Testing a shower pan

[Rick Cantrell]

Since we were on the topic of shower pans and liability
I thought it better to start a new thread



I feel the most effective way to reduce liability is through education, and training in procedures.
I contacted Bill Myers (not his real name) by phone a couple months ago. I was interested in the procedure he used for testing, and how if any, he has changed his procedures.

http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_inspection/plumbing-system-home-inspection-commercial-inspection/19779-shower-pan-disaster.html
Post #18 & #19 have links to various sites detailing the procedure for testing of the shower pan.


Below is a form I use to inform the HO and purchaser about testing the shower pan

Request and Authorization to test Shower Pan


Notice to purchaser and homeowner.
A standard test of the shower has been or will be performed.
The standard test is very much like normal use of the shower.
Sometimes the normal activity of using the shower may not reveal a defect in a shower pan.
Therefore a Shower pan test is recommend to be performed.
Before consenting to the shower pan test you need to understand
The test does not create a leak;
However the test may expose an existing defect that will allow water to leak.
If a defect exists, water can leak causing substantial damage.
Some defects and leaks may not be readily observable or detectable.


The shower pan test consist of:
#1 Removing the shower drain cover plate
#2 Inserting the appropriate plug into the drain of the shower to stop water from draining
#3 Filling the shower pan to within ½” of the shower curb height
#4 Allowing water to remain in the shower pan 4 hours or longer
#5 After the allotted time, remove the drain plug, and observe water drainage
#6 Observe for water that has leaked around the shower, and if practical under the shower
#7 Reinstall shower drain cover
#8 Report observations and make recommendations.

I understand and agree to; the limitations, and accept the risk involved.

Address: __________________________________________________ _____________________


Property owner or agent: __________________________________________________ ________

Date: ___________________________________________


Prospective purchaser or agent: __________________________________________________ ___

Date: ___________________________________________

[Gunnar Alquist]

Hi Rick,

I handle it a bit differently. If the stall shower is on the first floor, I put water in the pan, but not to 1/2" of the top of the dam (many membranes stop short) and let it sit until I go underneath. I let the water out once I am ready to crawl. Since the majority of homes around here are crawl, I will find any leak when I get under the bathroom.

If the stall shower is on the second floor, I let them know that I did not fill the pan with water due to the possibility of causing damage, that the pest inspector probably will or did the same, and recommend obtaining a waiver from the seller to allow a standing water test of the shower pan.

[Rick Cantrell]

Hi Rick,

I handle it a bit differently. If the stall shower is on the first floor, I put water in the pan, but not to 1/2" of the top of the dam (many membranes stop short) and let it sit until I go underneath. I let the water out once I am ready to crawl. Since the majority of homes around here are crawl, I will find any leak when I get under the bathroom.

If the stall shower is on the second floor, I let them know that I did not fill the pan with water due to the possibility of causing damage, that the pest inspector probably will or did the same, and recommend obtaining a waiver from the seller to allow a standing water test of the shower pan.

Gunner
Thank you for replying

The membrane should go above the dam 6" (?), any less that that is not allowed.
Good that you do recomnend a shower pan test on the showers you do not test.

[Gunnar Alquist]

The membrane should go above the dam 6" (?), any less that that is not allowed.

And, of course no one would install a shower pan incorrectly :cool:

However, I am more concerned as to whether or not the pan is likely to leak during typical use. I fill and drain the pan to check the pan as well as the drain pipe. Unless the drain becomes clogged, the pan is unlikely to fill with water.

Anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

[Bob Elliott]

I would never test with a method that will cause extensive damage should the component fail during testing.

Using a drain plug means that if it fails under testing you may have a flooded ceiling and associated mold besides the damage.

Failed under testing in the report will not stop your liability IMO.

Test using normal operating controls or are you guys also turning all the shutoff valves (including main) to see if they leak at the valve stem or crack off in your hand also?

Just because a goofy gadget is sold does not mean you should use it.

[Dom D'Agostino]

I would never test with a method that will cause extensive damage should the component fail during testing.

Just because a goofy gadget is sold does not mean you should use it.


I agree.

Dom.

[James Duffin]

I would never test with a method that will cause extensive damage should the component fail during testing.

Using a drain plug means that if it fails under testing you may have a flooded ceiling and associated mold besides the damage.

Failed under testing in the report will not stop your liability IMO.

Test using normal operating controls or are you guys also turning all the shutoff valves (including main) to see if they leak at the valve stem or crack off in your hand also?

Just because a goofy gadget is sold does not mean you should use it.

I agree...

[Jerry Peck]

Some would not test something if something could be damaged?

Crimeny! almost EVERYTHING an HI tests COULD cause damage to something!

I always filled the shower pans up, I carried 2 of the shower testers in my bag and had two more in the van for really deep showers ... IF THE DANG SHOWER LEAKED ... *I* *DID* *MY* *JOB*.

Quit whining and do your job.

[Ted Menelly]

I will add my kind 2 cents worth (a nickle now a days)

I here all of you about liability but that is something I have never worried about a day in my life. Yeah yeah, some say that is foolish to go thru life like that but the folks I see get in the most trouble are the folks that are trying to disclaim themselves to death.

In all the years of remodeling and inspecting I never once saw a shower pan fail to the point of flooding a house out. Totally impossible unless the shower falls thru the floor to the first floor and if that was going to happen it would happen with the 300 pond woman standing in there dancing to the music taking a shower, not from filling the shower pan and I don't fill it to the top. Some shower panes, mostly the older ones, don't cover as much as they should in height. When I test a pan I am in the shower area 30 times until I see maybe the water move in the slightest t from my mark and then stop the test.

The most I have seen and that is practically never even with a slight loss of water in the pan was at the most a small wet spot on a ceiling and that is after multiple thousands of inspections and decades of inspecting

Also as I have said repeatedly and not trying to irritate. If there is going to be a leak then there was a leak and there has already been water getting under there for some time and damage is already done.

Changing them out in the past even with the slightest leak found has been an eye opening experience every time. Rotted wood abounds It is amazing that there was not a collapse on some of them I have seen with the extensive rot and mold.

Anyway this is not a rant but just the other side of why multiple thousands of inspectors do test shower pans. It can cost your client thousands in repair. A simple test that is certainly not purposely or intentionally designed to cause damage but just to find a leak that is already there. Every single one I have pulled apart in the past every single home owner said "I had no idea" I just started seeing a little bit of water so I figured I would catch it before damage was done.Yep, the damage was done long before the test was ever even thought of being done.

Now for the permission slip.

I actually like the form that you produced Rick. The problem I see with it is the answer will be no more often than yes because the seller isn't going to buy it. They do not want damage to their home one they are trying to sell it. This also opens up the world of why did I not get one of these before you pulled the panel cover of the electric panel.

Why did I not get one of these explaining that the micro wave may short out when you test it (that has happened far more than a shower pan leak 100 fold). I also got a call from a seller stating he just had the micro wave installed "by a professional installer" and everything was perfect and I know this guy and would trust him to do anything on my home. He is a true professional." I put a cup of water in there and zip, zap, tsssst and the micro was no more. HGe actually wanted me to pay for it, ah, no.

I had a garage door fold up even after all the hand testing and inspecting and then hit the button and the door crumpled before my eyes ... and the owners eyes. NO, I di not pay for it.

I put my foot thru a roof while walking it and I actually went in the attic on this one before the roof and saw no concerns. No, I did not pay for it.

Not only did I not pay for any of the items listed above but never had a problem with any of the sellers on those and countless other items over the decades with the exception of the micro wave. The reason the micro wave never turned into a concern because the buyer watched me test it and saw what happen. The owner never did fix it and would not call his professional in for a warranty just to be a putz.

I just do not see where all this liability talk comes from almost every day on this board.

I read Ken Rowe speaking of his past company he worked for and talked of claims that came in and they or the insurance paid them. That was a wow considering non of that has happened to me in thousands of inspections and decades of inspecting
I never had a claim even when building and remodeling.

I do believe it is all about expectations and or constantly telling folks and disclaiming everything is why so many even think of this liability issue. Long drawn out contract. Sign here and initial there and no you will never get anything from me but the cost of the inspection or two.

I don't do that either. Other than now having to have E+O insurance because it is state mandated I never had that either, just general liability. Maybe I am the luckiest guy on the planet in the world home inspection or maybe, just maybe, I am doing something right.

Now folks. Even though this looks like a rant I am just asking questions (where does all this come from) giving my opinion (it just varies with yours but also goes right in line with thousands of inspectors that do test shower pans) of the situation and seeking understanding (does everyone of you constantly run into liability issues and if so please explain what and why because I just never see it)

I apologize for the length and have a good evening.

One last item. I literally flooded a second floor out a short while ago quite by accident and fault of a sink.(really my fault) Yes it ran down stairs. I cleaned it up. Took a hell of a long time and did a good job. And you know what. I never heard one word about it and was told to not worry about it in the slightest. Yes there was a few wet spots on the ceiling. No one upset. No letters from lawyers. No screaming client, seller listing agent or buyers agent.

I just do not get this constant liability talk.

[Rick Cantrell]

Bob, Dom, and James

Did you read the form?

Notice to purchaser and homeowner.
A standard test of the shower has been or will be performed.
The standard test is very much like normal use of the shower.
Sometimes the normal activity of using the shower may not reveal a defect in a shower pan.
Therefore a Shower pan test is recommend to be performed.

The shower pan test is OPTIONAL
It informs the HO and the buyer of the risk

[Bob Elliott]

Bob, Dom, and James

Did you read the form?

Notice to purchaser and homeowner.
A standard test of the shower has been or will be performed.
The standard test is very much like normal use of the shower.
Sometimes the normal activity of using the shower may not reveal a defect in a shower pan.
Therefore a Shower pan test is recommend to be performed.

The shower pan test is OPTIONAL
It informs the HO and the buyer of the risk

Rick, one thing I learned is that we can have a ton of disclaimers but they almost mean nothing in court if the Judge rules against us.

How many times have you heard......turn the main on it is OK to do so and we will not blame you if it leaks...:)

[Bob Elliott]

Some would not test something if something could be damaged?

Crimeny! almost EVERYTHING an HI tests COULD cause damage to something!

I always filled the shower pans up, I carried 2 of the shower testers in my bag and had two more in the van for really deep showers ... IF THE DANG SHOWER LEAKED ... *I* *DID* *MY* *JOB*.

Quit whining and do your job.

Impressive use of CAPITOL LETTERS but......did you also turn the main shutoff valves to make sure they operated properly?

Please answer in small letter typing:)
...or you can just be the "ANGRY GUY":rolleyes:

[Rick Cantrell]

"Rick, one thing I learned is that we can have a ton of disclaimers but they almost mean nothing in court if the Judge rules against us."

Very true
I don't look at as a "disclaimer", I see it more as information needed so they can make an informed decision.



"How many times have you heard......turn the main on it is OK to do so and we will not blame you if it leaks"

The form is SIGNED

[Steven Turetsky]

Jerry, did you eat Cherrios or something this morning?

I agree that the shower pan should be tested... especially if it is a custom pan.

I am a bit leery of removing the drain cover, as I have seen screws break off in older installations. Personally, I prefer a flat rubber stopper or top hat style stopper.

The authorization is a good idea, although I may word mine differently, to include the entire inspection. This could eliminate alot of other headaches that may arise. Remember, we are touching, tinkering, and walking in and on a whole lotta stuff. A homeowner can be pretty vindictive, especially if the sale does not happen. If it is important for an inspection agreement to protect us with the client (in the event he buys the property), this will protect us with the homeowner in the event the client does not buy the property.

As far as to test or not to test... to each their own and whatever floats your boat. Either way the authorization is a good idea.

[Rick Cantrell]

"Now for the permission slip.

I actually like the form that you produced Rick. The problem I see with it is the answer will be no more often than yes because the seller isn't going to buy it."

I recommended the test, they declined it. Where is the problem?

If you recommend the HVAC system be check/serviced/repaired and they do not, what else can you do?

Same as with a SE, chimney, electrician, etc...

[James Duffin]

When you get to the house for the inspection the pan is either already leaking or not leaking. If it is leaking you will see evidence and if it not leaking then you won't. What is trying to make it leak if at all possible going to accomplish?

[Dom D'Agostino]

Bob, Dom, and James

Did you read the form?



My comments were stand alone, and don't necessarily refer to forms or quotes. When I replied, there were no forms.

Dom.

[Rick Cantrell]

My comments were stand alone, and don't necessarily refer to forms or quotes. When I replied, there were no forms.

Dom.

See post #1

[Dom D'Agostino]

See my previous posts on the same subject matter.

Dom.

[Dom D'Agostino]

See post #1

See post # 18

[Rick Cantrell]

I'm trying to be helpful and your being a smart-ass, why?

[Dom D'Agostino]

I'm trying to be helpful and your being a smart-ass, why?

Sorry, not being a smart ass at all. Quite the contrary. I have a huge interest in this thread. I thought there was a misunderstanding or something.

My other post (last post) was to clarify what I saw. I'll review all the threads and clear up any BS.

Dom.

[Rick Cantrell]

I here all of you about liability but that is something I have never worried about...
No screaming client, seller listing agent or buyers agent.

I just do not get this constant liability talk.

Bill never worried about it also.

http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_i...-disaster.html

[Rick Cantrell]

Sorry, not being a smart ass at all. Quite the contrary. I have a huge interest in this thread. I thought there was a misunderstanding or something.

My other post (last post) was to clarify what I saw. I'll review all the threads and clear up any BS.

Dom.

Sorry I jumped to the wrong conclusion.
Guess I was expecting someone to say something, and thought it was you.

[Jerry Peck]

Impressive use of CAPITOL LETTERS but......did you also turn the main shutoff valves to make sure they operated properly?

Please answer in small letter typing:)

Bob,

Did you notice what I stated in that quote you posted? :)

Crimeny! almost EVERYTHING an HI tests COULD cause damage to something!

"almost ... an HI tests"

Which is different than stating that an HI tests everything - just making sure you picked that up.

Back to your question, though, I did test the main shut off valves, and I learned how to test them without having them fail closed, fail open - yes. First, rotate the valve open, if the valve is all the way open, the handle will not turn, if the handle turn, either the valve was not fully open (the handle will stop turning at fully open) or the stem and gate have separated and the valve needs to be replaced. You can sometimes turn the handle closed and the stem will push the gate in, shutting the water off, but the gate will not retract when the handle is turned open - that leaves the house without water ... and, yes, I did find that out the hard way, but it did not cost me anything as ... you know the story ... it "failed under testing".


...or you can just be the "ANGRY GUY":rolleyes:
Nope, not an angry guy, just a guy who can't figure out why some HIs are so mamby pamby about doing their job.

[Steven Turetsky]

As I stated in a previos thread, when I am doing an EIFS inspection, I know I will be penetrating the surface, and always get a signed authorization. Besides that fact that I am going to be doing quite a bit of invasive testing, I also realize that although I will try to be invisible; when I am done, there's a damn good chance that I won't be.

On the other hand, when I am doing a home inspection, I would be suprised if I leave any trace that I was there. Don't get me wrong, I've had my leaks, overflows, and whatever.

If something leaks or breaks during normal use, or standard testing I will handle each case on it's own merit, and decide how I will handle it. If if is plainly my responsibility, I will man up. If I think it is "better business," I will eat it.

As far as getting a signed wavier that mentions possible damage during the inspection, well, I think it's a great idea, but I can also see being turned away from a number of inspections. I think it will scare the crap out of the homeowner. Whatever you write, all they will read is that "this guy is going to damage our house."

So some of us will test, and some will not. I will test what I feel comfortable with (which is quite a bit). As will all of us. For now, I have had a change of view on a "blanket" authorization.

[Benjamin Thompson]

OK, and now if you'll sign this document, we will install a dam around the perimeter of your roof and flood your roof with an inch of water to see if it leaks.

[Rick Cantrell]

OK, and now if you'll sign this document, we will install a dam around the perimeter of your roof and flood your roof with an inch of water to see if it leaks.

Not the same thing. If you follow the links I provided they show that it is common industry practice to test the shower pan in this manner. In fact it's not just common, it's recommended. Since it is recommended, I think it is only prudent for the HI to at least recommend the test even if as an additional service.

[Darrel Hood]

Jerry,
Thanks. I can see how you made that interpretation.

Rick,
Does that mean if I recommend that you wear a dress to your next inspection, it is prudent for you to do that?

[Rick Cantrell]

Jerry,
Thanks. I can see how you made that interpretation.

Rick,
Does that mean if I recommend that you wear a dress to your next inspection, it is prudent for you to do that?

Darrel
I don't want to be to critical but, did you even read my posts?

"If you follow the links I provided they show that it is common industry practice to test the shower pan in this manner. In fact it's not just common, it's recommended. Since it is recommended, I think it is only prudent for the HI to at least recommend the test even if as an additional service."

[Rick Cantrell]

I presumed that everyone would understand the steps, even though I did not list them in detail.

You do your normal everyday inspection
During your normal everyday inspection
You inspect around the shower (and adjoining walls) for evidence of damage
You operate the shower as to simulate normal shower use.
You inspect for water that may have leaked around the shower

If you find no damage and no water has leaked you recommend the shower pan be tested. You recommend this because the test can expose defects not detectable or observable by normal use of the shower and doing the test is the next step to determine that there is a defect in the shower pan.

If you did see damage or water did leak, you report the findings and recommend repairs be made and recommend the test be performed.

[Darrel Hood]

Darrel
I don't want to be to critical but, did you even read my posts?

"If you follow the links I provided they show that it is common industry practice to test the shower pan in this manner. In fact it's not just common, it's recommended. Since it is recommended, I think it is only prudent for the HI to at least recommend the test even if as an additional service."

Rick, I did, especially the final sentence in which you state your position.

[Rick Cantrell]

Darrel
I guess that I do not understand what you are saying.


I'm saying that manufactures and industry standards do recommend this test be performed. They do not say what type of clothing should be worn, so I suppose you could wear a dress.

Now if you are saying that YOU recommend to wear a dress, I ask, by what standard do you base that recommendation on?

Will wearing a dress affect the results of the test?

[Darrel Hood]

Rick,
It doesn't matter much. I am only observing that a recommendation does not carry any meaningful weight. You and I have spent more time on this point than it merits.

Have a great day.

[James Duffin]

To me...a flood test is done when the shower pan is installed to try and make it leak if at all possible so repairs can be made before the mud bed and tile is installed. After the job is complete the goal is to not have a leak so trying to create a leak where there is not one is asking for trouble IMHO.

[Rick Cantrell]

I think I understand.
It's a good question, that others may have wanted to ask.
I'll answer it the best I can

I, as an HI recommend this test to the HO/ buyer because manufactures and industry standards recognize this procedure as an effective method to identify defective shower pans.
Using industry standards means that I did not make it up.
I do not perform the test during a routine inspection because, the HO may object to performing the test since it could cause damage.

[Rick Cantrell]

To me...a flood test is done when the shower pan is installed to try and make it leak if at all possible so repairs can be made before the mud bed and tile is installed. After the job is complete the goal is to not have a leak so trying to create a leak where there is not one is asking for trouble IMHO.

Not trying to create a leak, trying to identify if a leak is present but has not been detected yet.

After several years even properly installed shower pans deteriorate to the point of leaking. But many shower pans were just not installed properly to begin with.
Testing the pan is an effective method to determine if the pan has a defect.

A leaking pan is not an event, it's a process.
As Ted said, long before a HO will see anything, there has been a leak for a very long time.
First it's just a small amount of seepage, not even detectable.
Years may go by before it deteriorates to the point that water is leaking on the floor.

[James Duffin]

I agree that a shower pan does not last forever but why try to speed up the deterioration process? That small leak may not be a problem for a few more years if it is not aggravated by the HI. I am not saying you are wrong....I just don't agree with extreme measures that may create a problem where there once none visible. When I leave a house I want it to be in the same shape as I found it. And not with a shower that was fine when I got there and leaking when I left.

[Jerry Peck]

To me...a flood test is done when the shower pan is installed to try and make it leak if at all possible so repairs can be made before the mud bed and tile is installed. After the job is complete the goal is to not have a leak so trying to create a leak where there is not one is asking for trouble IMHO.

James,

Your presumptions are off because you (apparently) do not understand what is going on with a flood shower test.

1) You said " ... a flood test is done when the shower pan is installed to try and make it leak ... ", however, a shower test CANNOT "MAKE it leak". The shower flood test can only EXPOSE a leak.

2) You then added "After the job is complete the goal is to not have a leak so trying to create a leak where there is not one ... ", if "there is not" a leak, then a shower flood test will simply have water setting in the shower ... for weeks and weeks if you left the water there that long. A shower flood test CANNOT "create a leak". The shower flood test can only EXPOSE a leak.

Rick said: "You operate the shower as to simulate normal shower use.", but you do not have weeks to find out if there is a leak, you have, at most, a few hours, which means you need to do something which will expose shower pan leaks within a very short time, and a shower pan flood test will do that.

[Gunnar Alquist]

My experience is this:

If you do not do a flood test, you will miss a leaking shower pan and end up with an irate phone call.

If you do a flood test, you will find a leaking shower pan and end up with an irate phone call.

I think I will go to work at McDonalds. No shower pans, no leaks. :rolleyes:

[Jerry Peck]

My experience is this:

If you do not do a flood test, you will miss a leaking shower pan and end up with an irate phone call.

If you do a flood test, you will find a leaking shower pan and end up with an irate phone call.

I think I will go to work at McDonalds. No shower pans, no leaks. :rolleyes:

Gunnar,

What I did for a while was, if I saw *any* evidence of a shower pan leak around the other side of the shower stall walls 'and' there was no evidence of a shower pan repair, I would point that out to the agent, buyer, seller, etc., and tell them that the shower stall leaks, and that it is likely the shower pan - after they doth protest too much about the shower *not* leaking, I would tell them that doing a shower pan flood test will not cause any water leakage so they will not mind if I do a shower pan flood test, right? ;)

They now had the chance to admit that there may be, likely is, a shower pan leak and save me from doing the test, or they could stubbornly 'stick to their story' that the shower did not leak. :cool:

Probably 80% would stick to their story and say 'Go ahead, I know it doesn't leak.', and after a few minutes of a shower pan flood test when water starts leaking out, they scream 'Shut the water off!' and 'Let the water out!', of course, though, when I let the water out by removing the shower pan testing devices, the water keeps leaking out even *after* the water has drained down the drain as water had accumulated in the walls and that has to finish leaking out too. :)

The other 20% would agree that their may be a shower pan leak and 'What else would cause the evidence I found' and I would simply write the shower pan up as needing replacement due to the evidence found that the shower pan leaks and that there has not been any evidence of a repair. (Why create a mess with that water when the seller was willing to concede that the shower leaked? I mean, after all, I am a nice guy. :D )

[Rick Cantrell]

Gunnar,

What I did for a while was, if I saw *any* evidence of a shower pan leak around the other side of the shower stall walls 'and' there was no evidence of a shower pan repair, I would point that out to the agent, buyer, seller, etc., and tell them that the shower stall leaks, and that it is likely the shower pan - after they doth protest too much about the shower *not* leaking, I would tell them that doing a shower pan flood test will not cause any water leakage so they will not mind if I do a shower pan flood test, right? ;)

They now had the chance to admit that there may be, likely is, a shower pan leak and save me from doing the test, or they could stubbornly 'stick to their story' that the shower did not leak. :cool:

Probably 80% would stick to their story and say 'Go ahead, I know it doesn't leak.', and after a few minutes of a shower pan flood test when water starts leaking out, they scream 'Shut the water off!' and 'Let the water out!', of course, though, when I let the water out by removing the shower pan testing devices, the water keeps leaking out even *after* the water has drained down the drain as water had accumulated in the walls and that has to finish leaking out too. :)

The other 20% would agree that their may be a shower pan leak and 'What else would cause the evidence I found' and I would simply write the shower pan up as needing replacement due to the evidence found that the shower pan leaks and that there has not been any evidence of a repair. (Why create a mess with that water when the seller was willing to concede that the shower leaked? I mean, after all, I am a nice guy. :D )

Exactly

[James Duffin]

I installed my shower pan about 10 years ago. The way it is installed I know it will not leak until the water gets over 2" deep at the curb. There have been no signs of leaks since it was installed. If a HI inspected my house and caused a leak where there was not one he would be replacing my shower....no if, ands, or buts.

[Rick Cantrell]

I installed my shower pan about 10 years ago. The way it is installed I know it will not leak until the water gets over 2" deep at the curb. There have been no signs of leaks since it was installed. If a HI inspected my house and caused a leak where there was not one he would be replacing my shower....no if, ands, or buts.

So when you go to buy a house for yourself, and the seller tells you "I installed my shower pan about 10 years ago. The way it is installed I know it will not leak until the water gets over 2" deep at the curb. There have been no signs of leaks since it was installed. If you cause a leak where there was not one you will be replacing my shower....no if, ands, or buts.", will you think, this guy is honest and I think he knows how to install a shower pan, so I believe him?

[Ted Menelly]

I installed my shower pan about 10 years ago. The way it is installed I know it will not leak until the water gets over 2" deep at the curb. There have been no signs of leaks since it was installed. If a HI inspected my house and caused a leak where there was not one he would be replacing my shower....no if, ands, or buts.

Sorry James. I just think that us about they silliest thing i ever heard. First off. If you installed a shower pan wrong so about the first 2 inchest is protected and they tested it as it should be and it leaked, as it should not have unless there was a leak already ...... They would be installing a new shower pan?

Good luck wirh that to anyone. The reason the liner comes up so far is that the grout work is more likely to crack towards the bottom and water gets behind the tile. I would venture to say if you wanted it replaced you would be doung it yourself.

If a shower pan leaks when tested:) . The shower pan already had a leak. Is that really so difficult to understand?

[Jerry Peck]

I installed my shower pan about 10 years ago. The way it is installed I know it will not leak until the water gets over 2" deep at the curb. There have been no signs of leaks since it was installed. If a HI inspected my house and caused a leak where there was not one he would be replacing my shower....no if, ands, or buts.

If the curb is HIGHER THAN 2" ... then the shower pan ALREADY HAS A LEAK. :p

You would lose again. :p

[Steven Turetsky]

A shower pan liner should not leak.

The liner should come up 6"-8" at the walls. The curb should rise 3" above the finished shower floor. The curb should pitch towards the shower pan. The liner should cover the curb.

[Jerry Peck]

I wanted to address this one separately.


If a HI inspected my house and caused a leak

James, James, James,

Do you not "get it"? Home inspectors CANNOT CAUSE a leak in a shower pan.

About the only things the home inspector can do is to accidentally allow the water to overflow the curb ... but that IS NOT A LEAK.

[James Duffin]

So when you go to buy a house for yourself, and the seller tells you "I installed my shower pan about 10 years ago. The way it is installed I know it will not leak until the water gets over 2" deep at the curb. There have been no signs of leaks since it was installed. If you cause a leak where there was not one you will be replacing my shower....no if, ands, or buts.", will you think, this guy is honest and I think he knows how to install a shower pan, so I believe him?

I don't ask a seller about his shower pan. Either it is leaking when I get there or it is not leaking when I get there. If I buy a house myself with a shower I would not try to cause it to leak because it is stupid to do so. In my own shower the pan membrame is hole free up to 2" above the floor and then there are holes where the cement board is attached to the curb. Like I said...if you inspect my house and fill up the shower pan to the point it leaks you would put me in a new shower...no if, ands, or buts! There is no SOP in the world that covers you doing that.

[James Duffin]

I wanted to address this one separately.



James, James, James,

Do you not "get it"? Home inspectors CANNOT CAUSE a leak in a shower pan.

About the only things the home inspector can do is to accidentally allow the water to overflow the curb ... but that IS NOT A LEAK.

I viewed your post so I could see what dumb thing you said this time and you did not let me down!

You again show your ignorance. My shower pan liner is overlapped so water from above sheds just fine but water coming up from the bottom can get under the liner...just like a shingle roof sheds water only one way. But of course you have never installed a shower pan so how would you know.

[Jerry Peck]

In my own shower the pan membrame is hole free up to 2" above the floor and then there are holes where the cement board is attached to the curb.

Okay, so it we can presume that your curb is ONLY 2" high? Your shower pan liner was installed incorrectly from the get go if that is correct.

Then, on top of all else which can be presumed from your statement, you go and punch holes through the water proofing liner? Really? That is like having a boat, drilling holes through the sides, and then wondering why the boat is taking on water ... crimeny.


Like I said...if you inspect my house and fill up the shower pan to the point it leaks you would put me in a new shower...no if, ands, or buts! There is no SOP in the world that covers you doing that.

No SoP prohibits that either, and if your shower pan leaks YOU will be the one paying to replace the pan and to install it correctly. Here you are, on a well read board, and you are telling us that your shower pan is installed incorrectly - THAT will bury you if you ever tried to take a home inspector to court for showing that your shower pan leaked because you installed it incorrectly.

James, you really do need to stop telling the world how you do things wrong, and then threaten to have others pay for your known errors when they inspect your house when you sell. My best advice to you would be to never sell your house ... that way you would never have to worry about what a qualified home inspector may find. :p :rolleyes:

[Bob Elliott]

Bob,

Did you notice what I stated in that quote you posted? :)


"almost ... an HI tests"

Which is different than stating that an HI tests everything - just making sure you picked that up.

Back to your question, though, I did test the main shut off valves, and I learned how to test them without having them fail closed, fail open - yes. First, rotate the valve open, if the valve is all the way open, the handle will not turn, if the handle turn, either the valve was not fully open (the handle will stop turning at fully open) or the stem and gate have separated and the valve needs to be replaced. You can sometimes turn the handle closed and the stem will push the gate in, shutting the water off, but the gate will not retract when the handle is turned open - that leaves the house without water ... and, yes, I did find that out the hard way, but it did not cost me anything as ... you know the story ... it "failed under testing".


Nope, not an angry guy, just a guy who can't figure out why some HIs are so mamby pamby about doing their job.

I give up since I know for a fact that the more unreasonable someone is in their beliefs the harder they will fight when confronted with facts.

My issue with you in this thread is the audacity of you stating we are not doing the job properly unless we are all foolish risk takers willing to turn shutoff valves that any experienced tradesman will tell you are bound to leak or crack off in older homes.

I am guessing you would tell Inspectors to de-winterize the REO's also.
The bet here is most association message boards are full of sensible skilled Inspectors that make sure to let the Rookies know turning valves and trying to break components in others property is a big no go.

I recommend you check your state and association SOP's if you are an active professional still working.

Next post I fear we will have someone stating we are all sensitive ,dainty types unless we yank the guardrails in both directions while 50 stories up with as much force as we can in order to see if they hold up under 200lbs of horizontal thrust.

[Robert Slight]

When you get to the house for the inspection the pan is either already leaking or not leaking. If it is leaking you will see evidence and if it not leaking then you won't. What is trying to make it leak if at all possible going to accomplish?

Thank you.

[Phil Brody]

By flooding the pan you are subjecting it to conditions inconsistent with normal usage and that could land you into trouble. Evidence of a leaking pan/stall can be obtained without such a test. Only when such evidence is apparent should a flood test be performed with the consent of the respective parties. Do you load every 15 amp circuit breaker to 16 amps to make sure it trips properly ?

[Noel Bouteller]

My only concern with the testing is filling to 1/2" from the top of the curb. I have torn out and replaced a few shower pans and many times the liner does not go within 1/2" of the top of the curb just from the fact that between the liner and the top of the curb is usually wire mesh, thinset, and tile, Some of the tiles are close to 1/2" by themselves. So by design of the curb 1/2" is really pushing it. I would be better with 1 inch or more.

[Jerry Peck]

I recommend you check your state and association SOP's if you are an active professional still working.

Your SoPs are *minimum* requirements, yes, "minimums" which one should not strive to meet, those should be your *starting point* as to what you do for your client.


By flooding the pan you are subjecting it to conditions inconsistent with normal usage and that could land you into trouble. Evidence of a leaking pan/stall can be obtained without such a test.

A flood test on a shower pan is not inconsistent with what the shower pan is *supposed to be able* to withstand.

No, I doubt anyone does a load test on a breaker, just like no one takes a fire hose to a roof, etc., but that does not mean that *something so simple* as a shower pan test should not be performed.


My only concern with the testing is filling to 1/2" from the top of the curb. I have torn out and replaced a few shower pans and many times the liner does not go within 1/2" of the top of the curb just from the fact that between the liner and the top of the curb is usually wire mesh, thin set, and tile, Some of the tiles are close to 1/2" by themselves. So by design of the curb 1/2" is really pushing it. I would be better with 1 inch or more.

The liner is supposed to go *over* the top of the curb, and, yes, that means that the tile and thin set *on top of the curb* is above the shower pan, but for shower pan flood tests we are not talking about flooding the shower pan to overflowing, just to a significant depth - hence my carrying 2 testers and having 2 more in my truck - it all depended on the shower depth.

[Gunnar Alquist]

My primary rationale for flood testing a shower pan on the first floor is to determine if the stains that I often find under a house are a result of a current or past leak. I will often find dry stains under an older shower and would rather tell a client that I found an active leak or that no active leaks were present under the home at time of inspection. In my opinion, it is useless to tell them that I saw stains and don't know if they are current or old.

I think the downshot of this is that we all have to make our own business decisions and stick to them. Each of us will have to defend our decisions if we are pulled into court. Saying "Well, Jerry does it this way" won't hold water :cool:

SOPs are only one measure. Another measure is "Standard of Care". If all home inspectors in your area are doing a flood test, then the bar has been raised and it is probably in your best interest (and your clients') to raise the quality of your inspection to that level.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

You are overfilling the finished shower floor excessively.The minimum required is 3" above the floor of the pan at the curb PRIOR to installation of mortar bed and tile or other finish.A mud bed could be as much as 2"! Stones, tiles can be thick.Filling to within 1/2" of FINISHED CURB HEIGHT is EXCESSIVE and can CAUSE a leak which has nothing to do with the FINISHED SHOWER's Pan.There is no reason to be so excessively flooding the shower floor at those depths for your extra ordinary "test".A shower pan test is used on an UNFINISHED shower.If you flood wall panel weeps you will further create a problem and potential damage which has nothing to do with the PAN.Apples and oranges.You would be better served to use actual standard test methods for the finished (type) shower rather than a rough flood test for proving an unfinished shower's pan.24 hours with such an overfilled is furthermore excessive, and could very well CAUSE damage with a finished shower. BTW your 2nd "link" on the earlier topic's post 18 doesn't work, Mr. Cantrell.What do you do when presented with a curbless shower?

[Gunnar Alquist]

I'm not Mr. Cantrell, but I play him on TV. :rolleyes:

I put as much water into the pan as I can. Typically, this isn't much. Then, I disclaim it, explaining my concerns about curbless shower pans.

[Bob Elliott]

Your SoPs are *minimum* requirements, yes, "minimums" which one should not strive to meet, those should be your *starting point* as to what you do for your client.


When one goes beyond SOP then one is also Liable and exposed.
What ever you decide you better make sure you have protection from liability and an explanation for the Judge as to why you should not pay for damages.

Staying inside SOP will protect you.
Call your associations Lawyer and tell him you like going outside SOP and listen for the response.

My client tonight decided to test the Bath sink overflow on his own and flooded out the floor and subfloor down into the basement.

If he had decided to test the second floor of this 2 Flat the damage is covered by whom?

[Benjamin Thompson]

There's really not much reason for the liner to extend above the curb. If you've got water over the level of the curb you have greater problems than a leaking pan.
I do occasionally do a test as described, with an inch or 2 of water if I suspect a leaking pan (tongue in cheek roof comments aside) and have found leaking pans or drain flanges that way. Also been berated by contractors that isn't a "normal" use of the shower. I had to agree but asked if the pan should leak under any circumstances, of course not.

So, my feeling is, the pan shouldn't leak period. If you can "get" it to leak without filling it over the curb, it is failing.

[James Duffin]

If someone will fill up a shower with water they will most likely jump out the high limit on a water heater to test the relief valve and plug in thirty five 1500 watt heaters to test the 200 amp main breaker. Why stop with just the shower pan leaking and making a mess. Let's see if we can blow the house up or burn it down during the inspection. That is what good inspector would do....right? :D

[Rick Cantrell]

If someone will fill up a shower with water they will most likely jump out the high limit on a water heater to test the relief valve and plug in thirty five 1500 watt heaters to test the 200 amp main breaker. Why stop with just the shower pan leaking and making a mess. Let's see if we can blow the house up or burn it down during the inspection. That is what good inspector would do....right? :D

James
The difference is, manufactures and industry standards recognize and even recommend this procedure as a method to test shower pans for leaks. Do you know of anyone that recommends the test you are comparing it to?

[Gunnar Alquist]

Hey Rick,

Good threat. Lots of discussion on this one. :cool:

[Rick Cantrell]

Hey Rick,

Good threat. Lots of discussion on this one. :cool:

Thanks Gunnar

But I hope you mean "Thread" not "threat"

[James Duffin]

James
The difference is, manufactures and industry standards recognize and even recommend this procedure as a method to test shower pans for leaks. Do you know of anyone that recommends the test you are comparing it to?

Do you have any industry standards that say to test the pan this way after the job is compete?

[Jerry Peck]

For those who think of flood testing a shower pan as some technically exhaustive and technically challenging action and try to equate it with load testing a 200 amp main breaker ...

... I guess you must also feel that using a ladder to access a roof is some technically exhaustive and technically challenging action, that equates to hanging from a harness under a helicopter and flying in to do a roof inspection ... :rolleyes: :p

[Rick Cantrell]

James
If you test shower pans or not, it makes no difference to me. I am only providing information to those that may wish to test them.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Long ago (2003) article from the ASHI Reporter, outlines numerous steps to be taken (investigations, verifications and "tests") PRIOR to flooding a FINISHED shower floor (near end of article "Beyond the Scope, Pinpointing a leak" section).

This section was NOT written for HI by an HI, but by a tradesman (Plumber). The "tests" and specifications you've been referring to are for an unfinished or filled (safe) shower pan, NOT a finished tile or otherwise shower floor, shower base, etc..


Inspecting Tiled Showers and Shower Pans | ASHI Reporter (http://www.ashireporter.org/articles/articles.aspx?id=609)


I have yet to have seen any authoritative application of the unfinished flood leak test applied to the entirety of a finished shower floor.

Please provide the promised authorities (promised in the earlier thread from last year).

[Ted Menelly]

Long ago (2003) article from the ASHI Reporter, outlines numerous steps to be taken (investigations, verifications and "tests") PRIOR to flooding a FINISHED shower floor (near end of article "Beyond the Scope, Pinpointing a leak" section).

This section was NOT written for HI by an HI, but by a tradesman (Plumber). The "tests" and specifications you've been referring to are for an unfinished or filled (safe) shower pan, NOT a finished tile or otherwise shower floor, shower base, etc..


Inspecting Tiled Showers and Shower Pans | ASHI Reporter (http://www.ashireporter.org/articles/articles.aspx?id=609)


I have yet to have seen any authoritative application of the unfinished flood leak test applied to the entirety of a finished shower floor.

Please provide the promised authorities (promised in the earlier thread from last year).


Always good info as usual Mr W

But in saying that

"Unfinished flood test" The idea of that test is to show it does not leak before they go to the trouble of tiling and a complete finish down to the grout

So they dont have to tare it apart and start over again when the clients move into their new home and they discover ....... the liner leaks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!

So, why do they do a flood test before they put the bed in and tile and grout and finish up the walls? Because the liner is suppose to hold water incase the tiles crack, grout chips out over time, the house settles and a crack runs across the hard surfaces and water gets down into the bed and on to the liner.

No SOPs that say this must be done. No industry standards saying that this is the way to test.

You just gave us the darn industry standards to check for a leak in liner. That is the standard. That is how you check for a leak. That is way they check it that way bfore the tile work gets done.

Please stop with these excuses as to not test it and there is no standards and it is not suppose to be flooded to check for a leak.

Checking for a leak or not, at this time, is up to the Inspector. Checking for it is done in one way, by fillung it a bit and seeing if you lose water.

As far as the folks saying that the liner should not in old or new showers go over the curb. Darn folks. The shower door, threshold, sweep keeps water from the shower from running, splashing out over the threshold so in fact the threshold is soaked all the time. This is the absolute best point for a leak and when you pull the showers apart the first thing you see saturated is the double 2x4 of the threshold. Of course you cannot and won't block the curb so you can have an inch of water sitting on it for a while but you can and should have it sitting inside the shower for a while.

It is the only way to check for a leak.

Again, inspect for it or not at ones own discretion. But if you are one that inspects the liners/pans for leaks then you MUST "flood" it out as in fill it up short of the curb and let it sit. You are not doing anything contrary to industry standards. Those are the industry standards. You are not causing it to leak. If it leaks then there already was one.

All my life as a young man, even a teen, going to job sites I would see the liner/pan filled with water and sitting there for the building inspectors inspection!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They have never done it different so I guess that is the way to do it no matter how many writings or publications or SOPs you want to read or from what year.

Because that is the way you check for leaks. If you fill it up before the tile and it does not leak then I guess the reason they do it is so it won't leak all over the home afterward if it does get filled/flooded ..... yeah think!

Dance all you want

[Benjamin Thompson]

As far as the folks saying that the liner should not in old or new showers go over the curb. Darn folks. The shower door, threshold, sweep keeps water from the shower from running, splashing out over the threshold so in fact the threshold is soaked all the time. This is the absolute best point for a leak and when you pull the showers apart the first thing you see saturated is the double 2x4 of the threshold.

A properly built shower pan does not have 2x4's at the threshold!

[Marc M]

Since we were on the topic of shower pans and liability
I thought it better to start a new thread



I feel the most effective way to reduce liability is through education, and training in procedures.
I contacted Bill Myers (not his real name) by phone a couple months ago. I was interested in the procedure he used for testing, and how if any, he has changed his procedures.

http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_inspection/plumbing-system-home-inspection-commercial-inspection/19779-shower-pan-disaster.html
Post #18 & #19 have links to various sites detailing the procedure for testing of the shower pan.


Below is a form I use to inform the HO and purchaser about testing the shower pan

Request and Authorization to test Shower Pan


Notice to purchaser and homeowner.
A standard test of the shower has been or will be performed.
The standard test is very much like normal use of the shower.
Sometimes the normal activity of using the shower may not reveal a defect in a shower pan.
Therefore a Shower pan test is recommend to be performed.
Before consenting to the shower pan test you need to understand
The test does not create a leak;
However the test may expose an existing defect that will allow water to leak.
If a defect exists, water can leak causing substantial damage.
Some defects and leaks may not be readily observable or detectable.


The shower pan test consist of:
#1 Removing the shower drain cover plate
#2 Inserting the appropriate plug into the drain of the shower to stop water from draining
#3 Filling the shower pan to within ½” of the shower curb height
#4 Allowing water to remain in the shower pan 4 hours or longer
#5 After the allotted time, remove the drain plug, and observe water drainage
#6 Observe for water that has leaked around the shower, and if practical under the shower
#7 Reinstall shower drain cover
#8 Report observations and make recommendations.

I understand and agree to; the limitations, and accept the risk involved.

Address: __________________________________________________ _____________________


Property owner or agent: __________________________________________________ ________

Date: ___________________________________________


Prospective purchaser or agent: __________________________________________________ ___

Date: ___________________________________________

I do that but verbally. Unless its a bank. :rolleyes: Glad you moved this thread...i wish you would have let me know sooner...;)
I found 4 pans this week out of 5. My tests last the entire inspection of 3-4 hours. But most leak in the first 15 minutes. Like this from today.

[Gunnar Alquist]

Thanks Gunnar

But I hope you mean "Thread" not "threat"

Rick,

I would have meant thread. That is, if I could type. :rolleyes:

[Garry Sorrells]

Like many threads this has brought out that there many methods in what and how a home is inspected. The person doing the inspection will set their own limits on method unless specified by their licensing law SOP. So few things are etched in stone. Which then leaves things open for a mater of interpretation. The decision on the extent that any SOP is exceeded is a very personal mater and one that will be argued till the end of time. Many determine methodology by first determining their comfort level of personal liability for their actions. Thus we have those that will not fill the shower pan with water and just run the shower. Others will test to some limit of expectation. How we rationalize/justify our methodology of testing ultimately boils down to being confronted with a law suite and the deffence for those actions taken.

Responsibility was the genesis for this thread.
Methodology of testing was the conduit of inquiry.

It is always interesting how far a field things get during the discussions. Also, how some seem to take a different view as a threat rather than a learning opportunity.

Marc,
Have you ever had an uneasy feeling that a verbal discussion details will be altered or forgotten when there is a negative outcome? Thus leaving you exposed for liability for repairs.

Benjamin,
Your statement: "....There's really not much reason for the liner to extend above the curb. ..." , is answered by normal methods of construction. Why extend above threshold? Because it is far easier to extend it than worry about it not being high enough on completion.

Benjamin,
How have you built your thresholds if "...A properly built shower pan does not have 2x4's at the threshold! " ? Just curious. Though off topic a bit.

Questions for the group:

Does any one have a definitive expert authority (non-disputable in court) that specifically states methodology for testing a standing shower? In addition, but separately the methodology for testing a shower pan?

Taking the actual shower pan testing a step further, what is your methodology for testing a curbles shower pan ?

[Jerry Peck]

A properly built shower pan does not have 2x4's at the threshold!

Why?

By what standard?

What code or installation instructions state not to use 2x4s?
(Look at any installation instructions and you will see 2x4s used for that purpose.)

Now, if instead of saying "A properly built" you had said 'A better built' ... then I would agree with you as a 'better built' shower pan will have a concrete curb/threshold, either precast or cast in place.

But a "properly built" shower pan is doing what the installation instructions show or 'better'.

[Marc M]

Like many threads this has brought out that there many methods in what and how a home is inspected. The person doing the inspection will set their own limits on method unless specified by their licensing law SOP. So few things are etched in stone. Which then leaves things open for a mater of interpretation. The decision on the extent that any SOP is exceeded is a very personal mater and one that will be argued till the end of time. Many determine methodology by first determining their comfort level of personal liability for their actions. Thus we have those that will not fill the shower pan with water and just run the shower. Others will test to some limit of expectation. How we rationalize/justify our methodology of testing ultimately boils down to being confronted with a law suite and the deffence for those actions taken.

Responsibility was the genesis for this thread.
Methodology of testing was the conduit of inquiry.

It is always interesting how far a field things get during the discussions. Also, how some seem to take a different view as a threat rather than a learning opportunity.

Marc,
Have you ever had an uneasy feeling that a verbal discussion details will be altered or forgotten when there is a negative outcome? Thus leaving you exposed for liability for repairs.

Benjamin,
Your statement: "....There's really not much reason for the liner to extend above the curb. ..." , is answered by normal methods of construction. Why extend above threshold? Because it is far easier to extend it than worry about it not being high enough on completion.

Benjamin,
How have you built your thresholds if "...A properly built shower pan does not have 2x4's at the threshold! " ? Just curious. Though off topic a bit.

Questions for the group:

Does any one have a definitive expert authority (non-disputable in court) that specifically states methodology for testing a standing shower? In addition, but separately the methodology for testing a shower pan?

Taking the actual shower pan testing a step further, what is your methodology for testing a curbles shower pan ?

No, I actually dont inspect a lot of occupied houses as weird as that sounds. But it is a weird market. Of the occupied houses I inspect, few pans have leaked...at least not this week.;)

[Marc M]

Why?

By what standard?

What code or installation instructions state not to use 2x4s?
(Look at any installation instructions and you will see 2x4s used for that purpose.)

Now, if instead of saying "A properly built" you had said 'A better built' ... then I would agree with you as a 'better built' shower pan will have a concrete curb/threshold, either precast or cast in place.

But a "properly built" shower pan is doing what the installation instructions show or 'better'.

Out here, the mop guys will soild block the perimeter of the pan and lay 2x4's on thier side at the thresh.

[Rick Cantrell]

"Do you have any industry standards that say to test the pan this way after the job is compete?"


"I have yet to have seen any authoritative application of the unfinished flood leak test applied to the entirety of a finished shower floor."

Thank you Mr Watson for providing us with this link

Inspecting Tiled Showers and Shower Pans | ASHI Reporter (http://www.ashireporter.org/articles/articles.aspx?id=609)
Testing
Experienced inspectors know to cover the shower strainer and add water to check the integrity of the shower pan. I would encourage inspectors to fill the shower to approximately 1 to 1 1/2 inches below the door threshold. Do this early into the home inspection, so the water has ample time to make its escape.

Final step
The final step in the test procedure is to reinstall the test-plug and fill the shower base to about an inch or so below the threshold.

[James Duffin]

That is not an industry standard....this is Kenny Hart's opinion. Some good info though. That roofing nail in the corner of the pan where the PVC is folded shows why you should not fill a pan to the top of the curb.

In reading about this subject I do agree with the method some AHJ use which is to fill the pan up to the top of the slope in the floor which is about where the floor meets the curb. This allows you to quickly test the pan and drain under normal operating conditions.

[Rick Cantrell]

That is not an industry standard....this is Kenny Hart's opinion. Some good info though. That roofing nail in the corner of the pan where the PVC is folded shows why you should not fill a pan to the top of the curb.

In reading about this subject I do agree with the method some AHJ use which is to fill the pan up to the top of the slope in the floor which is about where the floor meets the curb. This allows you to quickly test the pan and drain under normal operating conditions.

It was published by ASHI
You are saying that ASHI is not an industry standard

[Jerry Peck]

That is not an industry standard....this is Kenny Hart's opinion. Some good info though. That roofing nail in the corner of the pan where the PVC is folded shows why you should not fill a pan to the top of the curb.

You are ass-u-ming that nail is below the top of the curb.

It would be best to presume that the nail is above the top of the curb as no nails, screws, cuts, etc., are allowed below 2" above the top of the curb. Even where the shower pan material is cut to wrap over the top of the curb and the sides around the wall above the curb, that open cut area is to be sealed - this can be done by gluing pieces in place, however, the major shower pan manufacturers have preformed corner dams available which are just glued into that corner and avoid the bulky material build-up caused when one tries to glue multiple pieces there to seal it up.

[Ken Schaumann]

If someone will fill up a shower with water they will most likely jump out the high limit on a water heater to test the relief valve and plug in thirty five 1500 watt heaters to test the 200 amp main breaker. Why stop with just the shower pan leaking and making a mess. Let's see if we can blow the house up or burn it down during the inspection. That is what good inspector would do....right? :D

James, I have been reading all these posts and I understand and agree with what you are saying. The SOP on my CREIA Inspection Agreement plainly states in Part III, A.12: The Following are EXCLUDED from a real estate inspection... Water testing any building, system, or component or determine leakage in shower pans, etc.
So I assume that if we DO the shower pan test there is liability involved so we better be charging an extra for it, just as we would charge extra for inspecting a pool, spa, and so on. If there is no visible evidence of leakage why test it (to try and make it leak)? Why do it if we don't have to, unless there is evidence or a suspicion of leaks and then WE ARE CHARGING EXTRA FOR IT. If the buyer wants to test the pan, then sign the agreement and the waivers etc and get the extra $$. After all we are in business to make money. I don't think anyone on this forum is doing inspections just for the fun or the practice.

[Marc M]

James, I have been reading all these posts and I understand and agree with what you are saying. The SOP on my CREIA Inspection Agreement plainly states in Part III, A.12: The Following are EXCLUDED from a real estate inspection... Water testing any building, system, or component or determine leakage in shower pans, etc.
So I assume that if we DO the shower pan test there is liability involved so we better be charging an extra for it, just as we would charge extra for inspecting a pool, spa, and so on. If there is no visible evidence of leakage why test it (to try and make it leak)? Why do it if we don't have to, unless there is evidence or a suspicion of leaks and then WE ARE CHARGING EXTRA FOR IT. If the buyer wants to test the pan, then sign the agreement and the waivers etc and get the extra $$. After all we are in business to make money. I don't think anyone on this forum is doing inspections just for the fun or the practice.
I found 4 pans out of 5 that were bad last week alone. Not one of them showed any evidence of damage prior to the test.;) Most people except maybe your teenager, wont take a shower longer than 10 minutes. The test floods the pan for 3 hours, at least in my inspection. Probably why I find so may busted pans. I have no problems walking on tile roofs:eek: shower pans:eek: or other restrictions / limitations or whatever set by ASHI, creia, Nachi, nahi or any other org. But thats me, I'm willing to take those chances.

[Ken Rowe]

That is not an industry standard....this is Kenny Hart's opinion. Some good info though. That roofing nail in the corner of the pan where the PVC is folded shows why you should not fill a pan to the top of the curb.

In reading about this subject I do agree with the method some AHJ use which is to fill the pan up to the top of the slope in the floor which is about where the floor meets the curb. This allows you to quickly test the pan and drain under normal operating conditions.

It also sounds as if the author considers this type of shower pan testing to be intrusive:


I believe home inspectors who already perform other types of intrusive investigations could certainly handle this procedure, which can be used to help locate leaks on tiled lined stalls and all other types of showers.

[Ken Rowe]

It was published by ASHI
You are saying that ASHI is not an industry standard

ASHI always publishes articles which are not industry standards, but only the opinions of the authors. ASHI does not create industry standards.

[Marc M]

ASHI always publishes articles which are not industry standards, but only the opinions of the authors. ASHI does not create industry standards.

Hey Ken I have a question. Is your state a licensing state for HI's? If so, does you state dictate what HI's can and cannot do? Just wondering..

[Steven Turetsky]

I found 4 pans out of 5 that were bad last week alone. Not one of them showed any evidence of damage prior to the test.;) Most people except maybe your teenager, will take a shower longer than 10 minutes. The test floods the pan for 3 hours, at least in my inspection. Probably why I find so may busted pans. I have no problems walking on tile roofs:eek: shower pans:eek: or other restrictions / limitations or whatever set by ASHI, creia, Nachi, nahi or any other org. But thats me, I'm willing to take those chances.

Well perhaps this will start a whole nuther topic.

I have no problem going the extra mile, and I will walk any roof that can be accessed safely, but I don't walk tile roofs. Besides it being extremely easy to break tiles. if you walk on a loose one you can end up going off the roof.

I already fell off one roof, and had 2 more close calls... very close calls. Actually, I used to be 6'4", now I'm 4'6". :eek:

[Marc M]

Well perhaps this will start a whole nuther topic.

I have no problem going the extra mile, and I will walk any roof that can be accessed safely, but I don't walk tile roofs. Besides it being extremely easy to break tiles. if you walk on a loose one you can end up going off the roof.

I already fell off one roof, and had 2 more close calls... very close calls. Actually, I used to be 6'4", now I'm 4'6". :eek:

See what you did...you went ahead and jinxed me. Gonna have to bring my rabbits foot on the roof now.:D
I weight a buck 50 so I'm good with the tile, I walk lightly. I actually dont do clay, however. Tried that once...lets just say it didnt go very well.:rolleyes:

[Ken Schaumann]

Hey Ken I have a question. Is your state a licensing state for HI's? If so, does you state dictate what HI's can and cannot do? Just wondering..

No problem Mark. In the upper right hand corner of the post it states where a person is located. I also am in California, hence no licensing requirement. CREIA is the acronym for the California Real Estate Inspection Association. Their SOP's are the standard for inspections in California. Hence SP testing is excluded, not required. Also see section 5 B 1: "The inspector is not required to fill any fixture with water....."

[Marc M]

No problem Mark. In the upper right hand corner of the post it states where a person is located. I also am in California, hence no licensing requirement. CREIA is the acronym for the California Real Estate Inspection Association. Their SOP's are the standard for inspections in California. Hence SP testing is excluded, not required. Also see section 5 B 1: "The inspector is not required to fill any fixture with water....."

HAHA...sorry, I meant Ken R.
I'm pretty familiar withy CREIA. I've been doing inspections in CA for many, many moons. I dont subscribe to CREIA's anything. No real reason, I suppose It's because they dont benefit me in any way. I did the associations thing for a while.

[Ken Rowe]

Hey Ken I have a question. Is your state a licensing state for HI's? If so, does you state dictate what HI's can and cannot do? Just wondering..

Nope, no licensing here.

[Raymond Wand]

What home owner would ever have 2.5" of water in the pan? Unless of course the owner puts a face cloth over the drain or some other item falls over the drain?

How many of you fill the bath tub to see if there are leaks? But wait.. did you actually sit in the tub while it was full?

[Garry Sorrells]

Not directed at any specific person, but in general discussion.

Anytime an inspection is done the inspector will make choices on how and to what extent they will test each item of their inspection. Some have said that they will go on any roof that is safely accessible, but then make exceptions based on the roof material due to the high potential of causing damage (breaking tile). Which returns us to the issue of testing/inspecting an item that the inspector knowingly has a high potential of failure and causing damage. When the inspector has not informed the property owner the nature of the test and the potential ramifications of that test.

I like most concede that there are a limited number of ways to test the shower pan. Being separate from testing the valves, fixtures and drain. Also, different form testing the tile (something for another thread). Mostly SP testing is just a mater of duration and depth of water used. How the depth is achieved , again is just a matter of practice and method.. Again, the determination of the integrity of the SP is a valid concern and testing it is what should be done for the client to provide a good inspection report, though exceeding most SOP.

First accepting that all owners have no prior knowledge of methodology of testing a shower pan and being different form the fixtures and drain test. Further, disregarding the issue of owner accessibility/availability or time expended contacting the owner, would it not be a good standard practice to inform the owner of the SP Test with an explanation of potential damage that may be incurred ? Then obtaining a written waiver for any resulting damage that may occur prior to testing ?

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

It was published by ASHI
You are saying that ASHI is not an industry standard

Obviously you chose to not read my post where I provided the link to the article, nor the article itself.

Words like beyond the scope, outside the SoP, etc. just skipped over.

No, articles in the ASHI reporter are NOT "Industry Standards" or "Standards of Practice" or anything similar UNLESS identified as being PUBLISHED AS SUCH. Even "opinion" or interps on SoPs and CoE columns are identified as merely opinion of the author(s) even those of committee.

The article was written by a PLUMBER. You also skipped over the multiple steps the PLUMBER described in the practice of his trade prior to flooding the SHOWER FLOOR (NOT raw "safe" PAN) - missing the point apparently of the myriad areas proven or investigated prior to same. The shower base, or finished shower floor is NOT a PAN. It may or may not be installed in a panned area. A pan test is for an unfinished area. A drop in the retained visible water level in a finished, tiled, DRY, UNUSED, unoccupied, unsaturated shower floor does NOT necessarily indicate a PAN LEAK or failure. Characterization regarding "test" on the "form" is invalid, consent and imdemnity worthless to unlicensed unauthorized practice of plumbing, etc. Performance as represented and described, regardless of suposed disclaim and consent would not indemnify HI regarding damages including tortious interferrance with a sale should the "supposed" leak not be of the pan itself, or not a "leak" at ALL but a flood event caused by the inappropriate flooding of the finished shower floor.

The Plumber wrote the article describing HIS approach in the practice of HIS TRADE, beyond the scope of a home inspection.

Proving a SAFE PAN at the appropriate stage of installation or repair is done by the tradesman, not by but TO the Building Official, or his/her representative, or a "home inspector".

I've eluded to examples regarding multitude invalid applications suggested already in this and the referenced former discussion. The linked article provides multiple examples as well. Wicked moisture, flooded or blocked weeps, shifted or bad drain gaskets; unnecessary work and/or damages you create by doing so at your own peril and your permission/disclaimer/easily pierced.

[Garry Sorrells]

Obviously you chose to not read my post where I provided the link to the article, nor the article itself.

Words like beyond the scope, outside the SoP, etc. just skipped over.

No, articles in the ASHI reporter are NOT "Industry Standards" or "Standards of Practice" or anything similar UNLESS identified as being PUBLISHED AS SUCH. Even "opinion" or interps on SoPs and CoE columns are identified as merely opinion of the author(s) even those of committee.

The article was written by a PLUMBER. You also skipped over the multiple steps the PLUMBER described in the practice of his trade prior to flooding the SHOWER FLOOR (NOT raw "safe" PAN) - missing the point apparently of the myriad areas proven or investigated prior to same. The shower base, or finished shower floor is NOT a PAN. It may or may not be installed in a panned area. A pan test is for an unfinished area. A drop in the retained visible water level in a finished, tiled, DRY, UNUSED, unoccupied, unsaturated shower floor does NOT necessarily indicate a PAN LEAK or failure. Characterization regarding "test" on the "form" is invalid, consent and imdemnity worthless to unlicensed unauthorized practice of plumbing, etc. Performance as represented and described, regardless of suposed disclaim and consent would not indemnify HI regarding damages including tortious interferrance with a sale should the "supposed" leak not be of the pan itself, or not a "leak" at ALL but a flood event caused by the inappropriate flooding of the finished shower floor.

The Plumber wrote the article describing HIS approach in the practice of HIS TRADE, beyond the scope of a home inspection.

Proving a SAFE PAN at the appropriate stage of installation or repair is done by the tradesman, not by but TO the Building Official, or his/her representative, or a "home inspector".

I've eluded to examples regarding multitude invalid applications suggested already in this and the referenced former discussion. The linked article provides multiple examples as well.


The article stated, written by a plumber, suggests filling the shower with water to test for a leak. The author, by my reading, is directing the testing of the shower floor for leaks.

From :Inspecting Tiled Showers and Shower Pans | ASHI Reporter (http://www.ashireporter.org/articles/articles.aspx?id=609)
".... Experienced inspectors know to cover the shower strainer and add water to check the integrity of the shower pan. I would encourage inspectors to fill the shower to approximately 1 to 1 1/2 inches below the door threshold. Do this early into the home inspection, so the water has ample time to make its escape. ..."

H.G.,
- Your siting "...Words like beyond the scope, outside the SoP, etc. just skipped over.
..." has nothing to do with the real discussion other than why someone is not required by Organization or State SOP.
- The exact nomenclature for the lower 3" of a shower stall should not be at issue. Especially when we all should have a common understanding that under the surface of the shower floor is some type of containment structural mterial (good or bad).
- The author wrote the article listing the progressive methods for the inspection and ultimate testing of the shower.
- The licensed plumbing idea doesn't really fly far since HI is not altering the plumbing nor is making a statement as to code (depending on state/city) when leak is found. Thus difficult to bridge to your statement "... regardless of suposed disclaim and consent would not indemnify HI regarding damages ..." How you determine that liability would not be mitigated if writen and informed consent is obtained prior to the test.
-

Siting the article does support the flood testing of the shower floor.

The article, as most are, offered as an opinion not a definitive directive for action.

ASHI may be offered as a standard in the industry, but is there an authority that accepts the burden of being the beginning and end of the testing methods for showers???

[Rick Cantrell]

Obviously you chose to not read my post where I provided the link to the article, nor the article itself.

Words like beyond the scope, outside the SoP, etc. just skipped over.

No, articles in the ASHI reporter are NOT "Industry Standards" or "Standards of Practice" or anything similar UNLESS identified as being PUBLISHED AS SUCH. Even "opinion" or interps on SoPs and CoE columns are identified as merely opinion of the author(s) even those of committee.

The article was written by a PLUMBER. You also skipped over the multiple steps the PLUMBER described in the practice of his trade prior to flooding the SHOWER FLOOR (NOT raw "safe" PAN) - missing the point apparently of the myriad areas proven or investigated prior to same. The shower base, or finished shower floor is NOT a PAN. It may or may not be installed in a panned area. A pan test is for an unfinished area. A drop in the retained visible water level in a finished, tiled, DRY, UNUSED, unoccupied, unsaturated shower floor does NOT necessarily indicate a PAN LEAK or failure. Characterization regarding "test" on the "form" is invalid, consent and imdemnity worthless to unlicensed unauthorized practice of plumbing, etc. Performance as represented and described, regardless of suposed disclaim and consent would not indemnify HI regarding damages including tortious interferrance with a sale should the "supposed" leak not be of the pan itself, or not a "leak" at ALL but a flood event caused by the inappropriate flooding of the finished shower floor.

The Plumber wrote the article describing HIS approach in the practice of HIS TRADE, beyond the scope of a home inspection.

Proving a SAFE PAN at the appropriate stage of installation or repair is done by the tradesman, not by but TO the Building Official, or his/her representative, or a "home inspector".

I've eluded to examples regarding multitude invalid applications suggested already in this and the referenced former discussion. The linked article provides multiple examples as well. Wicked moisture, flooded or blocked weeps, shifted or bad drain gaskets; unnecessary work and/or damages you create by doing so at your own peril and your permission/disclaimer/easily pierced.

Mr Watson
You provided the link, are you now saying it is not valid?
Testing
Experienced inspectors know to cover the shower strainer and add water to check the integrity of the shower pan. I would encourage inspectors to fill the shower to approximately 1 to 1 1/2 inches below the door threshold. Do this early into the home inspection, so the water has ample time to make its escape.

[Marc M]

What home owner would ever have 2.5" of water in the pan? Unless of course the owner puts a face cloth over the drain or some other item falls over the drain?

How many of you fill the bath tub to see if there are leaks? But wait.. did you actually sit in the tub while it was full?

You make my own personal point. We test because as long as the "potential" exists e.g. wash cloth, IMO it should be tested.

[Ted Menelly]

Not directed at any specific person, but in general discussion.

Anytime an inspection is done the inspector will make choices on how and to what extent they will test each item of their inspection. Some have said that they will go on any roof that is safely accessible, but then make exceptions based on the roof material due to the high potential of causing damage (breaking tile). Which returns us to the issue of testing/inspecting an item that the inspector knowingly has a high potential of failure and causing damage. When the inspector has not informed the property owner the nature of the test and the potential ramifications of that test.

I like most concede that there are a limited number of ways to test the shower pan. Being separate from testing the valves, fixtures and drain. Also, different form testing the tile (something for another thread). Mostly SP testing is just a mater of duration and depth of water used. How the depth is achieved , again is just a matter of practice and method.. Again, the determination of the integrity of the SP is a valid concern and testing it is what should be done for the client to provide a good inspection report, though exceeding most SOP.

First accepting that all owners have no prior knowledge of methodology of testing a shower pan and being different form the fixtures and drain test. Further, disregarding the issue of owner accessibility/availability or time expended contacting the owner, would it not be a good standard practice to inform the owner of the SP Test with an explanation of potential damage that may be incurred ? Then obtaining a written waiver for any resulting damage that may occur prior to testing ?


Hi Garry

First off. Please read this in its entirety. It is just my opinion and possible advise and an answer to your question as well as an answer to the original posters questions. Thats all. No rant.

My answer to the written disclosure, signed by a seller for "possible" damages to their property by using industry or the only way to test something properly. I say no. It opens up the whole world of written disclosure (liability release) signed by a seller before anything what so ever is tested in anyway by a home inspector. Get that signed and you better have them sign something else disclaiming the entire inspection such as the tub over flow leaking (what, you don't test that?) and causing water stain/damage on the ceiling below. Everyone that takes a bath wants that sucker filled to over flowing the overflow. But I guess that is "normal usage" so I guess testing that is just fine.

How about they say to you "well, you had be sign off on damage from doing a proper test on my shower liner/pan because of possible damage. How come you did not have me sign off on damage from testing the tub overflow. Also you did not have me sign a release of damages when you walked the roof. I had no idea I had rot up there and your foot would go thru".

Back to the disclaimer. Around here I almost absolutely never see or run into or talk to a seller. They are never around. That means getting emails or phone numbers to contact a seller to tell them that you may just destroy there home with all the tests your are going to do and is that OK with them? If it is OK with you fine sir could you please print this release of all damages to your home and sign it and leave it on the kitchen counter?

HVAC may start up and then short out. The garage door may collapse. When I open all the windows , which you folks never do, several of the springs may release and need repair. When I run the screws out of the electric panel one may hit a main line and short the panel out and kill me. Is that OK.

When I crawl thru your attic and my hand lands on a live wire and I slip off of the joist and fall thru the ceiling, is that OK with you. I mean after all. It was your bare wire that caused me to fall causing damage to your home. When I get out of the hospital I will give you some numbers to folks that fix that kind of thing.

When I ran you Whirlpool (just a name) one of the lines may be loose or pop off and water flood the first floor. I find leaks in whirlpools all the time and a whole lot more leaking than the shower, every time.

Disclaimer, disclaimer, disclaimer for everything in the home. And most if not all I mentioned is relatively common, well, kind of.

Just my opinion but i am thinking ......NOT! No one is going to sign off on anything if "there just might be damage to their home" from a particular test and then .... what about the rest of the disclaimer.

I am just thinking you are about to go down a foggy highway. Thus opening the door to more liability questions than you are trying to quell.

The home owners already know you are coming to their home and testing the electric system the plumbing system, which of course is for water supply and drainage/leak issues. HVAc, doors, floors, windows, roofs and all the associated concerns that might come out of the inspection. Why would one want to start asking permission for countless liability releases. Is one thinking of killing the home inspection business altogether.

[Raymond Wand]

You make my own personal point. We test because as long as the "potential" exists e.g. wash cloth, IMO it should be tested.

Okay point taken.

Now how many fill the bathtub to see if the overflow functions?

As I asked before how many inspectors get in the tub full of water, because some tubs only leak when someone is in it.

[Marc M]

Okay point taken.

Now how many fill the bathtub to see if the overflow functions?

As I asked before how many inspectors get in the tub full of water, because some tubs only leak when someone is in it.

Not me..too risky.:p

[Benjamin Thompson]

I think that is the whole point. They WONT sign the disclaimer and then you can skate when the pan leaks.

[Ted Menelly]

I think that is the whole point. They WONT sign the disclaimer and then you can skate when the pan leaks.


Never liked skating. My feet always froze for the first hour until the thaw out cycle started:p

[Dom D'Agostino]

HVAC may start up and then short out. The garage door may collapse. When I open all the windows , which you folks never do, several of the springs may release and need repair... Is that OK.



I'm sure you understand the difference between operating a garage door (using normal controls or methods as the homeowner would do), and purposefully blocking the shower drain and flooding the shower pan.
Or do you remove some of the rollers and see if door still operates without falling?

I think I understand your point of view, but your analogy is way off.

Dom.

[Ted Menelly]

I am not sure about you folks but I find blocked drains in the shower in brand new and existing homes. Hair is the culpert in the existing homes and tile chips and grout in the drain in new homes. I cannot even begin to guess the amount of times there is slow drains and the water fills up itself with absolutely no outside help. That is why this entire "flooding the shower pan", "intentionally blocking the drain" "creating a leak" is actually so comical. The garage door was an example of normal testing and **** happens. The walking on the roof it also happens. Filling a tub like every human on the planet up to the over flow or it gets to the overflow once in the tub. Every single scenario is "normal operation testing including the shower pan.

I will make everyone quite happy and just make my last comment on this thread.

The shower pan filling up a bit to quite a bit *is* normal use in a massive number of showers I have inspected over the decades and they fill all by themselves with out a barrier of any kind. Add the barrier and they just fill quicker. The liner of what ever kind it is under the tile .... in case folks just do not get the understanding of what it is for.

It is there to "not allow" water to get thru. If it does. It already had a leak. No one is intentionally creating one. No one is doing anything abnormal to "MAKE" it leak. If it leaks it leaks. Just like garage doors that were gone over manually and everything seemed fine until that motor button is hit and something binds. Guess what, they want you to pay for that crumpled door as well.

Check the shower for leaks or don't test the shower for leaks. It is that simple.

If it has a leak you and the buyer won't know until tomorrow or a month from now when a wash cloth is on the floor and they are running the water while getting ready to get in.

Damn, the shower is leaking. Waver, no waver. Release of liability or not. I just don't like skating unless it is dry and indoors with wheels.

End of the thread ...... for me.

[James Duffin]

I guess my whole point is once a house is finished the time for possible destructive testing has passed. When Ford designs and builds a new car it is put through stress and destructive testing but once it is finally built.... to make it last it has to be taken care of. A house is the same...there is no need to speed up the natural deterioration process just because you can. A roof or a shower will leak on its own when the time comes but if you abuse it you can surely speed up when the leak happens. YOMV

[Steven Turetsky]

Okay point taken.

Now how many fill the bathtub to see if the overflow functions?

As I asked before how many inspectors get in the tub full of water, because some tubs only leak when someone is in it.


The only places I can imagine a tub leaking from is either from the drain or overflow (or a hole to attach an accessory). What type of leak would be caused (other than overflowing the sides, which is not a leaking tub) by getting in?

[Raymond Wand]

While there maybe leakage in the areas you note, they may not necessarily leak with just water, the addition of the weight of a person could cause them to open up.

[Jerry Peck]

...there is no need to speed up the natural deterioration process just because you can.

Performing a shower pan test does not speed up the natural deterioration of the shower pan - either the shower pan is installed properly or it is not.

[Steven Turetsky]

While there maybe leakage in the areas you note, they may not necessarily leak with just water, the addition of the weight of a person could cause them to open up.

Other than water?

Such as??

[Jerry Peck]

Other than water?

Such as??

Such as the weight placed where one puts their foot and flexes plastic tubs and steel tubs, and cracks (plastic tubs) or rust (steel tubs) around the drains can leak when the tube is flexed from standing in it.

Those would be my first thoughts ... because I've seen both.

[Steven Turetsky]

Such as the weight placed where one puts their foot and flexes plastic tubs and steel tubs, and cracks (plastic tubs) or rust (steel tubs) around the drains can leak when the tube is flexed from standing in it.

Those would be my first thoughts ... because I've seen both.
I see where you're going, and I've seen them too. I thought that the response meant something other than water was leaking. :eek:

[Garry Sorrells]

I see where you're going, and I've seen them too. I thought that the response meant something other than water was leaking. :eek:


GIN leaking may be the answer.

[Garry Sorrells]

Ted,
This thread demonstrates the need for testing the shower, though it is not known what type of inspection was really done.
http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_inspection/questions-home-owners-home-buyers-diy/27150-new-mexico-plumbing.html

The entire point is that doing a shower pan liner test may, if defective (and a lot are), may cause damage to the property. This test is more prone for damage than opening a widow or flushing a toilet since the test presumes that the drain will be blocked and the pan flooded. Which is not a daily common event. The toilet is supposed to be sealed to the floor to prevent water penetration, but we do not test that seal.

More to the point it is about informing the owner of what is going to take place. Many, if any, do not have a clue as to what a true inspection is all about and what will be done. I agree that getting a signed release for anything and everything that will take place during a inspection is not realistic. It is only in the case that the inspector knows that there is a high potential for damage, unknown by the owner, for a particular test or part of an inspection that a little additional caution for reducing liability or the errant law suite may be warranted.

It is more about being professional and increasing the level of professionalism in home inspections. Even if it take additional time and effort.

I will leave the dead horse lye where it is now found.

[Ted Menelly]

Ted,
This thread demonstrates the need for testing the shower, though it is not known what type of inspection was really done.
http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_inspection/questions-home-owners-home-buyers-diy/27150-new-mexico-plumbing.html

The entire point is that doing a shower pan liner test may, if defective (and a lot are), may cause damage to the property. This test is more prone for damage than opening a widow or flushing a toilet since the test presumes that the drain will be blocked and the pan flooded. Which is not a daily common event. The toilet is supposed to be sealed to the floor to prevent water penetration, but we do not test that seal.

More to the point it is about informing the owner of what is going to take place. Many, if any, do not have a clue as to what a true inspection is all about and what will be done. I agree that getting a signed release for anything and everything that will take place during a inspection is not realistic. It is only in the case that the inspector knows that there is a high potential for damage, unknown by the owner, for a particular test or part of an inspection that a little additional caution for reducing liability or the errant law suite may be warranted.

It is more about being professional and increasing the level of professionalism in home inspections. Even if it take additional time and effort.

I will leave the dead horse lye where it is now found.

I turn on the computer and bring my email back up and as the emails load the last one at the top is someone trying to pull me back in

All I will say is I know all to well about professionalism and bringing an upper level of professionalism is what my business plan all my working life. That is why I check shower pans. It is also why I do not get permission slips signed from sellers (which is completely impossible around here anyway) because if you mevtion "POSSIBLE" damage to a seller and sign here .... they are not going to sign it. The top post ofn this page from Benjamin T is not what I want to do in the slightest. I never have been in the mode of

"They WONT sign the disclaimer and then you can skate when the pan leaks"

That just does the complete opposite of the professionalism you talk about. That leaves you and the lady that you mentioned from the other thread holding the bag. She will now be out a couple thousand. That of course depends on the extent of the damage from the *already leaking shower pan* She did not make it leak and the previous owners or previous inspectors di not make it leak. The only way someone can get a shower pan to leak is *if there was already a leak* or someone installs one wrong. She moves in, smells the obvious but does not see signs of where it is coming from

What you forgot to add is that the highlighted red above is you believing that your point you bring up is the best for the industry and is solely your opinion. My point I have been trying to make, and also pointing out that your and anyone else opinion may vary, is that no matter what your idea or thoughts or opinions are, you are leaving your client holding the bag.

To me, that is about the most unprofessional thing you can do. You are there inspecting to "REDUCE" the financial risk in the clients home buying process. Not to blow it off. At best the seller gets a wet spot (it has been leaking already). At the least your client gets is a couple grand in repairs, if you don't at least give it a good go at finding if "it already leaks".


Those are my opinions and you may do or not do as you wish. I prefer to give it the old college try and protect my client the best I can. Damage to the sellers home. The damage is already there but was just never openly visible . drip, drip, drip, drip, drip and the wet spot never appeared or may have slightly and was never noticed.

[Dom D'Agostino]

Damage to the sellers home. The damage is already there but was just never openly visible . drip, drip, drip, drip, drip and the wet spot never appeared or may have slightly and was never noticed.


Or, as an alternative explanation, the damage wasn't there YET, because the current owner doesn't plug the drain on purpose before taking a shower. You have to acknowledge the possibility.

(Just had to drag you back in for a few more posts...;))

Dom.