Trap under sink

[jcundiff]

I dissagree. The trap is wrong. IRC P3201.4 "Traps shall be set level with respect their water seals" Picture the water line inside the trap. It should be level with or in right angles to the trap body.

[rmoore]

John, I think a lot of the angle is "percieved" due to parallax distortion and the angle the photo was taken at. In the photo below I've rotated it so that the distortion of the tiles is about even on both sides of the trap. We still have the fact that the photo was taken at a downward angle, but if (I stress if) that trap arm is level then the the trap itself can't be that far off level.

[jcundiff]

Sounds good to me! This lifetime Mensa member is off to look up the word "paralax"

[Jason A. Sieg, CMI]

To me (other than the slinky) it looks like someone might have been lazy. I can not tell how much room their is but with a proper locking nut replacing the rubber boot and trimming the plastic horizontal trap pipe shorter so it can fit inside the drain would make more sense then what the installer did.

Looks like someone didn't own a hack saw.

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

You will not find the flex piping in the allowable materials shown in table 3002.1.

Drain/waste lines require a "smooth interior waterway."

[Jae Williams]

Paralax has to do with a change in visual perception due to
a change in the position of observation.

Either that, or it's a remedy for constipation.

[Dean Call]

I agree with Richard, I too “think a lot of the angle is "perceived" due to parallax distortion” due to the angle of the camera to some extent.

parallax
An apparent change in the direction of an object, caused by a change in observational position that provides a new line of sight.

(John got the “L” outta there)

If you compare the angle of the tailpiece with the angle of the trap inlet, although certainly not level, it really isn’t all THAT crooked either.

Having said all that, although it would work fine, it’s obvious it wasn’t installed by a professional and does look pretty bad.
It really wouldn’t be all that difficult to make it right WITH the proper materials. (No plumbing license necessary)

[Bill Smith]

Traps are over rated.

[Larry L. Davidson, CHI]

If there is no leaks then it is working properly. As a licensed plumber I know Ohio code does not allow this type of connection. But as a Home Inspector I know it is working properly and doing what is is suppose to, preventing sewer gas from entering the house. That is the way I write it in my report. I think sometimes we have to be reminded of what our role is as a Whole House Inspector.

[Marcel R. Cyr]

Pretty obvious to me that the plumbing rough in was done wrong, and immediate repairs would be recommended by an established Plumbing Contractor. This set up could fail and cause problems in a sanitary way.

Marcel

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by ldavidson

If there is no leaks then it is working properly. As a licensed plumber I know Ohio code does not allow this type of connection. But as a Home Inspector I know it is working properly and doing what is is suppose to, preventing sewer gas from entering the house. That is the way I write it in my report. I think sometimes we have to be reminded of what our role is as a Whole House Inspector.

But if I worked like that, then I would never say anything about the lack of GFCI outlets at the sinks. After all, the outlets that are there by the sinks are doing what they are supposed to do, right?

[Larry L. Davidson, CHI]

Originally Posted by rray

But if I worked like that, then I would never say anything about the lack of GFCI outlets at the sinks. After all, the outlets that are there by the sinks are doing what they are supposed to do, right?

If the house was built prior to GFCI becoming code then GFCI is not required. Remember safety first. GFCI is there for safety same as a minumin of 2 inches of water in a trap. If GFCI is not present i write in my report. That GFCI was not required when house was built, but highly recommend when replacing outlets with in 6 feet of water that GFCI is used.

[Russel Ray]

Exactly my point.

Safety first.

Proper plumbing traps have been required for much longer than GFCI outlets. Sewer gases can not only kill, but they can also create other health problems which, sometimes, might make one wish for death and that higher plain that everyone talks about.

Don't underestimate the damage to one's health that the lack of a trap, or an improper trap, can cause.

[rmoore]

Originally Posted by ldavidson

If there is no leaks then it is working properly. As a licensed plumber I know Ohio code does not allow this type of connection. But as a Home Inspector I know it is working properly and doing what is is suppose to, preventing sewer gas from entering the house. That is the way I write it in my report. I think sometimes we have to be reminded of what our role is as a Whole House Inspector.

I'm with Larry, assuming we are still talking about Earl's trap. Even if you removed the "slinky" completely the trap would still block sewer gases. At this point I would hope the homeowner would notice the water pouring out the vanity cabinet every time they use the sink.

Could it be done better? Of course. Is it a huge safety issue in it's current configuration? I think not.

I'm not saying you have to ignore it, but to raise the spectre of serious health hazards in this case is, IMO, overboard.

[Russel Ray]

Well, if the slinky is damaged during move-out, and the new owners don't use that bathroom, the damage will allow the trap to dry out, at which time the health hazards certainly do exist. There's a reason why the codes do not allow use of slinky traps.

There's a mediation hearing going on here currently concerning this exact problem. The home inspector noted the slinky trap and recommended that it be replaced because it can be easily damaged. Sure enough, the slinky apparently was damaged and released sewer gases into the bedroom. In this case it was a baby's bedroom. The buyers should have done something prior to close of escrow, but they didn't. Neither did they do anything until after $2,495 worth of doctor bills for their little baby. Now, of course, they are suing the home inspector. Where the mediation hearing is likely to end up, I don't have any clue.

By the way, the home inspector in question is the one whom I have talked about here for the last few months. He filed bankruptcy in October due to the lawsuit. I thought his report was very comprehensive but he foolishing carried no E&O insurance which would have fought for him in this case. Nevertheless, the courts here are very pro-ADR, so he got into mediation which will probably help since he had a very good report.

I've seen the complete lawsuit now, and the plaintiffs are suing for $12,000 in rent that they couldn't collect due to zoning violations that the seller's knew about, $2,700 for plumbing repairs and medical expenses, $15,000 for roof repairs, and other stuff, all totaling $175,000. Except for the zoning violations which were excluded from the inspection by contract, everything that the plaintiffs are suing for was covered and/or disclaimed in the report. Unfortunately, as always, if you get to court, you lose.

If you want to know how bad sewer gases are, I challenge you to unhook the drain in your own kitchen or bathroom and see what your spouse has to say. No one wants to have sewer smells in their house. I should think that's a big DUH!