How would you classify this on the the 1802 form. Form what I could see it was a 50/50 split between dead on and what you see in the pictures.
If one nail on the other side, its a single wrap. If not, its a clip. I need to see a pic of both sides.
Yes there was a nail on the other side
In that case, I would call it a single wrap… If I was an auditer/underwriter, I may question it and require a photo of each side.
I was just showing the spacing from the wrap to the truss.
ok. spacing looks o.k from my house.
Now that spacing is pretty close, I know it is beyond the minimum specification in the code book, but its definitely close… The question would be is how many of the straps were positioned in that manner.
I know I know, weakest should be listed.
Maybe I will look at it in the morning when I am rested.
was that romex properly secured?
about 50% were off by more than a 1/4 in.
I was not looking at the romex, if I remember correctly this was a wind mit.
Other: Single wraps with majority having >1/4" offset to truss. Include photos.
Just report the observations, IMO.
Single Wrap - Note spacing issues…
The form is very specific and in my opinion there are no gray areas. does the strap have 3 nails on one side wrap over the truss with a minimum of one nail. Is it embedded into the beam. If the answer is yes then it is a single wrap. No where does it ask the embed distance from the truss seat.
I’m just saying where do to stop? do we report the lack of permanent lateral bracing, roof sheathing placed parallel to the trusses on a hip that does not have the end restrained. of course not those items are not part of a wind mit. these items are the responsibility of the AHJ just as the relationship between the strap spacing and the truss
You ought to be right, but I’m not sure you are. That’s the problem with these inspections I have a hard time being sure of anything. Plus whatever you call it, you sent a picture and some know nothing then decided you were right or wrong approved or disapproved a credit and still it may come back to bite you in the butt later. Who voted clip?
From York’s training (pg 101) regarding connections greater than 1/4" away from roof framing: “Connectors not meeting these minimum installation criteria should be reported as “Other”…”
This is why state approved training courses are needed; then we will have official reference material to turn to.
This is what I keep bitchin about and if only one is off by 5/8"? Is an instructor in a class going to come out to that home to explain why they get no credit? No they aren’t but you are. The form is too specific on some items, on this one it is not specific enough.
I think the form is plenty specific.
It does not mention it at all so therefore I do not take distance into consideration.
Another thought is I cannot even get clear shots sometimes with my camera I sure as sh-t do not want to belly crawl out on a truss through insulation flashlight I guess on my head ruler in one hand and camera in the other. Then attempt to take a picture proving a distance. give me a break. Our word a professionals should be enough. I have used a boat hook and Monocular many times to see how many nails are in a strap and ALWAYS make sure before I claim it as a strap or clip. That should be enough we are the professionals and all these picture requirements should not even be there. If we say so that should be good enough. If it is not then the insurance companies can send there own guys out to risk their lives for peanuts.
That is kind of like drawing marks on peoples trusses claiming they represent nails of a specific size holding a ruler next to it an taking a picture of it.
What about the part of the form that says visible and accessible how about also safe to do.
Please do nothing more than what is on the sorry form already for the sake of us all.
Michael,
I’m eating my humble pie as I write this. As you may or may not know i have been a strong advocate of reporting as the form stated. Unfortunately I attended a Citizens Insurance training session earlier this week and they specifically mentioned the 1/4" rule for truss to strap spacing. That is just the tip of the iceberg. They are now going to require (1) a picture of both sides of a reported connection close enough that the nailing is visible (2) a field view of several connected trusses (3) Pictures of nail spacing marked on the trusses with a marker initialed and dated x 4 trusses (4) a picture using a depth gauge showing the thickness of the sheathing (5) picture of the zircon mt-6 showing reinforcement in the field not at a corner or window (6) an address picture (7) a legible picture of the NOA for the storm panels, garage door, and exterior doors (8) a legible picture of the etched label on impact glass ( I have a $400 digital camera and i still can not get this one).
Generally I only do these inspections as an ad on to a home inspection. Back in the day I would only do a wind mit for $125 as a stand a lone now the local agents tell me they can get them done for $65. Are they freaking kidding me or what?
Not a chance from me until all that is on the form.
I propose a class action suite against all those insurance companies who try to make up their own requirements for the form. I guess from now on I will have to write up a document stating that my inspections will only have what is required by the form and nothing more and have the customers sign them in advance of the inspection.
It citizens wants all that crap then they MUST have an inspector on their own dime complete an inspection for them.
It is my impression from a letter I have seen here somewhere from the oir that if they do not accept our forms they they must pay to have their own flunkies fill out whatever crap they desire.