Non-continuous stair rail?

[Joe Funderburk, CMI]

Please read this information about stairs and falls from the National Safety Council. If this doesn't convince you, nothing will.

http://www.nsc.org/issues/ifalls/falquiz.htm

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by jfunderburk

Please read this information about stairs and falls from the National Safety Council. If this doesn't convince you, nothing will.

http://www.nsc.org/issues/ifalls/falquiz.htm

Good one Thanks Joe ......
Roy Cooke

[Joe Farsetta]

Marcel,

You are in lala land.

Joe F,

How the hell do you inspect an older home to todays standards? Give me a break. As to Arc Faults and GFCIs. it may indeed be a recommendation, but one cannot call out the lack of GFCIs in a 1958-built home, as the devices did not exist at the time the structure was built. Come to NY City sometime and take that same attitude. As to AFCI's, if you called it out in NY, you'd be wrong, as it is NOT an electrical code requirement. As to the old lady wanting t fixed, I'd say it depends on the market. In many locales, she would be told to fix it herself. I doubt the AJH would actually flag it.

[Mario A. Kyriacou, CHI]

Originally Posted by jfarsetta

Marcel,

You are in lala land.

Joe F,

How the hell do you inspect an older home to todays standards? Give me a break. As to Arc Faults and GFCIs. it may indeed be a recommendation, but one cannot call out the lack of GFCIs in a 1958-built home, as the devices did not exist at the time the structure was built. Come to NY City sometime and take that same attitude. As to AFCI's, if you called it out in NY, you'd be wrong, as it is NOT an electrical code requirement. As to the old lady wanting t fixed, I'd say it depends on the market. In many locales, she would be told to fix it herself. I doubt the AJH would actually flag it.

Joe

Do you even care about "HEALTH and SAFETY". Being a HI is sometimes [most times] more than inspecting for structural defects.

[dbucknavich]

Originally Posted by jfarsetta

Marcel,

You are in lala land.

Joe F,

How the hell do you inspect an older home to todays standards? Give me a break. As to Arc Faults and GFCIs. it may indeed be a recommendation, but one cannot call out the lack of GFCIs in a 1958-built home, as the devices did not exist at the time the structure was built. Come to NY City sometime and take that same attitude. As to AFCI's, if you called it out in NY, you'd be wrong, as it is NOT an electrical code requirement. As to the old lady wanting t fixed, I'd say it depends on the market. In many locales, she would be told to fix it herself. I doubt the AJH would actually flag it.

Joe,

It is simply a "recommended safety upgrade". I am not "calling it out", but rather educating my client on what might be hazardous to them.

In regards to an older home being inspected, you can state that "although at the time of construction this may have been acceptable, safety research since the construction of this home recommends new standards, as does your inspector".

It isn't hard to simply recommend a safety concern to YOUR CLIENT. Call me a softy, but I actually care about the people that hire me and I want to make sure they are safe, after all they are relying on me.

[Marcel R. Cyr]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by jfarsetta

Marcel,

You are in lala land.

Some of us might be, but I have not yet visited that land. I don't travel much, but if you wish I can go and get you out.

Marcel

[Joe Funderburk, CMI]

Originally Posted by jfarsetta

Marcel,

You are in lala land.

Joe F,

How the hell do you inspect an older home to todays standards?

It's very easy. Yes, I recommend GFCI upgrades in a 1958 home. My only exception is AFCIs. I do not recommend them in the Summary (my reports have generic text recommending the upgrade to AFCIs in the body of it--InspectVue).

How 'bout you? Do you recommend guardrails on a high deck of a 1900 home? How far apart should the balusters be in that case? What was the guardrail/stair rail code in 1900??? For that matter, what was the stairrail code in 1958??? You're smarter than me if you know that. Since I don't know, I use today's standards.

Here's another example. Would you have a problem with guardrail balusters 4 feet apart on a 1958 home? I bet so. How about 2 feet apart? Probably so. What about 1 foot apart then? I still bet you would call that out. OK, what about 6 inches? Is that too wide for you? So, then, what is your standard and how do you determine it--what is it based on? Do you make up your own rules for acceptability? At what point is it not a concern? Since I don't know 1958 standards, I use today's standards. I'll let the buyers and sellers hash it out.

[Marcel R. Cyr]

Originally Posted by jfunderburk

It's very easy. Yes, I recommend GFCI upgrades in a 1958 home. My only exception is AFCIs. I do not recommend them in the Summary (my reports have generic text recommending the upgrade to AFCIs in the body of it--InspectVue).

How 'bout you? Do you recommend guardrails on a high deck of a 1900 home? How far apart should the balusters be in that case? What was the guardrail/stair rail code in 1900??? For that matter, what was the stairrail code in 1958??? You're smarter than me if you know that. Since I don't know, I use today's standards.

Here's another example. Would you have a problem with guardrail balusters 4 feet apart on a 1958 home? I bet so. How about 2 feet apart? Probably so. What about 1 foot apart then? I still bet you would call that out. OK, what about 6 inches? Is that too wide for you? So, then, what is your standard and how do you determine it--what is it based on? Do you make up your own rules for acceptability? At what point is it not a concern? Since I don't know 1958 standards, I use today's standards. I'll let the buyers and sellers hash it out.

Exactly Joe, and some of us can realize that safety comes first, regardless of Codes and SOP's.

Marcel

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by bking

Its the old SOP only or exceed the SOP debate.
Good points on both sides of it too.

There is no such thing as "exceeding" an SOP. I think that this is the unresolvable point of contention that keeps these arguments endlessly burning.

You have a "standard operating procedure" by which you inspect a home... or you do not. You may use the NACHI SOP or the ASHI SOP. Perhaps, you use your own SOP based upon one or both.

What you do is your "standard". If I do something different in my inspections, it is my "standard". The fact is, we are simply applying two different standards. That's all. To say that mine "exceeds" yours is nothing but rhetorical hype.

In the end, since we are not AHJs, nothing we call out is a mandatory fix, anyway. The seller can refuse any of our recommendations he wishes to and the buyer will have to determine if he wants out of the contract or not, accordingly.

[jmichalski]

Originally Posted by jbushart

There is no such thing as "exceeding" an SOP.

Incorrect. You can definitely exceed association SOP's by doing something as simple as testing every window or outlet, not just the "representative sample".

This goes above and beyond the bare minimum that the SOPs really are, and - hence - exceeds them.

Advertising such is not rhetorical hype. It is a legitimate point to make to clients: "Which would you rather have: an inspection limited to the bare minimum required by a trade association, or an inspection that surpasses those standards in dozens of significant ways?"

Yes, it is my standard, but it is not the industry association standards that are held up by minimalist inspectors as the official standard.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by jmichalski

Incorrect. You can definitely exceed association SOP's by doing something as simple as testing every window or outlet, not just the "representative sample".

That is not "exceeding" anything. That is simply creating another standard, that's all.

You can hype your new standard at being better than, or "exceeding" another standard, but the fact remains that your different method of inspecting is simply that.

An SOP that is published provides a client with an advanced understanding of the scope of an inspection. A simple statement that my inspection "exceeds" your standard...says nothing, unless I publish how my inspection is different - thus creating a new SOP.

[Marcel R. Cyr]

jbushart

http://www.ashi.org/inspectors/standards/standards.asp

You might do better in this Association.

Marcel

[mthomas2]

I recently saw an interior staircase where just about everything was "wrong": excessive open space between treads, 12” baluster spacing, 1x1/4” wrought iron handrails, smooth-surface ceramic tile covered treads with metal nosings projecting about 1/8 higher than the tread surface, and so on.


Perhaps it met code when constructed, and passed inspection at the time.

But in my judgment while each of these defects individually may “not have been a big thing” the totality of the defects created what I judged a truly dangerous staircase, starting with the combination of trip and slip hazards with a difficult to grasp handrail, and I told my client so at the time, and wrote it up as such in the body of the report.

And my question is this: if I feel I should write up this combination of details as dangerous (and I do), on what basis could I exclude citing any one of them them individually as "no big thing", considering that I can’t know in advance which batch of of them might combine in a given situtaion to create an uncontrolled fall?

[Brian E. Kelly]

Originally Posted by jfunderburk

It's very easy. Yes, I recommend GFCI upgrades in a 1958 home. My only exception is AFCIs. I do not recommend them in the Summary (my reports have generic text recommending the upgrade to AFCIs in the body of it--InspectVue).

How 'bout you? Do you recommend guardrails on a high deck of a 1900 home? How far apart should the balusters be in that case? What was the guardrail/stair rail code in 1900??? For that matter, what was the stairrail code in 1958??? You're smarter than me if you know that. Since I don't know, I use today's standards.

Here's another example. Would you have a problem with guardrail balusters 4 feet apart on a 1958 home? I bet so. How about 2 feet apart? Probably so. What about 1 foot apart then? I still bet you would call that out. OK, what about 6 inches? Is that too wide for you? So, then, what is your standard and how do you determine it--what is it based on? Do you make up your own rules for acceptability? At what point is it not a concern? Since I don't know 1958 standards, I use today's standards. I'll let the buyers and sellers hash it out.

What Joe said Michael in regards to your standards questions.

[Joe Farsetta]

Joe F (not me) and Marcel,

We are speaking of a non-continuous handrail here. Let's not forget it. You speak in absolutes, and there are none. The way you report is certainly your business. it is just that some of us see things a bit differently than you do. I personally would not call this out as a code (safety) issue because the AHJ, who is the sole individual with the legal authority to do so, has decided that it is not.

As to GFCIs in a 1958 home, the lack thereof is certainly NOT a defect. And, yes, I recommend upgrading receptacles to ones with GFCI protection routinely. There are those wh DO NOT call out this recommendation.

The point I am making is that there are no real absolutes. Every home is different, and the knowledge and experience of the inspector is supported by his/her ability to effectively communicate, in both oral and written formats.

You flag this. I do not. You have your opinion, based on CODE (you opened the can of worms). I submit that making a recommendation to reconfigure the handrail is FINE. But, to say it is a safety or code VIOLATION is not your call.

The question was asked if you flag this. You do. Others do not.