Upon successful completion of this 8-hour course, the student shall learn how to identify the common defects found in a home inspection and to develop comments and narratives in writing an inspection report.
And, in keeping with InterNACHI’s commitment to Continuing Education, this course is open and free to all members, and can be taken again and again, without limit.
Students are free to pose questions and comments here and join in the conversation with other students. The thread will be monitored by the course instructor.
I would consider not quoting building codes in any form of a narrative unless you are also a licensed building contractor. Of course we (you) rely upon the building codes throughout your inspection but not being a licensed contractor (assumed) might make you suject to cross-examination under certain circumstances. Reliance upon facts you examine are what of importance, not what you are basing those conclusions upon. Experience here is the dictate. Heavy reliance on codes is a matter of fact, but not a material fact that the client should rely upon.
Photo 19 in the Exterior section contains the end comment, “Recommend replacing or re-anchoring the lag screw.” When do I recommend something be fixed by a specialist, and when do I recommend it simply be fixed? My line of thinking is that since this is listed as a potential safety hazard, I would recommend a specialist fix it rather than the handyman homeowner. Or does “potential safety hazard” cover it?
Thanks
Oh, here’s the entire comment, referring to the photo where what appears to be a wrought iron fence is coming loose from the brick veneer:
Defect: Lag screw pulled loose, possibly due to inadequate anchor or sleeve causing potential safety hazard. Recommend replacing or re-
anchoring the lag screw.
Quoting code opens a can of worms that I prefer to leave unopened. There are other ways of describing why something is a safety or structural defect that are just as effective. The problem with code is that a house only needed to meet the code standards that were in effect when the house was built. If work was done to the structure after that time then for the most part that work and only that work needed to meet the newer code in effect at the time of the newer work (I realize that there are many exceptions to that last statement.)
If for example a home was built in 1993 and has had no additional work done to it since then is it not in code compliance because it does not meet 2012 standards? Can they be cited for not being in compliance by a local code official? For the most part the answers are no and no.
By citing code in a report we give the impression to the prospective buyer that the house is not in compliance which does not fall under our SOP as a home inspector and is not necessarily true. The other thing to remember is that code is the minimum standard in effect at the time of work. Nothing more, nothing less.
It is better to use a phrase like ‘such and such does not adhere to standard building practice’ rather then citing code when describing why a defect is a defect in your opinion.
With that I am off to do this course and find out what Ben’s take on this is.