BATH EXHAUST FAN TO ATTIC

[CHARLIE VAN FLEET]

HEY ALL

i know this has come up before, but can't find it in archives. i find this alot in colorado when a new roof is installed. they forget all about the bathroom exhaust fans to the exterior. is this up to code. roof was permitted and finaled. so i ASSUME it is good

thanks

[Jerry Peck]

Assuming that it is good could get you into trouble when it is not good. :)

The exhaust from bath fans is required to be exhausted to the outdoors such that it cannot readily re-enter the structure, and the exhaust in your photo will be exhausting back into the structure - into the attic - and getting some of it to the outdoors would be a matter of luck.

[CHARLIE VAN FLEET]

THANKS JP

thats what i thought. you see alot of this shortcutting in new roof install in CO. but again it had final inspection cleared by the city. so what can i say

thanks

charlie

[Jerry Peck]

but again it had final inspection cleared by the city. so what can i say


That it is wrong.

Just because a municipal code inspector signs off on a final inspection does not mean "everything" is done correctly, only that "what the inspector looked at" was not noticed to be wrong enough to not pass (which is not even the same as saying it was not wrong, much less saying that it was right).

[Brandon Whitmore]

That installation is standard practice in this area. As long as the exhaust ducts are pushed up to the vent, I don't call it.

I'm curious as to what other inspectors do in this scenario-- anybody.

[Jerry Peck]

That installation is standard practice in this area. As long as the exhaust ducts are pushed up to the vent, I don't call it.

You should call it out.

[John Arnold]

That installation is standard practice in this area. As long as the exhaust ducts are pushed up to the vent, I don't call it.

I'm curious as to what other inspectors do in this scenario-- anybody.

What's the downside of calling it? It's not as if your report or opinion is binding on anyone. Wrong is wrong.

[Dan Harris]

That installation is standard practice in this area. As long as the exhaust ducts are pushed up to the vent, I don't call it.

I'm curious as to what other inspectors do in this scenario-- anybody.

When I saw the picture I thought the same.
I figured if its to daylight, it was OK.

[Daniel Leung]

In Vancouver, it is the standard practice to wrap the metal ducts with insulation material to prevent condensation water drip down to the ceiling fan in winter time.

[Jerry Peck]

I figured if its to daylight, it was OK.


Dan,

It needs to go to more than daylight.

It needs to directly to the outdoors without any of it going into the attic. As shown in that photo, it actually goes into the attic, with some maybe actually getting out to outdoors.

[Bruce Breedlove]

i find this alot in colorado when a new roof is installed. they forget all about the bathroom exhaust fans to the exterior. is this up to code. roof was permitted and finaled. so i ASSUME it is good


Like Jerry said it is wrong. It was wrong before the reroof.



In Vancouver, it is the standard practice to wrap the metal ducts with insulation material to prevent condensation water drip down to the ceiling fan in winter time.

Daniel is correct. The ducts should be insulated so moisture in the exhaust does not condense and drain down causing damage to the structure. This is especially important in cold climates (like Colorado).

I see very, very few done correctly (i.e., ducts discharge to outside AND insulated) even on new construction. I report them and note the consequenses if not corrected (condensation in attic leading to mold or damage to structure or interior).

Wrong is wrong. It is your job to report stuff like this. If the client wants to ignore your advice so be it.

[John Kogel]

It needs go to directly to the outdoors without any of it going into the attic. As shown in that photo, it actually goes into the attic, with some maybe actually getting out to outdoors.Yes. Some attics can't tolerate even a minor leak, such as in this pic.

[Stacey Van Houtan]

There goes the code tunnel vision crowd with a limited vision of what home inspectors should do.

In my area we see what you show in the pic and have for many years. some times it is a issue. (4 teeage girls with one bath) our code officials have considered the attic air as outside air. with the new code this interpation is no longer allowed. But in as much that a home inspection is a in-service inspection if no issues are present this is the verbage i use


FYI - Bathroom exhaust vent(s) terminate　in the attic. Although this is commonly seen and is often　done this way,　building　standards currently recommend　extending these　to the exterior for reasons such as:　helping to　lower humidity levels in the building; move condensation outside; reduce the likelihood of mold; etc. A new owner my wish to perform this improvement.

[Cobra Cook]

I'm curious, did the roofer actually reinstall the vent back "on" the roof or simply block the hole off? That is what i see frequently, they do not, so when an inspector comes if they do have a permit, for a final he only looks at the roof and nothing else.
It should not take a code to tell you to not vent a bathroom or dryer exhaust fan straight into the attic. Go back a little on this site and read the posts about the importance of attic ventilation and moisture up their. I have seen vent pipes simply laying in the attic and this has to be reported as a correction needed yesterday.
Just like the two year old house i was called to about no heat, while there the owner asked me about the dryer not drying clothes but the exterior of the cabinet was very hot. This was before I was an inspector. I went outside to investigate the venting to see if it was stopped up but could not find it. When i entered the crawl space i found that the builder had simply ran the vent pipe under the insulation and what a mess and fire hazzard not to mention the mold growing under the house, not a pretty site.:o

[John Arnold]

There goes the code tunnel vision crowd with a limited vision of what home inspectors should do.

In my area we see what you show in the pic and have for many years. some times it is a issue. (4 teeage girls with one bath) our code officials have considered the attic air as outside air. with the new code this interpation is no longer allowed. But in as much that a home inspection is a in-service inspection if no issues are present this is the verbage i use


FYI

- Bathroom exhaust vent(s) terminate　in the attic. Although this is commonly seen and is often　done this way,　building　standards currently recommend　extending these　to the exterior for reasons such as:　helping to　lower humidity levels in the building; move condensation outside; reduce the likelihood of mold; etc. A new owner my wish to perform this improvement.


Who are you trying not to upset with your careful FYI wording?

[Lawrence Transue]

HEY ALL

i know this has come up before, but can't find it in archives. i find this alot in colorado when a new roof is installed. they forget all about the bathroom exhaust fans to the exterior. is this up to code. roof was permitted and finaled. so i ASSUME it is good

thanks

I would say it is good, but could be better. The fact that the roof is new doesn't have much weight around here. The roofers and the code inspectors don't enter the attics.

However 75% of the bath fans do not even discharge to a roof vent at all. At least someone here made an effort.

Quote
"FYI
Bathroom exhaust vent(s) terminate in the attic. Although this is commonly seen and is often done this way, building standards currently recommend extending these to the exterior for reasons such as: helping to lower humidity levels in the building; move condensation outside; reduce the likelihood of mold; etc. A new owner my wish to perform this improvement."

Stacey
I like this comment except for "the new owner" stuff. That assumes that your client is purchasing the home.

Instead, why not say
Although this is commonly seen and is often done this way, I recommend extending these to the exterior for reasons such as: helping to lower humidity levels in the building; move condensation outside; reduce the likelihood of mold; etc.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Charlie,

Looks like its intended exit/termination is one truss over to the left and on the opposite side of the peak (I think I'm seeing daylight in the pic) Attached is your pic with notation, might be wrong sized opening for the vent octopus. I'm thinking that was intended location (opposite side of the ridge), since where we're seeing this pinned now I see pvc vent behind it, so IF that were the intended termination point above the roof deck, the exhausted water vapor would condense and wash the PVC vent and cause it to freeze over.

Perhaps something changed since the final for the roof itself (like unsecured it fell from the boot?) or perhaps the roofer "pinned" or hung it being flex one truss over during the roofing activity and "forgot" to re-install it (wouldn't be the first time - ex. unlocked bvent, etc.) or perhaps owner had plans to modify/extend and directed new opening location and wanted to do in separate operation and ventillation work was outside scope of roofing permit? Also wouldn't be the first roofing final inspection that the permit inspector didn't go INTO the attic, most look from outside for the final, heck sometimes they don't even leave the car/truck for a high pitched roof. It also wouldn't be the first time something changed since a permit inspection, as many things do (even five minutes after the inspector leaves the area ;) .

Realizing after years of drought and arid climate with conistant winds (quick evaporation) and intense sun, may have been "the norm" practice in years past in your area (not venting to outdoors bath fans) do know WDO and mold is a problem when moisture rich evironment.

It also wouldn't be the first time something changed since the permit inspection, as many things do.

[CHARLIE VAN FLEET]

HG
that is just another square roof vent on the other side of ridge. i just sent picture to city inspector and asked .what gives???

waiting for answer

thanks

charlie

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Charlie, I was editing my post when you replied, so I went back and underlined the edits. Take a look about what I said about the proximity to the PVC vent.

The restrictions caused by the reduction of those vents interconnected need calculation. Were there three bathrooms or some other ventillation exhaust area being combined?

Whereever the vapor exhaust is terminated, it should NOT be placed so as to "wash" the plumbing (or other) PVC (stack/auxiliary or exhaust) vent as it will be prone to freezing/iceing over if above or too close.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

HG
that is just another square roof vent on the other side of ridge. i just sent picture to city inspector and asked .what gives???

waiting for answer

thanks

charlie

Are you sure it isn't a roof cap/weather hood for the ventillation exhaust??? looks too small an area to be effective for passive attic ventillation!

See pics belowhttp://www.rd.com/images/tfhimport/2002/Mar02_Ask_Handyman/20020301_Ask_Handyman_page003img001_size2.jpg


http://www.make-my-own-house.com/images/abvent.jpg

and compare to "roof louvers" at this page at airvent's site (I attached some pics below), they can look similar/same at first glance (and sometimes are the very same "hardware" although often minus a screen) esp. if the dampers are back at the fan(s).

Air Vent: Roof Louvers (http://www.airvent.com/homeowner/products/staticVents-roofLouvers.shtml)

[Markus Keller]

I have to say I am stunned that this is actually a debate, that HI on this board are letting this pass and not writing the crap out of it.
I am more than willing to be reasonable and work with contractors/owners on many issues to resolve and improve conditions.
This however is an absolute NO. Anything less than a dedicated sealed termination to the exterior is BS. You guys letting this slide should be ashamed of yourselves.
Will there be a problem, YES.
Will the problems be significant, hazardous, destructive or cause mold, maybe, maybe not.
Are you willing to put your client's property at that risk, shame on you.:(
The amount of moisture and damage from long hot showers should not be underestimated.

[Nolan Kienitz]

Mechanical Exhaust is required to be vented to "home's exterior". Dumping into daylight or to the soffit vents at the eave is absolutely wrong.

Soffit vents in eaves are "air intakes" for adequate/proper attic ventilation.

I have yet to grasp the concept about how some AHJ's and many other people can accept putting an "exhaust" vent into an "intake" area!!! :confused:

[CHARLIE VAN FLEET]

hg
that opening is a normal square roof vent, just like the one the flex pipes are vented to,but on the other side of the ridge. i spoke to the city inspector, and as i thought,,what attic- the inspector probable didn't even get on roof . i advised him of the reacurruing exhaust vents being covered over and just dangling in attic after new roof install, and he said,"REALLY WE WILL HAVE TO LOOK INTO THAT,"

dont ya think a simple visable inspection of house and roof would find exhaust vents or no exhaust vents.from the city inspector---permits and finals are a joke sometimes.

MARKUS

cool your jets--i did write it up as i always do--just wanted to know if there is a code---and the city said NO, BUT IS PRACTIBLE.

i always believe common sense is more reliable then code, and who knows every code in the book

thanks all for your input

charlie

[CHARLIE VAN FLEET]

that would be practical

[Bruce Breedlove]

that would be practical

Charlie,

You do know you can edit your post, don't you?

[Markus Keller]

I wasn't picking you out Charlie. Posts by others who thought it wasn't a big deal were far more disturbing.

[Jeff Allison]

Not for nothing but, it looks like crap and I can't believe a contractor installed the vents that way. If this is "common" in new construciton in CO, I am glad I am from PA because that looks like doodoo. First thing I would have said to myself if is, its a home-owner special and it needs to be called, and fixed.

The entire hose needs to be connected to the hood or cap. Having three vents just stuck up there is a butcher's job.

I would call it. What's the worst that anyone can say??? Yo uare better off calling it than not. If the steam from the bathroom enters the attic, causes mold, rot, leaks, etc.... and you docoumented it was OK, you may run into trouble.

If you call it, and nothing happens, they do nothing, o'well.

Jeff

[Ken Bates]

I have yet to see a builder admit eaves (and other non-code conforming practices) venting is wrong/bad/etc.

To CMA and serve my client I always call it out on reports.

However, I do one additional thing that none of the above posters has mentioned.

I tell my client (in private, without any witness) that if they can’t get the builder or the resident owner of a house to correct the problem they should do this until they get around to venting thru the roof or the side wall: HAVE THE VENT TUBE TERMINATE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ATTIC SO THE AIR DOES NOT IMPACT ANYTHING AND WILL BE DILUTED.

MY RATIONALE: How many times do you drive by a property that your client took possession of a few years ago and still see the exterior defects you called out?!!?

Builders and sellers just DO NOT FIX THE PROBLEM and your client follows suit. If you really care about your client tell him to pull the vent out from the eaves and prop the end up to dilute in mid-space.

[Nolan Kienitz]

KB: And you have just continued the same problem. Granted your friendly approach is nice, but it is still "not correct". :eek:

Telling the client to pull the vent pipe to the middle of the attic space will still get written up on the next inspection ... assuming the HI knows/understands the guideline.

As you tell him (client) to move the pipe ... tell him to properly support it and extend it the static vent exhaust and secure it. THEN ... you will be exhausting to exterior.

Now there comes a whole different concern as it relates to the power of the fan to actually throw the air to the end of the exhaust pipe that gets extended one heckuva long way.

[Jerry Peck]

There goes the code tunnel vision crowd with a limited vision of what home inspectors should do.


You mean you in your supposedly wide angle vision have lost sight of what home inspectors do? Things such as actually inspect for what is not right and report them?

Sheesh! :rolleyes:

[Brandon Whitmore]

Anything less than a dedicated sealed termination to the exterior is BS. You guys letting this slide should be ashamed of yourselves.


Ashamed of myself? No.
I do not see this cause a problem in this area. Does anyone else in OR see this cause a problem? (when pushed up into the vent opening).

I do see a problem when the ducts are just pushed up to eave vents-- I write those up.

I posted what I did to get a discussion going-- thanks for jumping down my (our) throat:rolleyes: . I knew and know exactly what the code says. By the way, the ICC code commentary was not accepted in OR, so the code is up for the AHJ's interpretation.

[Bruce Breedlove]

The entire hose needs to be connected to the hood or cap. Having three vents just stuck up there is a butcher's job.


Jeff,

Are you saying the three ducts should be connected to one roof exhaust vent? Or are you saying each duct should be connected to a dedicated roof exhaust vent?

No more than one duct should be connected to a roof exhaust vent because the exhaust air (and its moisture) from one exhaust fan can flow through the other duct(s) into the other room(s) especially if the roof exhaust vent is restricted (e.g., covered by snow). For the same reason multiple exhaust ducts should not be connected together.

[chris mcintyre]

I have yet to see a builder admit eaves (and other non-code conforming practices) venting is wrong/bad/etc.

Is this an IRC code requirement? If so could you let me know where it is.

[Jerry Peck]

I do see a problem when the ducts are just pushed up to eave vents-- I write those up.

Huh?

Explain why you think that venting into the attic at the soffit is a problem but that venting into the attic as shown in that photo is not a problem - you have lost me there. When something is venting into the attic ... it does not matter WHERE IN THE ATTIC that venting is taking place.

There is hope for you as you do acknowledge that doing the same thing in the soffit is not right. :)


By the way, the ICC code commentary was not accepted in OR, so the code is up for the AHJ's interpretation.

Not entirely ...

I've posted this many times before, but apparently some have missed it before.
- From the IRC. (underlining and bold are mine)
- - R104.1 General. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to enforce the provisions of this code. The building official shall have the authority to render interpretations of this code and to adopt policies and procedures in order to clarify the application of its provisions. Such interpretations, policies and procedures shall be in conformance with the intent and purpose of this code. Such policies and procedures shall not have the effect of waiving requirements specifically provided for in this code.

If the AHJ is making things up as they go and which are against what is stated in the code, as you are saying the AHJ in your area are doing, then THAT is a violation of the code itself.

[Mike Gault]

Vents terminate in a soffits here more often than not. Thermodynamics be damned, it's allowed.

Some AHJ's are allowing terminations in the attic the are within 30" of so of the ridge vents (tied off at a collar tie for example and "aimed" at the ridge) - at least that (like suggested somewhere above) gets it near the top and an 'exit' where all the air is going anyway... :-(

[Brandon Whitmore]

Explain why you think that venting into the attic at the soffit is a problem but that venting into the attic as shown in that photo is not a problem

I've got plenty of pictures of fungal growth around eave bays while I don't have any at ridge areas. This only applies when the duct is actually pushed up to the vent. Eave vents are supposed to be intake vents, while ridge area vents are supposed to be exhaust vents. Blowing often warmer exhaust air to a cooler air intake vent is counter productive.

[Jerry Peck]

I've got plenty of pictures of fungal growth at eave bays while I don't have any at ridge areas.

You didn't see the one in post #12 above?


Eave vents are supposed to be intake vents, while ridge area vents are supposed to be exhaust vents.

Sort of correct.

The ridge area *generally is* (but not always) an outlet for air which came in the soffit vents.

The soffit vents on one side of the house are intake while the soffit vents on the other side are outlets - air actually blows across the attic more than it does up and out the ridge. The ridge vent works best on hot still days where eddy currents can form and the hot air rises. On windy days the air blows through the attic more than up.


Blowing often warmer exhaust air to a cooler air intake vent is counter productive.

I'm not following you there. Blowing 75 degree air from the bathroom exhaust into an attic soffit vent which is likely at 90 degrees to over 120 degrees is definitely not blowing warmer air into a cooler air intake???

During winter maybe, but there are more places with a longer summer than with a longer winter.

[Stacey Van Houtan]

The reason I have new owner in my boiler plate comment is becuase that is my client for most of my inspections. I modifey the comment for pre-listing and xpert witness insp.

Jerry

Your comment is valid for the AHJ that is eforcing the adopted code.


BUT The mayor, state board, county commsion or other enity that is the final AHJ can and does modifiy and change what the Inspector (also a AHJ) accepets and how he interpets code adoptions.

Also, I would say to those who think that a bath exhaust that vents to a well vented attic is a major issue on each and very house that a Home Inspector inspects throughout the US, I show a lack of understing of Exposure/location deisgn, (extreme cold areas of the us would not even exaust warm mosit air to the outside), the concept a In-service inspection ( In-service field conditions refer to the state of repair of a building or its components while the building is in-use. This involves observation and evaluation of cosmetic and functional damage. This inspection is a execerise in prediction. The evaluation may also provide opinions of: probable causes of distress or damage, assessment of risk of further damage, recommendations for remedial measures, and cost estimates.) NOW having said the above IT IS a reportable condition, in my opinon. Any HI that would not report this, I would consider not meeting a standard of care, for most of the US. But as with many things that done wrong by current code, it my be serviceable and functioning as intended.

[Jerry Peck]

But as with many things that done wrong by current code, it my be serviceable and functioning as intended.


Stacey,

It can't be functioning as intended as it was never intended to function routed as such.

Which means it is also not serviceable. :)

[CHARLIE VAN FLEET]

AGAIN--thanks everyone for your inpuT

WRITE IT UP AND USE OUR COMMON SENSE AS A HOME INSPECTOR SHOULD.
sometimes i hate to even ask.

sometimes these threads get into a pissing match and goes on forever.



please put it to sleep all

thanks
charlie

[Stacey Van Houtan]

As one of my men in the American Reveloution said

The thing about commen sense is that it is'nt

[Brandon Whitmore]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brandon Whitmore http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_inspection/images/ca_evo/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_inspection/attic-areas-home-inspection-commercial-inspection/17541-bath-exhaust-fan-attic.html#post115905)
I've got plenty of pictures of fungal growth at eave bays while I don't have any at ridge areas.


You didn't see the one in post #12 above?



What I see is a poorly / improperly placed vent, if that is an attic vent, and would probably write that up. If that is a hood/ vent designed to accept an exhaust duct, then the duct is improperly installed and would get written up.

Jerry, that's a hip area, not a ridge area;)


[quote]I'm not following you there. Blowing 75 degree air from the bathroom exhaust into an attic soffit vent which is likely at 90 degrees to over 120 degrees is definitely not blowing warmer air into a cooler air intake???

During winter maybe, but there are more places with a longer summer than with a longer winter.
QUOTE]

I don't see ventilation type problems in the summer, just the winter, which is part of the reason I would still like more local input. If I'm wrong I'm wrong, but I'm basing this on personal experience.

Why is it that I often see the fungal growth start from the eave exhaust duct and rise upward from there through that framing bay, if wind has the biggest affect on attic ventilation? Something's rising. This applies to what I see in post #12 as well. I would think that under windy conditions, there would be so much air exchange out of the attic there may not be any moisture issues-- this is for my non humid climate. I would bet that fungal growth occurs mostly during more stagnant conditions.


I'm not saying anyone else is wrong for writing this up. I appreciate everyone's input, but there are regional differences to consider. I'm smart enough to know I don't know it all, but not smart enough to not be a home inspector...:D

[Brandon Whitmore]

WRITE IT UP AND USE OUR COMMON SENSE AS A HOME INSPECTOR SHOULD.
sometimes i hate to even ask.

I guess I know your opinion. Why are you yelling? A friendly debate helps me learn.

For the most part, this has been what I consider to be a pretty civil discussion on this forum.

I'm glad you did ask, and I learn a lot from questions such as yours. For that, I thank you.

And thank you Jerry, for caring enough to try and sway an opinion, while keeping it civil.

[Jerry Peck]

Jerry, that's a hip area, not a ridge area;)

And what do you call that hip ridge ... wait, you say that is not a ridge ... ummm ... let me think ... what do you call that ... uhhhh ... that raised edge where those two roof surfaces meet? :p

Charlie's photo did not show it at "the ridge" but "off ridge". :p :p


I don't see ventilation type problems in the summer, just the winter, which is part of the reason I would still like more local input. If I'm wrong I'm wrong, but I'm basing this on personal experience.

Ventilation takes place all year long, and ... yep, you're wrong. :)

[Stacey Van Houtan]

Local condtions are important.

I lived in Beavorton about 15 + years ago , I remimber that at that time the St Helens dust was clogging the foundaton drains of some houses, A important local condition.

[CHARLIE VAN FLEET]

good night gracy---good night george

thanks to all , i know i did right by writing it up

[Brandon Whitmore]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brandon Whitmore http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_inspection/images/ca_evo/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_inspection/attic-areas-home-inspection-commercial-inspection/17541-bath-exhaust-fan-attic.html#post115932)
Jerry, that's a hip area, not a ridge area


And what do you call that hip ridge ... wait, you say that is not a ridge ... ummm ... let me think ... what do you call that ... uhhhh ... that raised edge where those two roof surfaces meet? :p

Charlie's photo did not show it at "the ridge" but "off ridge". :p


Quote:

I don't see moisture problems related to ventilation in the summer, just the winter, which is part of the reason I would still like more local input. If I'm wrong I'm wrong, but I'm basing this on personal experience.

Ventilation takes place all year long, and ... yep, you're wrong. :)


Bold words added.
You weren't staying up late awaiting my reply were you:D

Thanks.

[Cobra Cook]

Yes you did do the right thing by writing it up in your report, forget the code crap and use your commom sence and experience about what could happen in the attic ie: moisture, mold, fire, ect. Running the vents to the soffits are not that bad as long as you hook them to a grill that will allow the air to exit below the soffit, this is easier and allows for a shorter discharge pipe. with no chance of a roof leak.

[Lawrence Transue]

It seems many discussions on this board turn into hand-wringing over the building Code and what a local AHJ might say, could say, did say or missed.

When I am hired for a home inspection I am paid for MY OPINION. Not a code compliance report. If my clients want a code compliance report, I can sell them the 2009 IRC for a hundred bucks, they can go through the home read the code themselves and save hundreds of dollars.

In my experience, I have not seen a problem with this type of bathroom venting after 14 years of Home Inspections. That’s what I tell my clients. Could it be better? Sure it could be.

As a matter of fact, my home powder room vents into a space above my front porch. I have no intention of changing it. I look at it once a year when I get the Christmas tree out of the attic. Haven’t seen a problem yet.

This board should have another thread titled "Is it Code" On this thread a home inspector could ask if a particular installation complies with the current code.

[Markus Keller]

Maybe geography has something to do with it, I don't know. Geography probably only changes the time line though is my guess. I have been in way too many attics that have problems because of vents going into attics. I can usually tell soon as I open the hatch cover, the damp smell.
It seems that some are assuming that the push of the fan motor is going to get enough or all of the air out of the attic through the roof vent to not be a problem. To some extent that is probably true. However there are a few concerns.
- Do you think that getting a percentage of warm moist air out of the attic is really good enough?
- Allowing the vent into the attic also assumes that the roof vents will always be drawing air OUT. This is NOT the case. I have been in many an attic where air is coming in through the roof vents, albeit briefly, due to wind, weather, house orientation, etc.
- When that warm moist air gets near that cold roof vent, what do you think happens? The air condensates and just falls straight down onto the insulation and wood
- If the contractor didn't install the plastic shroud with flapper onto the X fan box, which I have seen plenty of times, No the installation is providing a nice pathway for a bathroom fire to get into the attic and really torch the house quick. Bathroom fire? You know, candles, bubble bath, towels, magazine, etc. puff up it goes.
Maybe this type of install is Ok or good enough for some of you guys, because its not that bad. However is that what your client is paying you for, hoping to get from you, Good enough?
Talk about degrading our profession.

[A.D. Miller]

This is my autotext comment regarding this cheesy, though all too common installation:

The exhaust fans must be repaired so as to discharge to the building exterior as per the manufacturer’s installation instructions, and IRC R303.3: Bathrooms. Bathrooms, water closet compartments and other similar rooms shall be provided with aggregate glazing area in windows of not less than 3 square feet (0.279 m2), one-half of which must be openable.

Exception: The glazed areas shall not be required where artificial light and a mechanical ventilation system are provided. The minimum ventilation rates shall be 50 cfm (23.6L/s) for intermittent ventilation or 20 cfm (9.4 L/s) for continuous ventilation. Ventilation air from the space shall be exhausted directly to the outside.

NEC 110.3(B): Installation and Use. Listed or labeled equipment shall be installed and used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing or labeling.
and TRCC performance standard 304.23(b)1: Performance Standards for Venting.
(1) An appliance shall be vented according to the manufacturer's specifications. If an appliance is not vented in accordance with the standard stated in this paragraph, the builder shall take such action as is necessary to bring the variance within the standard.

The ducts are designed to terminate at dampered hoods either in the roof, a sidewall or below the soffit. Termination in the attic, whether poised above a soffit vent or even when adjacent to a static roof vent is not allowed.

Contact:
Broan-NuTone LLC
Broan Customer Service
1-800-558-1711
webinfo@broan.com

http://www.texasinspector.com/Nutone%20Exhaust%20Fan%20Installation%20Instructio ns.pdf

[Stacey Van Houtan]

Lawrence HuRa

As you state a HI is doing a combination of a performance and a perscerptive inspection of a in-service building, with the reporte providing a persepctive of the building modifided and formed by the inspectors education and experience.(opinion)

If you do not undersstand this YOU are degrading the HI industry (in my opinion) and I invite you to attend some classes in our Inspection school here in KC

[John Arnold]

... I invite you to attend some classes in our Inspection school here in KC

Do they cover spelling, by any chance?

[chris mcintyre]

This board should have another thread titled "Is it Code" On this thread a home inspector could ask if a particular installation complies with the current code.

There is such a place, just ask JP ;) :)

[Stacey Van Houtan]

i may have spelt some things wrong.

But i can think.

"Wrong is wrong" I guess i missed this day of Logic class:)

[Jerry Peck]

It seems many discussions on this board turn into hand-wringing over the building Code and what a local AHJ might say, could say, did say or missed.

When I am hired for a home inspection I am paid for MY OPINION. Not a code compliance report. If my clients want a code compliance report, I can sell them the 2009 IRC for a hundred bucks, they can go through the home read the code themselves and save hundreds of dollars.

In my experience, I have not seen a problem with this type of bathroom venting after 14 years of Home Inspections. That’s what I tell my clients. Could it be better? Sure it could be.

As a matter of fact, my home powder room vents into a space above my front porch. I have no intention of changing it. I look at it once a year when I get the Christmas tree out of the attic. Haven’t seen a problem yet.

This board should have another thread titled "Is it Code" On this thread a home inspector could ask if a particular installation complies with the current code.

Lawrence,

You started out right, going in the right direction, then you somehow got sidetracked and ended up wrong.

"It seems many discussions on this board turn into hand-wringing over the building Code and what a local AHJ might say, could say, did say or missed.

When I am hired for a home inspection I am paid for MY OPINION. Not a code compliance report."

Code is MINIMUM requirements, as a professional home inspector, you and all other professional home inspectors should be addressing things from that minimum point and higher, not trying to justify something less than minimum as being okay because .... well, because you have not seen a problem caused by it yet ... and there are a few words in there which I need to stress - because you have not seen a problem caused by it yet

That does not mean the problems did not exist, only that YOU did not see them yet, that you DID NOT SEE them yet, and that you did not see them YET.

Did the problems exist? Quite possibly yes, and you simply did not notice them because your mind is convinced that doing that is "okay", thus you are not even looking for the negative aspect of what other might see. Not to worry, it happens to ALL OF US. :D

[Jerry Peck]

There is such a place, just ask JP ;) :)


I do know of such a place, and it is a nice place to visit. :D

[Lawrence Transue]

Actually,

What I have seen, not seen, not seen yet together make up my experience.

Have I seen everything, of course not. Have I seen most issues in homes in this area. I think so.

It may be different than yours, but people PAY me for my OPINION. My Opinion is based on my experience.

Others are welcome to sell their OPINIONS also.

Code has little or nothing to do with it. I have never seen a problem with a bathroom vented in that manner (directly below a passive roof vent). If anyone has a picture of a problem with a vent like it please post it.

[Jerry Peck]

Code has little or nothing to do with it.

That is where your "I know everything I need to know" is getting in your way of learning more (but, of course, based on "I know everything I need to know" ... you simply do not need to learn more ... :rolleyes: ).

Codes are the absolute minimum crappiest one is legally allowed to build it. That really is what codes are.

The home inspector should use codes as a base requirement assessment, and everything they see should be that good (that bad?) or better. Or they write it up.

Now, suppose you saw a vent directly connected to the exhaust roof cap and taped up, just as is required by "minimum crappiest you are legally allowed to build it" code requires, but it is still leaking air and moisture out ... now you really have a problem.

[John Kogel]

I do see a problem when the ducts are just pushed up to eave vents-- I write those up.

Anyone see a problem with these soffit-mounted bath fan vents? Beside the fact that they don't close properly? :confused:

[Lawrence Transue]

I am not saying I "know everything I need to know" I am saying based on my observations today, and other observations in the past this is my opinion.

As a matter of Fact, I never said I would not write this up.

What I did say is it could be done better.

Again, If anyone has a photograph of this type installation causing an actual problem, please enlighten me.

Where did this come from?

"The home inspector should use codes as a base requirement assessment, and everything they see should be that good (that bad?) or better. Or they write it up."

Is this in the FABI, SOPs? Or the ASHI, NAHI, or NACHI Sops?

If not where did it come from? This is a Home Inspection Board ? right?

I think there has been enough time spent on this. And yes, much hand-wringing.

[Jerry Peck]

Anyone see a problem with these soffit-mounted bath fan vents? Beside the fact that they don't close properly? :confused:

The wording in the IMC is better at explaining what is intended than the wording in the IRC.

From the IMC: (underlining and bold are mine)
- 501.2 Exhaust discharge. The air removed by every mechanical exhaust system shall be discharged outdoors at a point where it will not cause a nuisance and not less than the distances specified in Section 501.2.1. The air shall be discharged to a location from which it cannot again be readily drawn in by a ventilating system. Air shall not be exhausted into an attic or crawl space.
- - Exceptions:
- - - 1. Whole-house ventilation-type attic fans shall be permitted to discharge into the attic space of dwelling units having private attics.
- - - 2. Commercial cooking recirculating systems.

From the IRC:
- M1501.1 Outdoor discharge. The air removed by every mechanical exhaust system shall be discharged to the outdoors. Air shall not be exhausted into an attic, soffit, ridge vent or crawl space.
- - Exception: Whole-house ventilation-type attic fans that discharge into the attic space of dwelling units having private attics shall be permitted.

The soffit vents are a ventilating system.

[Lawrence Transue]

"Anyone see a problem with these soffit-mounted bath fan vents? Beside the fact that they don't close properly? "

No John, I Have yet to see a problem with this other than an occasional birds nest. ( usually in a vacant home)

[Steven Turetsky]

This whole discussion regarding "to code" or not "to code" is not my mindset, nor would it be unless I was doing a "code check" inspection.

Exhausting into the attic is just bad construction... even if the local AHJ allows it... it is still bad and I would write it up. Just like we write up GFI's even though they are legal because of when they were installed.

I am of the faith that believes that an average client is at least... maybe more concerned about damage, potential damage and ongoing damage. I would be embarassed say that I saw something that is detrimental to the structure and ignored it.

Besides the way the ducts are not vented, I question how long they are. Unless there are three bathrooms right next to each other, they seem to be quite long, and exhausting right next to each other. I would suspect condensation spilling back and into each other.

I would also prefer to see hard pipe. It is only a matter of time until the flex tube is damaged.

[Cobra Cook]

Besides blowing over the window? are you sure they were not running then? Here we go again with the click and paste, HOME INSPECTORS ARE NOT CODE INSPECTORS,:( if you want to be a CODE INSPECTOR go to school to learn how to do that profession and ENFORCE the codes so that when a contractor builds or installs it it meets or exceeds any code that is required at that time. Then later when a want to be home inspector code enforcer comes by they will they will not have to worry about it and will be inspecting the property the way they should have been taught, in a nationally recognized home inspector training school.:rolleyes:
Are your schools in Kansas nationally recognized, just curious not knocking. If it is not nationally recognized with in class room instruction and not just on line instruction, then most likley you are not learning what you need to know to give your customers the best inspection for their money, nor are they recognized in other states. Even code enforcers can not make you go back and change an installation that passed the code when it was installed at the time.
I would be interested to know how much e&o insurance rates increased or had to pay out due to some home inspectors more worried about if somthing passed code or if an item in their opinion and experience was just not right and was going to or has already caused damage. What Home Inspection Schools are teaching and preaching codes? :confused:

[A.D. Miller]

ST and Others:

Whew, that was quite a read. Here's my take on the discussion regarding the very large gray area that exists between "wringing of hands over building codes" and "common sense":

In my area, and under my state SOP, the building code is the crux of the issue. Even in states with lesser SOPs (non-Texans bow yo' heads and divert yo' eyes):cool: , and as JP and others have said, the adopted model code sets the benchmark or minimal entry level into the building construction game. You must consider the code if you are a home inspector. Anyone who thinks otherwise is living in a dream world which is kept inflated by his lack of knowledge of the code. It is a self-perpetuating BS argument.

Obviously, in a new construction setting, the code is everything. You can write all of the "common sense" arguments you wish in a report to a builder and all for naught. If your comments do not address the building code you have just wasted your time and your client's money.

In a a contract for resale inspection you will still be dealing with the code even if you are not fortunate enough to be working under the Texas SOP. Think about it. You find a water heater that was just installed last year, last month, last week or yesterday to be improperly installed. On what do you base this theory? Common sense? Certainly not. You can use the manufacturer's installation instructions, but new mechanical equipment installations are required to be code-compliant. Some of the issues involved in the code are not listed in detail in the installation instructions.

What about electrical cable installations that are wrong? How do you deem them to be so? You cannot dig into a roll of NM to find the installation instructions, right?

Or, let us say that you find a brick veneer home, of whatever age, without weep holes (this is being hotly contested on another thread) and you report it as deficient. Upon what do you base this gem of wisdom? Ever see an Acme brick with installation instructions chiseled into it? Sure, you can fall back on BIA, ACI, or other industry standards as well, but nothing has quite the authority of the adopted model building code.

When you get the inevitable phone call(s) from the Sparky, Wrench Slinger, or Hammer Monkey, decrying your inspection and reporting abilities by saying this or that is just not so, in which harbor do you seek refuge? The building code, if you plan to prevail in the argument. Try talking common sense to a tradesman who has been doing a certain thing wrong for 20 years and you'll be handed your hat on the way out of that conversation.

Simply put, if you are not acutely aware of and intimately familiar with the adopted building codes in your area, you are not a competent home inspector. You are merely doing your little jig on very thin ice.:D

[A.D. Miller]

HOME INSPECTORS ARE NOT CODE INSPECTORS,


CC: Some of us are. Suffering from authority envy? Buy a dog.:D

[Markus Keller]

Wow, some of you guys should really consider taking the blinders off, putting your egos aside and learning something here. I continue to be stunned by some of the responses to this thread.
HI of course are not Code inspectors or enforcers. Nonetheless it is folly to think that a HI is not, to some extent at least, a Code inspection.
Some of what we see and write during a regular HI can come under 'common sense', especially in older homes. A lot of it however should be coming from knowledge of approved construction methods, manufacturer standards and THE CODE. If you are doing a lot of NC inspections, the Code should be your friend.
I don't usually cite Code during a regular HI because there generally is no need to. Most of the time the contractor knows what he did is BS. Once busted they will often fix it with not too much argument or the seller will give a credit. Others will however argue and then it is important to be able to cite Code to assist your client.
As dumb as clients seem to be sometimes, especially 1st time buyers, they can often understand a reasonable explanation. Your client probably won't remember that you told them but they sure as hell will remember that you didn't.
Some of us do more than just regular HI and that may be where some of the differences of opinion are coming from. I was in Housing Court yesterday for a client, I don't think I would get very far in serving my client using some of the rationale put forth by some on this thread.

[Steven Turetsky]

Good morning AD & others,

AD, if I'm reading you correct, you are saying that if something is "to code" you do not call it... even if in your opinion it is "bad" building practice. I don't necessarily agree.

I understand that if an item is "to code" you cannot present it the same as if it were "to code," but they should still be presented. Sure, they can be argued but they are still presented.

GFI's, FP panels, and in this case moisture being exhausted into the structure. OK, you may get an argument... bring it on.

AD, do you think it is ok to vent into the attic? If you say no, then my next question is; do you call it?

AD, I have read a number of your posts, and although we may not always agree, your opinion is definately one that deserves respect. Even when we don't agree, I still listen very carefully to what you have to say. I just never pictured you as someone that will let a little thing like the "law" stop you when you think something is bad.

[Bruce Breedlove]

I understand that if an item is "to code" you cannot present it the same as if it were "to code," but they should still be presented.


Steve,

I am having trouble understanding that sentence. Could you explain it to me?

[A.D. Miller]

AD, if I'm reading you correct, you are saying that if something is "to code" you do not call it... even if in your opinion it is "bad" building practice. I don't necessarily agree.

ST: No, you did not read or interpret my post correctly.


I understand that if an item is "to code" you cannot present it the same as if it were "to code," but they should still be presented. Sure, they can be argued but they are still presented.

ST: This can be a slippery slope if not properly traversed. Unless one can solidly support a finding with industry standards, the comment becomes just so much subjective blather. So then, I am not a supporter of HIs reporting their unsupported opinions.


AD, do you think it is ok to vent into the attic? If you say no, then my next question is; do you call it?

ST: No and yes respectively.



I just never pictured you as someone that will let a little thing like the "law" stop you when you think something is bad.


ST: Good call, but I will always be able to produce at a minimum one or two written industry standards or opinions from authorities prior to committing a comment to writing. Well, usually always . . .:D

[A.D. Miller]

Steve,

I am having trouble understanding that sentence. Could you explain it to me?

BB: ST may have been toking prior to writing that sentence.:D

[Lawrence Transue]

I guess it comes down to different ways of "calling out" or "writing up" the same things.

Here is a real life example: Recently I Inspected a home with a one year old water heater. At the end of the TPR discharge pipe are threads. Installed Last year by Joe Plumber. (not his real name)

When Joe plumber calls and asks why this is not safe,

I could

A. Tell the plumber that I purchased a book for $100.00, then committed it to memory. And in the $100.00 book on page 438 section P2803.6.1 it clearly says "The discharge pipe SHALL NOT have a threaded connection at the end of the pipe. Afterward s, tell the buyer, real estate agents, and other Home Inspectors that "Boy, I sure set that plumber straight."

Or

B. Say Joe, you know I’ve seen people put threaded caps or ball valves on the ends of these things when they start to leak. This could create an very unsafe and life threatening situation. Why not go over there with a hacksaw and cut the end off?

I think the second choice is the more likely to achieve the desired result. I could make a similar argument over anything I call out.

The bottom line: Is the installation unsafe because it was not installed to code? Or Is it not installed to code because its unsafe?

[A.D. Miller]

I guess it comes down to different ways of "calling out" or "writing up" the same things.

Here is a real life example: Recently I Inspected a home with a one year old water heater. At the end of the TPR discharge pipe are threads. Installed Last year by Joe Plumber. (not his real name)

When Joe plumber calls and asks why this is not safe,

I could

A. Tell the plumber that I purchased a book for $100.00, then committed it to memory. And in the $100.00 book on page 438 section P2803.6.1 it clearly says "The discharge pipe SHALL NOT have a threaded connection at the end of the pipe. Afterward s, tell the buyer, real estate agents, and other Home Inspectors that "Boy, I sure set that plumber straight."

Or

B. Say Joe, you know I’ve seen people put threaded caps or ball valves on the ends of these things when they start to leak. This could create an very unsafe and life threatening situation. Why not go over there with a hacksaw and cut the end off?

I think the second choice is the more likely to achieve the desired result. I could make a similar argument over anything I call out.

The bottom line: Is the installation unsafe because it was not installed to code? Or Is it not installed to code because its unsafe?

LT: While I appreciate your Wrench Slinger fable, the fact remains that plumbers and all other tradesmen not only can, but will argue with the theoretical concept of a stump. Common sense, contrary to your somewhat naive beliefs, is not wide-spread. Once confronted with the code citation, the argument stops - well, usually . . .:rolleyes:

[Lawrence Transue]

AD.

I guess in the Northeast, maybe we have more intelligent tradesman. Guess that's why I don't have to club them with a book.

Seriously, though, I am very thick skinned and have a good sense of humor but
"somewhat naive beliefs" C'mon.

The "Confrontational Code Citation" That stops all the arguments, is this like a ticket they get in the mail?

[John Arnold]

...

When Joe plumber calls and asks why this is not safe,

I could

A. Tell the plumber that I purchased a book for $100.00, then committed it to memory. And in the $100.00 book on page 438 section P2803.6.1 it clearly says "The discharge pipe SHALL NOT have a threaded connection at the end of the pipe. Afterward s, tell the buyer, real estate agents, and other Home Inspectors that "Boy, I sure set that plumber straight."

Or

B. Say Joe, you know I’ve seen people put threaded caps or ball valves on the ends of these things when they start to leak. This could create an very unsafe and life threatening situation. Why not go over there with a hacksaw and cut the end off?

I think the second choice is the more likely to achieve the desired result. I could make a similar argument over anything I call out.
...

So, to summarize your argument, there are two choices. If you mention code you must act like a jerk. If you don't mention code, you are free to act like a decent human being.

I'd like to suggest a third alternative. You nicely explain to Joe that the reason the threaded end violates code is that Harry Homeowner has been known to cap it, thereby blowing up his house.

[A.D. Miller]

I guess in the Northeast, maybe we have more intelligent tradesman.

LT: Give that man a cigar!


Guess that's why I don't have to club them with a book.

LT: It always helps though.


but "somewhat naive beliefs" C'mon.

LT: Nature of the beast . . .


is this like a ticket they get in the mail?

LT: Sort of like the ticking bomb in that package.:D

[A.D. Miller]

I'd like to suggest a third alternative. You nicely explain to Joe that the reason the threaded end violates code is that Harry Homeowner has been known to cap it, thereby blowing up his house.

JA: It works, sometimes. Sometimes not. That is when the gloves come off . . .:D

[Steven Turetsky]

Steve,

I am having trouble understanding that sentence. Could you explain it to me?


Gee, it makes perfect sense to me...:o

What I meant to say was; I understand that if an item is "to code" you cannot present it the same as if it was NOT "to code," but they should still be presented.

Meaning, if somethng is done to code, but is still bad construction, it cannot be presented the same way as if it were not to code and bad construction.

[Jerry Peck]

What I meant to say was; I understand that if an item is "to code" you cannot present it the same as if it was NOT "to code," but they should still be presented.

Meaning, if somethng is done to code, but is still bad construction, it cannot be presented the same way as if it were not to code and bad construction.


That is a good way to put it, although a bit more complex than this way:

A) It does not meet minimum code and is bad construction. I.e, it is 'bad bad'. :D
B) It does meet minimum code and is bad construction. All I did was remove the word "not". I.e., it is 'minimum bad'. :)

Or, for a code inspector ...
C) It does meet minimum code. I.e., it is signed off as meeting code, which is not the same as saying it is 'good construction'. ;)

[Markus Keller]

LT, Maybe when you graduate from the 'hand over the check box report at the end of the inspection' remedial class, you'll realize that in your example, it isn't an either or. You should be providing BOTH of your answers to the client.

[Lawrence Transue]

Markus,

I have no idea what this even means

"graduate from the 'hand over the check box report at the end of the inspection' remedial class"

I have never done a check box report.

If you are suggesting that as a home inspector you have to explain in your report why something is deficient, as well as quote the particular code reference that deals with alleged deficiency, That is the most ridiculous thing I have read in a long time.

Spare me this B.S. I have real work to do.

[Jeff Gainey]

I see a fine line here on reporting styles and common practice methods used in different areas.
While I agree with the fact that this picture is the wrong way to do it, I also understand that it differs from common practice in many areas. I would also realize that it is better than many I see in my travels. Still the client needs to be told that it's wrong.

I would tell my client that current standards would require these to be dedicated connections to the outside and not just near an exhaust vent opening. I would also tell them the concerns are with condensation running back down the vents and damaging the ceiling (insulate them), mold/fungus growth on sheathing if they do not exhaust properly, and being unaware when these vents decide to fall and vent elsewhere.
I am aware of the codes that say this but will not quote it because I am not qualified to do so. Sure, I can give them chapter and verse if requested, but will not shove it into their face until they ask for it.
Much of an inspection is common sense that we can also back up with the code if we are qualified to use it. We can still say "I don't do code inspections but here it is for you to consider".
Many of the "realtor" friendly inspectors out there would never bring it up in the first place. That's where we differ. We don't care who we piss off in the process as long as our client is well informed to make his or her own decision to fix it or let it go. From there it matters whether they got a realtor with balls enough to ask for the fix or whether they want the quick and quiet sale.

I respect the differing opinions on this site and pick your brains more than you realize. I use what you teach me to better educate my clients (and myself) and realize there are many different ways to say the same thing, depending on who you are talking to and the impression you want to leave.
I can always go to my picture file to impress on them what happens when it doesn't work right. This seems to convince them faster than me telling them they need to fix it.

[Jerry Peck]

While I agree with the fact that this picture is the wrong way to do it,


That not only is done wrong, as you have said, it is also "done wrong" "using the wrong material" for the air duct.

That white plastic stuff is not approved for any use. That is one of those things which they are allowed to make, are allowed to stock in stores, are allowed to sell, and people are allowed to buy ... and then set on their mantel and show off the modern work of art as they are not allowed to install it any where for any use.

[A.D. Miller]

If you are suggesting that as a home inspector you have to explain in your report why something is deficient, as well as quote the particular code reference that deals with alleged deficiency, That is the most ridiculous thing I have read in a long time.


LT: I am aware of no requirement for inspectors to explain or support their findings. I would further advise against it, as it appears to be in your case, where the inspector neither knows how to make the explanation nor find the supporting documentation.

[Jeff Gainey]

I totally agree Jerry. Not only did they use the wrong type of vent hose, but they conveniently left a water trap before it exhausts so they an catch all the water it will generate.

[Brad Peterson]

Hi All
Just my two cents worth !!!
That venting detail is correct as per IRC. It is to be vented TOWARDS the exterior. A soffit vent can also be used, they make a special small cap flashing for those that are not with in reach of a roof or soffit vent. As for the remark as a cheap way I've build res. & commerial on the UPPER end and this is a common practice and is not cutting any corners. The most important detail missed is does it or did it have a S-trap in the vent pipe. This practice prevents the typical or common water stain and or water dripping from the bath fan.
Have a GREAT DAY
Brad - Tri City Inspection Agency, LLC

[A.D. Miller]

Hi All
Just my two cents worth !!!
That venting detail is correct as per IRC. It is to be vented TOWARDS the exterior. A soffit vent can also be used, they make a special small cap flashing for those that are not with in reach of a roof or soffit vent. As for the remark as a cheap way I've build res. & commerial on the UPPER end and this is a common practice and is not cutting any corners. The most important detail missed is does it or did it have a S-trap in the vent pipe. This practice prevents the typical or common water stain and or water dripping from the bath fan.
Have a GREAT DAY
Brad - Tri City Inspection Agency, LLC

BP: It is not according to either the IRC or the manufacturer's installation instructions. As for common practice, well we all know what that argument amounts to, don't we?

[Jerry Peck]

That venting detail is correct as per IRC. It is to be vented TOWARDS the exterior.
Brad,

Being as you are sure that is code compliant ... you must know what section it is compliant with, so, for our education ... please post the code section which makes that compliant with the code.

Not sure what sections of what code you are looking at, but my copies of the IRC (which you referred to) do not agree with you, so I would like to compare what I have with what you have.

[Wade Johnson]

Jerry Peck. I have a Florida Mercedes Home, 2005, 2 story. 1st level has poured concrete walls on a slab. Baseboards are wet & stained on the entire 1st level east wall ( living room, office, & 1/2 bath ). Baseboards are wet & stained in the SW orner of the family room. Drywall just above tests dry with a probe moisture meter. Been wet at least 3 months, bank owned home. Any ideas?
Wade Johnson

[Jerry Peck]

a Florida Mercedes Home, ...

Is the opposite of a Mercedes car ... which is known for being well built and trouble free, well engineered.

A Mercedes home, on the other hand ... :eek:

First some questions:
- Did you look at the grade outside in relation to the floor height inside?
- What are the exterior walls covered with, stucco?
- Any other information you have? Photos?

[Wade Johnson]

The walls are stucco all the way to the soffit. The grade is flat. The slab is about 1" to 4" above grade. There are white blotches coming out of the stucco in random places on all sides.

[Jerry Peck]

The walls are stucco all the way to the soffit. The grade is flat. The slab is about 1" to 4" above grade.

About what I expected.

Probably wicking moisture up from the ground into the concrete, especially if there has been much rain and the ground is wet.


There are white blotches coming out of the stucco in random places on all sides.

Efflorescence indicating there is moisture in the wall behind the stucco.

Could be from leaks above if they are high enough, but could also be from moisture wicking up from the ground if they are near the bottom.

[Wade Johnson]

Thank you much. Thats what I think as well.

[Ryan Stouffer]

Inspectors don't even look in the attics in my area. Or crawlspaces. Be careful.

[Darren Miller]

If you are suggesting that as a home inspector you have to explain in your report why something is deficient, as well as quote the particular code reference that deals with alleged deficiency, That is the most ridiculous thing I have read in a long time.


Lawrence,

I see you conduct inspections in NJ.

The NJ SOP states- Prepare a home inspection report which shall:

v.State the significance of findings where any material defects in the systems and components of (c)1 above were found; and

vi. provide recommendations where material defects were found to repairs, replace or monitor a system or component or to obtain examination and analysis by a qualified professional, tradesman, or service technician without determining methods, materials or costs of corrections.

__________________________________________________ _______________

Now, let's look at some books on home inspections:

'The Complete Book of Home Inspections' (Norman Becker)
"Sometimes the exhaust fan from a bathroom discharges its moisture-laden air into the attic. This is undesirable because the moisture can cause condensation problems."

'Inspecting a House' (Rex Cauldwell)
"If possible, try to locate where the fan exhaust discharges from the house- it should discharge through ductwork to the exterior."

'The Home Reference Book' (Carson-Dunlap)
"The fan should discharge directly to the exterior."

'International Residential Code- New Jersey Edition' (ICC)
"Ventilation air from the space (bathroom) shall be exhausted directly to the outside."

I have shown you 4 difference references on it being wrong. The NJ SOP now requires you to tell you client it's wrong, what problems it will cause and how (or who) to fix it.

Now if anyone doesn't agree with the above comment, then show me where it is documented that you can vent an exhaust fan to the attic.

[Jeff Remas]

This should not even be an issue. I am posting 2 of the dozens of photos that I have that clearly show the problem with this type of installation.

M1501.1 Outdoor discharge. The air removed by every
mechanical exhaust system shall be discharged to the outdoors.
Air shall not be exhausted into an attic, soffit, ridge vent or
crawl space.

http://www.remasinspections.com/images/BathroomVentMold.jpg


http://www.remasinspections.com/images/VentMold2.JPG

[Jeff Remas]

In essence, reading through this thread it appears as though every single person agrees that the installation in the OP's photo is wrong.

Wrong from a code standpoint and wrong from a common sense/installation standard and wrong from the manufacturer's installation standard.

How we choose to write up our report or describe a defect is our business, as long as it meets the SOP that we are bound to.

There are several methods:

1) The factual method with a reference to a code for clarity legitimacy.
2) The opinion method with an explanation.
3) The combination method in which gives the opinion and states it is a defect and also state that the defect would be a code violation under today's standards.
4) The realtor friendly mention of a potential problem by masking the installation under the "see it frequently", "common practice" veil.

We have all had phone calls from builders, remodelers and tradesmen who have questioned our report when it made them look bad.

They have their own responses:

1) "That will never cause a problem".
2) "That is your opinion, I am the expert".
3) "I have been doing it like that for 20 years"
4) "You tell me how that is wrong!"
5) "The code official approved it"

Why bother beating up the subjective opinion argument? Simply state it violates a code which is a MINIMUM standard and move one. You get less arguments with that.

I don't reference code sections in home inspection reports unless I am doing a new construction or the code applied when the house was built or remodeled. When I do, I always make a statement letting them know that I am not the AHJ (unless I am) and specific references to codes are for clarification purposes.

In other words, it is easier to defend a code than an opinion.

My mind is going faster than my typing so I will stop now.

[Jerry Peck]

In essence, reading through this thread it appears as though every single person agrees that the installation in the OP's photo is wrong.

Wrong from a code standpoint and wrong from a common sense/installation standard and wrong from the manufacturer's installation standard.

Not quite ...


Hi All
Just my two cents worth !!!
That venting detail is correct as per IRC. It is to be vented TOWARDS the exterior. A soffit vent can also be used, they make a special small cap flashing for those that are not with in reach of a roof or soffit vent. As for the remark as a cheap way I've build res. & commerial on the UPPER end and this is a common practice and is not cutting any corners. The most important detail missed is does it or did it have a S-trap in the vent pipe. This practice prevents the typical or common water stain and or water dripping from the bath fan.
Have a GREAT DAY
Brad - Tri City Inspection Agency, LLC

Brad thinks it is okay, and admits to doing it that way, even on upper end construction.

Hopefully ... by now ... hopefully Brad no longer thinks that way ... hopefully.

[Stacey Van Houtan]

Read thru this thread again, I for one, may or may not call this a material defect.

This site gets hung up on codes their interptation, modifidations and enforcement, and how that relates to he HI and how the SOP affects the HI report

There is a large amout of varaiance as to what is in a HI report and what must be in a HI report per SOPs

Due to this most on the post on this thread (as well as many others) are opinions, nothing more, reguardless of some clams ("wrong is wrong"?)


Many SOP use: ‘‘Material defect’’ means any condition that significantly affects the value, habitability or safety of the dwelling.

This allows for a opinion from the inspector on some system and components. For example a 14ga on a 20 amp breaker, wrong is wrong.

Now to the grey area of the current thread, untill recently the irc required bath exhaust to vent to outside air (currently it is required to be vented directly to the outside)

Many AHJ's considered a well ventlated attic to be outside air. There are homes that have had 40+ years of performemce with a fan vented of the attic.

I see no material defect.

There are homes (as some posted photos show) were the moisistue has caused problems in less than 1 year.

This is a material defect.

Do we use historical performence and the presceptive code in place at the time the home was built, to determine if a material defect exist, or do we use the current codes prescreption. disreguarding the historical performance, of a older home using this as a threshold for defination of material defect.

I offer cliets the following information of what to expect from MY HI


The generalist (General Home Inspection) type of inspection is different from a specialist's inspection, which can be costly, may take much longer (even days to complete), involve the use of specialized instruments, the dismantling of equipment, video-scanning, destructive testing, and laboratory analysis. .
We evaluate systems/components and report on their general overall condition. A comment of "INSPECTED" does not mean that the item is perfect, but only that it is either functional or met a reasonable standard of operation on the day of the inspection. We try and take into consideration when a structure was built and allow for the predictable deterioration that would occur through time, such as the cracks that appear in concrete or in drywall surfaces around windows and doors, scuffed walls or woodwork, worn or moderately damaged floors, stiff or stuck windows, and cabinetry that does not function as well as it did when it was new. Therefore, we will often ignore insignificant and predictable defects and don't often note these, particularly those apparent to a casual observer or the average person without any construction experience.

Building Codes change every 3 to 5 years. Any building more than 5 years old will have areas that do not conform　to all current　code requirements. You should not expect a pre-existing structure or its components　to meet current code standards. We will make　an effort to point out significant safety issues, but　we are not the city or county code inspectors and our examination is not a code inspection.　 It is common that structures of any age, may have had repairs, additions, or renovations done that don't "conform to current code" or may appear amateurish.　Our report is not a grade card of　the repair. It is　common to see old plumbing or mixed plumbing materials. Sometimes moisture stains or water leak signs　could be years old from a problem that no longer exists. Or, they may still need further attention and repair. Determining this is　not usually possible in just one trip to the property. Issues like this may need to be monitored over a period of time


This is how I think most good inspectors report and what we teach in our HI school

We add disclaimers becuase of law suits. Mine, for older homes without problems, for bath fans venting to the attic, is this



Bathroom exhaust vent(s) terminate　in the attic. Although this is commonly seen and is often　done this way,　building　standards currently recommend　extending these　to the exterior for reasons such as:　helping to　lower humidity levels in the building; move condensation outside; reduce the likelihood of mold; etc.

This topic should not be as hard or complex as this thread is making it

[Jeff Remas]

Wow, somehow missed that post.

Brad, did you ever read the IRC or did someone tell you that?

[John Kogel]

Read thru this thread again, I for one, may or may not call this a material defect.
We add disclaimers becuase of law suits. Mine, for older homes without problems, for bath fans venting to the attic, is this
Bathroom exhaust vent(s) terminate　in the attic. Although this is commonly seen and is often　done this way,　building　standards currently recommend　extending these　to the exterior for reasons such as:　helping to　lower humidity levels in the building; move condensation outside; reduce the likelihood of mold; etc.


This topic should not be as hard or complex as this thread is making it
This 60 year old attic had a recent upgrade. They added a bath fan and a chunk of hose. Maybe it comes down to how much the fan gets used for how many showers. We can't predict how much moisture there will be.

[Brandon Whitmore]

Hi John,

Did you attribute the cause of that mold growth to the bath exhaust fan venting into the attic, or was it a combination of problems? I would be shocked if that attic were adequately ventilated. Isn't that mold a sign of a grow operation:D Man, I hope you caught that.

[Darren Miller]

R


Bathroom exhaust vent(s) terminate　in the attic. Although this is commonly seen and is often　done this way,　building　standards currently recommend　extending these　to the exterior for reasons such as:　helping to　lower humidity levels in the building; move condensation outside; reduce the likelihood of mold; etc.


Stacey,

You have no idea who is going to occupy the house you are inspecting. There may be 5 teenagers who take 30 minute showers.

If I purchased the house you inspected and found a problem a year later, I'm going after you. You may have written what you believe to be correct, but you didn't address the issue. Did you tell your client it's OK the way it's installed or did you tell your client to extend the vent to the exterior?

If you mean to tell your client to extend the vent, just say at the end of the above paragraph, 'I recommend you have the vent extended to the exterior'.

[Richard M. Pinkerton]

3 ducts into one vent that is clearly designed by the manufacturer to exhaust 1 duct...hmmm

[Stacey Van Houtan]

Come after me on this one, Take a home inspectiion as a whole, some items are easy oversized breaker, this is wrong, has always been, I recommened repair by a contractor,

Other Items EIFS- Further evaluation needed

Up- grades - Some up grades fall into Good, Better, Best For a simple example: 100 year old house with fusebox- good= new box better= new box with all new branch wires- best =new box, branch wires and fixtures

Other up-grades fall into this One is Bath exhaust,
I consider my job is to educate the client on this type of issues, Some is done verbaly at the inspection. Then they can make there own decesion and risk anaylsis,

And if you have had experience building in more than one climate, you can also understand that this exhaust issue depends on location of the home to some degree. Size of attic, age of house, etc. If i am inspecting a brand new house in on the gulf coast, on the shore. Yes this is a wrong

A 50 year house in KC with a 12-12 pitch well vented attic, 1-1/2 bath the vents tied to the rafters near soffit vents, no stains, no mold,
this is a Good - Better -Best

Add that, this may be a newly diviorced single guy, YOU dont know where this client is currently living or any History about his situtaion dont make decesion for him.

I use a summary page to put the house in perspective.

The new house on the coast= summary page item listed a suggested repair
50 year house in KC = stays in the body of the report and listed as suggested upgrade.



I don't leave things out.

I do try to put things in persepective.

In my opinion resposible report writing is doing as I described above.

FYI- Over 15 yrs inspecting. I never have been sued successfly,
I have acted as a expert witness for several engineers, and other home inspectors defending THEM in several law suits. One I won on a summary judgement (if you know anything about lawsuits you will know this is almost unheard of)

I teach report writing at PITI home inspection school in KC (by the way our first class since the Kansas HI law went into effect is comming up), I have thought about reporting many issues. On another thread I have gleaned some very good info on ventless heaters, from this site and am changing my report.

i hope this helps explain, my persepctive on what i consider a serious problem in our industry, poor report writing

[A.D. Miller]

You should call it out.

JP: If he is inspecting to IRC standards, he SHALL call it out.:D

[Stacey Van Houtan]

IRC 50 yrs ago?

[Richard M. Pinkerton]

Mr. Houtan,
Below I have made necessary changes to your post in light of how detrimental you hold proper report writing:

Come after me on this one: Take a home inspection as a whole, some items are easy, such as an oversized breaker. This is wrong, has always been, I recommend repair by a contractor.

Other Items such as EIFS- Further evaluation needed

Up-grades: Some up-grades fall into Good, Better, Best. For a simple example; A 100 year old house with fusebox- good= new box better= new box with all new branch wires- best =new box, branch wires and fixtures

Other up-grades fall into this scenario is Bathroom exhaust,
I consider my job is to educate the client on this type of issues. Some is done verbally at the inspection. Then they can make their own decision and risk analysis,

Now, if you have had experience building in more than one climate, you can also understand that this exhaust issue depends on location of the home to some degree, size of attic, age of house, etc. If i am inspecting a brand new house on the gulf coast shore, then yes this is wrong.

A 50 year old house in KC with a 12-12 pitch, well vented attic, 1-1/2 bath, vents tied to the rafters near soffit vents, no stains, no mold,
this is a Good - Better –Best scenario.

Also add that this may be a newly divorced single guy, you dont know where this client is currently living or any History about his situation, don't make decision for him.

I use a summary page to put the house in perspective.

The new house on the coast= summary page item listed a suggested repair
50 year house in KC = stays in the body of the report and listed as suggested upgrade.



I don't leave things out.

I do try to put things in perspective.

In my opinion responsible report writing is doing as I described above.

FYI- Over 15 yrs inspecting. I never have been sued successfuly,
I have acted as a expert witness for several engineers, and other home inspectors, defending them in several law suits. One (?) I won on a summary judgement (if you know anything about lawsuits you will know this is almost unheard of)

I teach report writing at PITI home inspection school in KC (by the way our first class since the Kansas HI law went into effect is coming up), I have thought about reporting many issues. On another thread, I have gleaned some very good info on ventless heaters, from this site and am changing my report.

I hope this helps explain, my perspective on what I consider a serious problem in our industry; poor report writing.

[Stacey Van Houtan]

Is there a english fourm some where you can try sarge.

As my kids say Whatever

[Richard M. Pinkerton]

Now, I "shall" address your comment on the "IRC 50 years ago".

The IRC was developed in 1994, not 1960 as you imply.

"The International Code Council (ICC) was established in 1994 as a non-profit organization dedicated to developing a single set of comprehensive and coordinated national model construction codes. The founders of the ICC are Building Officials and Code Administrators International, Inc. (BOCA), International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO), and Southern Building Code Congress International, Inc. (SBCCI). Since the early part of the last century, these non-profit organizations developed three separate sets of model codes used throughout the United States. Although regional code development has been effective and responsive to our country’s needs, the time came for a single set of codes. The nation’s three model code groups responded by creating the International Code Council and by developing codes without regional limitations; the International Codes".
ICC.safe.com (Home-History).

The need for ICC was great due mostly in part to the call for a an unbiased development of building codes that would not be influenced by special interest groups.

Also, the ICC has a code book on Existing Buildings that may be of interest to you.

[Richard M. Pinkerton]

Is there an english fourm some where you can try sarge.

As my kids say Whatever

I don't mean to be so anal, it's just that us lowly ICC inspectors are held at a higher level. That is not to mention that I was a teacher myself and I do understand how that once you label yourself as such, you are looked up to, as you well know in Kansas City.

[Stacey Van Houtan]

Now I will address your comment

I know that, I rember when it was going to be 2000 and the IRC would consoladate HA HA

I put that out there to be Facetious -adjective 1. not meant to be taken seriously or literally: a facetious remark. 2. amusing; humorous. this is as i take your correction post.

If you did not understand the post explaing my report writing logic, then that is one thing, if you disagree another, I would continue this converstation if it was a to englighten You or if information is presented that would enlighten me

[Richard M. Pinkerton]

OK, I get it now. I apologise for stealing your thunder.
This has been amusing and quite entertaining.

On the books I am quite anal.
In the field I am every contractors dream.
In the office I am but a shadow delved deep into Plan Reviews.

[Stacey Van Houtan]

Richard would you teach Mr. Miller some of your wisdom.

[Stacey Van Houtan]

:D Richard would you teach Mr. Miller some of your wisdom.

[Richard M. Pinkerton]

:D Richard would you teach Mr. Miller some of your wisdom.

The only thing I'm going to teach Mr. Miller, is the effects of gravity through a 1" I.D. opening. lol

[Terry Neyedli]

In Vancouver, it is the standard practice to wrap the metal ducts with insulation material to prevent condensation water drip down to the ceiling fan in winter time.

Daniel:
Also look for the famous "Red Green" duct tape.
Great for the first 6 months but.......
It is best to use the metal tape as it last for 5 years or so.

Terry Neyedli CHI
www.alphahomeinspections.ca

[Michael Greenwalt]

So there I was, standing at the toilet and suddenly it began to rain inside my toilet room. This rain was coming through the vent fan and onto my head. Previously I had seen water on the floor and we,,,being the stupid humans we are,,,thought that the cats were playing in the toilets while we were gone.

This was not a a little amount of water here, passing through the electrical components of the fan and light fixture but a fairly heavy stream for a brief period.

I have since fixed this problem and my bathroom vent exhaust (home built in 2004 in KANSAS) now route DIRECTLY to the exterior as they should. I was procrastinating the fix I knew should happen until I started to see some water damage in the attic space, I was wrong.

So, when you think you know it all, you get another one of life's simple lessons; you don't.

Do I write up the need to repair this problem in homes,,,you betcha. I have no desire to pay for repairs that could have been alleviated by simply reporting it to the client and letting THEM make the decision.