally regarded by home inspectors as a condition that warrants disclosure rather then repair, unless leakage or other related problems are observed. The reason that correction is not always prescribed is that repair can be very costly, and if the integrity of the deck membrane prevents leakage, it is hard to justify the reconstruction that would be needed to provide adequate slope for drainage.

When you sell your home, this condition could be raised as an issue by the buyers’ home inspector. Rather than awaiting the possible fallout of that disclosure, the better approach, as a seller, would be to include this condition in your disclosure statement to the buyers. Defects disclosed in that format are often accepted on an as-is basis.

The House Detective by Barry Stone, Certified Building Inspector

Dear Barry: We bought our home one year ago. When we had our home inspection, we asked the inspector about a small water stain on the ceiling. He pointed some kind of sensor at it and said it was not an active leak. Recently, the ceiling stain became wet again, and that portion of the drywall fell down. It turned out that the water came from the old air conditioner in the attic. But according to the inspection report, the A/C was “new and in good working order.” Do we have any recourse against the inspector? Deanna

Dear Deanna: Your home inspector apparently committed three errors. The first was to evaluate a ceiling stain on the basis of current wetness or dryness. The second was not conducting a follow-up investigation of attic and roof conditions directly above the stain. The third was to misidentify the age and condition of the air conditioner.

When asked about the stain, reliance on a moisture detection device was inconclusive because stains caused by seasonal roof leaks or by intermittent mechanical leakage are not always wet. The proper approach would have been to inspect the attic and roof areas directly above the stain to investigate possible causes. Had this been done, the inspector might have discovered related water stains near the A/C system and could have recommended repairs by a licensed HVAC contractor.

The fact that your inspector described the A/C unit as “new” indicates three things: first, that he did, in fact, take a look at the system; second, that his ability to evaluate the system was so inadequate that he could not distinguish between a new or old fixture; and third, that he failed to notice evidence of condensate leakage.

On this basis, the inspector appears to have been negligent and should accept some liability for ceiling and A/C repairs. You should contact him and ask that he reinspect and discuss these issues.