Should I add Life-Safety section to my Commerical Report?

[Roger A. Frost]

I would love to get a copy of your Life Safety template for HomeGuage 3 if you have it.

My email is barriehomeinspector@sympatico.ca

Thanks

Roger Frost

[Russell Buchanan]

Originally Posted by rfrost

I would love to get a copy of your Life Safety template for HomeGuage 3 if you have it.

My email is barriehomeinspector@sympatico.ca

Thanks

Roger Frost

Hey Roger,
Are you wanting to use the Life Safety template outside of a commercial inspection? Would you want it to be independent stand alone, or as part of your normal inspection?
Reason being is once I create it inside of the commercial template, i can make it separate easily. These will be version 4 only though. They wont work in version 3. If you are using our HG Services (Gold or Platinum) the version upgrade is free or included.

[Joe Farsetta]

I dont think it's a matter of ASTM is a joke or NACHI's COMSOP is superior.

It's sometimes dictated by the client. ASTM is often the template used by accouting firms. The standard one uses is dictated by many tings. Compliance to some or all of either standard is by mutual agreement.

I teach how to comply with both. COMSOP has its strong points, as does ASTM 2018.

I believe the only way for COMSOP to overtake ASTM is through exposure. It's a long process. The more folks see the COMSOP, and use the COMSOP, the more accepted it becomes.

Like I have said, both have strong points, and neither should be ignored.

The key is in understanding both, and understanding one's limitations.

Sections of either can be excluded where mutually accepted by inspector and client.

Gerry, you said:

I'm sorry but I still think that even the addition of the verbiage to 3.3 does not do enough as it still makes the default SOP too exhaustive, you would have been better off IMHO to have said that "the inspection may include any or all of the following systems and components" That way the inspector could treat it is a menu of agreed components.

Is is the substantial compliance combo that you are uncomfortable with? I believe your verbiage makes COMSOP a bit too loose. Not saying that I dont agree with the concept, but it seems that it is all up to the inspector, with or without the clients knowledge or concent.

No?

[gbeaumont]

Originally Posted by jfarsetta

Is is the substantial compliance combo that you are uncomfortable with? I believe your verbiage makes COMSOP a bit too loose. Not saying that I dont agree with the concept, but it seems that it is all up to the inspector, with or without the clients knowledge or concent.

No?

Hi Joe, my issues with this SOP are that it has no place in my business (or that of other Commercial inspectors) specifically in answer to your questions:

1. The substancial compliance is certainly a big issue in a market where the agreed scope of work defines the inspection.
2. As to my suggestion to changes, I don't believe it makes it too loose, it just reflects what that market is asking for.
3. No. it isn't up to the inspector "with or without the clients knowledge" in comercial inspections the scope of work is part of the initial negotiation.

Remember that in the commercial world both the buyer and inspector are "parties of equal standing" this is not the same as an inspector working for a potential home owner where the homeowner is percieved by the courts as being in a weaker bargaining position.

As Nick has stated, he has had the ComSOP drawn up to help members who lack the ability to define a scope of work, frankly I think those members should really concider whether they should be doing commercial work.

BTW 95% of my Scopes only cover roofs, structure, major mechanicals and lots, I know others like Dale would state the same.

Regards

Gerry

[gbeaumont]

Hi Joe,

Part II

I believe the only way for COMSOP to overtake ASTM is through exposure. It's a long process. The more folks see the COMSOP, and use the COMSOP, the more accepted it becomes.

I agree, but this SOP is aimed at home inspectors, my real competition is from the engineering companies who have never heard of NACHI, and who will never use it's standards, I am certainly not worried about loosing business to inspectors using the ComSOP.

Nick would have been much better served (and be better serving our members) by talking to those of us who primarily work in Commecial markets before converting the residential standards to "suit" commercial markets.

Regards

Gerry

[Nick Gromicko]

A small portion of www.nachi.org/sop.htm can also be found in www.nachi.org/comsop.htm but this is less than 5% of the document.

Hold www.nachi.org/comsop.htm up to www.nachi.org/sop.htm .... nothing alike.

www.nachi.org/comsop.htm was built from the ground up to be a commercial SOP.... from cooking area, to life-safety, to commercial definitions, to the commercial inspection agreeement, to the consultant agreement, to the add on infrared agreement, green building, and building accessibility sections... it is pretty hard to make the argument that www.nachi.org/comsop.htm was "converted" from our residential SOP or any others. Stuff like the aforementioned simply isn't found in residential SOPs (be they our residential SOP or any one else's). www.nachi.org/comsop.htm is built from the ground up as a darn near perfect commercial SOP.

[Joe Farsetta]

Gerry,

I agree with much of what you are sayong. I take the time to explain the importance of preparing a Statement of Work. A lot of commercial inspections, however, are almost too small to warrant a full Statement or much of 2018. When one considers that everything EXCEPT 4 residential dwelling units and LESS is considered commercial property, and when you consider the lagging residential RE market, well... you see where I am going.

With that in mind, COMSOP is an evolving standard, with a possible wide appeal. I agree that we wont wake up tomorrow and have ASTM thrown to the curb. You are correct that ASTM 2018 remains a defacto standard, for now. This is why I teach the PRACTICAL applicability of both, as they both have their place. And, yu are correct with the overall importance of a SOW in the contract docs.

I think that COMSOP will give it a run for its money, and has a chance of becoming as widely used and accepted. It will take time, however. It will never appeal to certain factions, however, like engineers, accountants, and architects.

Many do not realize that accounting firms are often contracted to do large-scale commercial engagements, where the costs of improvements, sustaining operations, capital planning, and ROI are almost more important than the physical inspection.

[Marcel R. Cyr]

In reading the post on this thread, it makes me wonder if this SOP COM will suit our needs as Commercial Inspectors.

I tend to agree with Dale and Jerry on some points, because Dependant of the type of Commercial Building one inspects, could be an array of variations, like Inspecting the roof only.
or inspecting the structure only,
or inspecting the structure roof, heating and cooling plant only.
or inspecting the structure, roof, electrical, and parking lot.
Those are just examples of many other variations.

So, it would be hard to use the SOP COM and applied properly unless it is edited to suit the condition of the Client and type of building being inspected.

The other issue is adding Life safety to the SOP COM.

I think the Life Safety should be left out of it, because I feel it should be it's own entity and kind of an ancillary service above and beyond the Commercial Property Inspection.

With Life Safety comes Fire.

Therefore, it is now Fire and Life Safety.

This category falls somewhat under the Jurisdiction of the Local Fire Departments in the area that usually Inspect the Building upon completion if new, and walkthru for existing buildings in order to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy. These Departments are trained to do this and use the Life Safety Code 101.

Life Safety Inspections should only skim the surface of NFPA 101 and not reflect at all that it has been inspected for Life Safety.

The liability is to great in my opinion.

If one wants to add some life safety comments in his Commercial Report, I believe it should be just the basic as I outlined below.

1. aisle ways are clear
2. Area that exits lead to is properly maintained and nonhazardous
3. Stairways & fire escapes are not used for storage & are easily navigated
4. Illuminated exit signs are displayed over each exit
5. Exit doors open easily without much force
6. Exit doors open in the same direction of travel
7. Exit doors remain unlocked during business hours
8. Exits are unobstructed & visible from all areas of the room
9. Exits do not lead to a room subject to locking

10. Fire alarm or smoke detectors are installed
11. fire alarm or smoke detectors are operable and well maintained
12.adequate number of extinguishers are provided
extinguishers are the proper model for business or building type
13.extinguishers are properly installed and mounted
14. Extinguishers are visible and accessible
15.extension cords and temporary wiring not used as a source of permanent power
16. Circuits are not overloaded
17. Electrical panels and junctions are closed
18. Fuses and circuit breakers are labeled
19. Sprinkler/standpipe system is properly maintained
20. Merchandise/stock not stored too close to sprinklers
21. Air conditioning and heating properly installed and maintained
22. No unsafe accumulation or rubbish/debris
23. Street number properly displayed outside of the establishment

These are the very basic and non-comprehensive listings.

Just food for thought for everyone.

Thanks

Marcel



</IMG></IMG>

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by rthoroman

All Commercial Guru's

I am now using the InterNACHI comsop and inspecting to its standards.

With that being said, I currently am using HG software and do not have a section for Life-Safety.

Should I add this section to my inspection report software and how specfic should I be (NACHI comsop section has A-Z)

Sorry if I am not being specfic enough.

Keep life/safety issues out of your inspection report.

Number one, to claim such an inclusion in your report is tantamount to calling your report a "code inspection report", which it is not. Find me a requirement in the NEC that is not there to provide protection to life and property.

Number two, the code books themselves specifically relieve code inspectors from liability for error. The code inspector who inspects has no liability...to the extent that the electrician or designer who modifies his work to conform with the AHJ can still be sued if that modification causes harm to someone, but the AHJ remains immune. We do no have that kind of protection and something YOU miss on YOUR life-safety inspection could result in your financial ruin if the matter remains in civil court. IMO, an unqualified inspector selling life-safety inspections could find himself in a criminal court under certain circumstances.

Leave life-safety inspections where they belong....the county or municipal code enforcers.