PB what to do?

[Steven C. Meyer]

Originally Posted by jfunderburk

Yes. There was a lawsuit. Settled out of court. http://www.pbpipe.com/



I sincerely doubt you are seeing PB in new construction. PEX is what you are seeing, not PB.

Tis so, the "new and improved" version, I still don't trust it. I am of the opinion I do not trust any new method of construction, until it has passed the test of time, and disbelieve and and all of the "fact", "test" " gurantee" sheets put out by manufactures.

Should I mention, LP sidding, Woodruf roofing, just a couple of mass failures, promoted by the manufactures. I got suckered by both, and no longer want to be their "testing" source.

[Joe Funderburk, CMI]

Originally Posted by Steven C. Meyer

Tis so, the "new and improved" version, I still don't trust it. I am of the opinion I do not trust any new method of construction, until it has passed the test of time, and disbelieve and and all of the "fact", "test" " gurantee" sheets put out by manufactures.

PEX has been out since the 1960s. How long, exactly, will it take to pass your test of time.

[Steven C. Meyer]

Originally Posted by jfunderburk

PEX has been out since the 1960s. How long, exactly, will it take to pass your test of time.

The same amount of time galvanized and copper have been around.

[Kenton H. Shepard, CMI]

It's my understanding that only certain types or brands of PB are bad. I call it every time I see it, give a summary of past problems (class action lawsuit) and potential problems and recommend evaluation by a qualified plumbing contractor. At that point, liability is passed to the client.

[Gary Farnsworth]

Last fall I inspected a very large, nice home in an exclusive area of Overland Park, KS. It had recently been renovated. At the inspection, I found out why and how. The owner had disclosed a water line leak at the upper bathroom, and had it repaired. That was all that was stated. As I went into the basement, all of the joists, sub-flooring, basement walls and floors had all been painted with Kills. (Earlier in my inspection of the home, I noticed new PEX water lines under the sinks at the upper baths). In the basement I noticed water lines running from the hot water heater through the sub-flooring; all painted white. I did some scraping. Yep, PB 2110. I called it out. Two days later, the realtor called me and complained that she lost a sale, due to the presence of PB water lines in the home, and that her buyer could not find an insurance company to insure the home. There was recently a large claim filed due to a "major water failure". Her insurance company came out, and found that not all of the water lines were replaced; just the ones that failed. The buyer had to give up purchasing that home, since it was not insurable. She tried several companies. Apperantly it was on some claim hot-line that most insurace companies use. Like a carfax report. I have pictures somewhere.

Insurance companies and mortgage lenders, and now appraisers, are getting into the home inspection business. Over the years, our business practices have been rising due to awareness and litigation. As states begin and implement licensing, our business as we know it is changing rapidly, and so much so that it is now being threatened. As in Kansas, realtors, apprasiers, insurance agents, home builders, etc. are exempt from any home inspection laws. Perhaps, we have been doing too good of a job.

[Steven C. Meyer]

Originally Posted by kshepard

It's my understanding that only certain types or brands of PB are bad. I call it every time I see it, give a summary of past problems (class action lawsuit) and potential problems and recommend evaluation by a qualified plumbing contractor. At that point, liability is passed to the client.

So far the best advice given, call it, and CYA.

[Kenton H. Shepard, CMI]

Seems like sellers never get prosecuted for non-disclosure (although this case sounds closer to criminal fraud). Disclosure laws have no teeth because law enforcement doesn't have the budget to enforce. A small fee tacked onto each transaction to fund disclosure enforcement might go a long way toward punishing sellers who hide problems and cutting down on the rampant violations.

Ever hear of anyone who was prosecuted? I haven't.

[Gary Farnsworth]

No. I almost never look at a disclosure statement. It is very seldom correct. And agents help the owners fill this out. Idea is good, but with the clout the RE have, it will never happen.

[Steven C. Meyer]

Originally Posted by gfarnsworth

No. I almost never look at a disclosure statement. It is very seldom correct. And agents help the owners fill this out. Idea is good, but with the clout the RE have, it will never happen.

I look at disclosure statements, but do not put much stock in them. Both seller and realtor will "gloss" over anything they know, and most generally get away with it. If they disclosed everything, then no need for an inspection??!! That's why you are there, to disclose things they did not disclose.

I don't see this as becoming a "criminal" act, it can become a civil action for damages, but only if you can prove it was intentional. And the cost of letigation may be more than the recovery.