Support... or lack thereof

[dcook1]

Dear Mr Home Inspector,

Please do not worry about the half support post under the joint in the main beam.

My brother-in-law told me he has seen pictures of houses and that this is perfectly safe. We feel by removing the extra weight of the post, the house will not sink as fast.

However this does leave me with one question…… seeing as I took this picture today, does this mean I should adjust the date on my camera?

Signed,

He-who-has-sagging-floors-in-wasaga-beach

[Darren St.jacques]

Whoa Nelly!

I guess the hardware store was having a 50% off sale!

[Frank P. Newman]

Judging from the way the wire is run, I'll bet the electrician is the one who convinced them it would be ok (sure, ok for him).

[David Nice]

Heck, nobody is going to see that anyway.

[dcook1]

Well at least not the top half!

[David P. Valley]

Naaaa...You don't need a support post below a main carrying beam seam.

Simply allow it to sag.

[Blaine Wiley]

Fortunately for you, that side of the wall wasn't finished!

[Peter Doane]

David,
Why do you think this is wrong? I'm guessing it was an unfinished basement and they added a wall under the girder/ beam? Correct? Wouldn't the "new" wall be sufficient for load bearing? Though I am only going by one small picture. Your thoughts...

[cgoyette]

Originally Posted by fnewman

Judging from the way the wire is run, I'll bet the electrician is the one who convinced them it would be ok (sure, ok for him).

Somehow I bet your right!


Curt
PS
Stupid is as stupid dose!

[phinsperger]

The top portion (the missing peice) of the post contains holes to macro adjust its height which are more than large enough to run the wires through. The electrician could have easily just ran his wire through one of the holes.

The new wall should be enough support anyway so it really dosen't matter.

[rwand1]

Its a lousy way to support a wall considering the top plate is not doubled and there is no crossing bracing, or double studding.

Nor does there appear to be a vapour barrier under the bottom plate.

[Larry D. Kage]

Originally Posted by rwand1

Its a lousy way to support a wall considering the top plate is not doubled and there is no crossing bracing, or double studding.

Nor does there appear to be a vapour barrier under the bottom plate.

Raymond, what would be the benefit of double top plate considering there is, what appears to be, a beam above the wall?

[rwand1]

Larry,

The way I look at; is that the sectional column was to be there for a reason. David mentioned the floors above were wavy. Double top plating would help support the beam along its entire length, imho. Either way if this picture is any indication the person who did the work was not a framer.

On the other hand may be the owner was going to place this sectional column to help stiffen the beam which was omitted during initial construction?

Cheers,

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by pdoane

David,
Why do you think this is wrong? I'm guessing it was an unfinished basement and they added a wall under the girder/ beam? Correct? Wouldn't the "new" wall be sufficient for load bearing? Though I am only going by one small picture. Your thoughts...

Peter,

That's how I see it as well.

The 2x4s on either side of the half jack post should be bearing on a footing if the post was properly installed originally. Since it's buried in the slab it appears to be OK. I would have left the temporary jack post in place as the wire had plenty of room to pass by the screw end. Other information may change my opinion but that's how I see it from the photo provided.

[rwand1]

Also ... without a top plate what is the drywall going to be screwed to?