(rotten, infested) MDF?

[Kristi Silber]

This is some kind of wood composite siding, about 5/8" or 3/4" thick except where it has gotten wet and rotten and infested with what I'm guessing are carpenter ants. There it's flaky, made in pressed layers like. Seems not dense enough for hardboard, but like it's something akin to that, so I thought it might be MDF.

[Rick Cantrell]

This is some kind of wood composite siding, about 5/8" or 3/4" thick except where it has gotten wet and rotten and infested with what I'm guessing are carpenter ants. There it's flaky, made in pressed layers like. Seems not dense enough for hardboard, but like it's something akin to that, so I thought it might be MDF.

There are many kinds of composite wood siding
Don't worry so much about the names

[Billy Stephens]

This is some kind of wood composite siding, about 5/8" or 3/4" thick except where it has gotten wet and rotten and infested with what I'm guessing are carpenter ants. There it's flaky, made in pressed layers like. Seems not dense enough for hardboard, but like it's something akin to that, so I thought it might be MDF.
.
No Infestation , ( Moisture Water De-laminated )

Installation Problem ( no gap at the Bottom. ) Water Wicks up causing deterioration and Rot.

Most Likely Composite Siding Identification by Siding Solutions, Inc. (http://www.sidingsolutions.com/pages/IDMasonite.htm)
.

[Kristi Silber]

Yes infestation. I could see the tunnels. Couldn't get a good photo though. Here's a pic of a sill above the same area. Something else going on besides just wicking. I can't figure out how it would affect this area, but there's a downspout that's clearly a problem on the same corner, up a level.

Doesn't seem dense enough for hardboard. I don't know, no big deal, was just curious.

[Raymond Wand]

Sure looks like Carpenter Ant damage, they love damp wood. They likely have another nest somewhere close, like an old rotting stump.

[Robert Jones]

Another insect to be looking for with that type of rot is moisture ants. Small, light brown almost translucent. They nest in wet wood.

[Kristi Silber]

After googling moisture ants, it seems like they're especially problematic in the Pacific NW (gee, I wonder why!:D). Haven't heard of them around here, but that doesn't mean much. At any rate, I think the tunnels are more carpenter ant size...and they're definitely a problem here. Icky, hate 'em. Had to pull a shed down and rebuild because of the buggers.

[Billy Stephens]

.
.
No Infestation , ( Moisture Water De-laminated )
.

.



.
Yes infestation.
.
I could see the tunnels. .
.
Unless you're Licensed Pest Control ( it's water, moisture,degradation Rot ! );)
.

[Kristi Silber]

Oh, please, Billy, trust me on this. I know carpenter ants tunnels with all too much familiarity. This has or had some kind of infestation very like that. You can see the frass. One doesn't have to be licensed to spot damage that's this obvious.

[Billy Stephens]

.
One doesn't have to be licensed to spot damage that's this obvious.
.
You do in my State.
* The State and them Pest Folks get irate.
.

[Dom D'Agostino]

One doesn't have to be licensed to spot damage that's this obvious..


You do in my State.
.
Actually, you can "spot it" all you want to.... you just can't report it. :)

[Billy Stephens]

.
.
"spot it" .
.
.....
.

[Raymond Wand]

Kristi,

To demonstrate a point; I don't have to be a mechanic to tell ya you have flat tire. ;) ;)

[Billy Stephens]

Kristi,

To demonstrate a point; I don't have to be a mechanic to tell ya you have flat tire. ;) ;)
.
Ya do if you put it in writing as in a Subpoena duces tecum. :rolleyes:
.

[Raymond Wand]

Where can I find these rules you keep promoting that are in place for MN?

[Billy Stephens]

.
]Where can I find these rules you keep promoting that are in place for MN?
.
This Pesticide Applicator Licensing (http://www.mda.state.mn.us/licensing/licensetypes/pesticideapplicator.aspx) would be a Good Place to start.

Might follow that with some Case Law. ( but I'm not an Attorney.) :D
.

[Raymond Wand]

I checked through those sites, but didn't see any regulation prohibiting 'anyone' from giving an opinion on wood rot compounded by carpenter ant activity, let alone Kristi in her role, or even a home inspector who would be remiss not to report that which is suspected, and as with Kristi's picture.

Does your state prohibit you from passing comment on insect activity as a home inspector?

Thanks,

[Billy Stephens]

Does your state prohibit you from passing comment on insect activity as a home inspector?

Thanks,
.
That's What I've been saying.
* nothing gets past you Raymond my man. :rolleyes:
.

[Raymond Wand]

Thank you for the enlightenment.

Now could you provide your state regulation wherein it states only a licensed extrminator is permitted to give opinion?

Thanks, just curious as to how the regulation is worded in TN.

[Billy Stephens]

Thank you for the enlightenment.

Now could you provide your state regulation wherein it states only a licensed extrminator is permitted to give opinion?

Thanks, just curious as to how the regulation is worded in TN.
.
Raymond ,

I have full faith and confidence you can obtain any reference material you may need.

I can take as many pictures of a properties condition and answer any questions or concerns just not as I wish I could sometime such as POS, RLH, NOYL.:p

Good Day,

[Jerry Peck]

Now could you provide your state regulation wherein it states only a licensed extrminator is permitted to give opinion?

In Florida, one must be licensed to practice pest control, and, as Billy was saying, one needs to be have a pest control license to identify those different types of little buggers - to with:
Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0400-0499/0482/Sections/0482.021.html)

That is the Florida statute for Pest Control, and the definition of Pest Control is: (bold and underlining are mine)
- 482.021 Definitions.—For the purposes of this chapter, and unless otherwise required by the context, the term:
- - (22) “Pest controlâ€� includes:
- - - (a) The use of any method or device or the application of any substance to prevent, destroy, repel, mitigate, curb, control, or eradicate any pest in, on, or under a structure, lawn, or ornamental;
- - - (b) The identification of or inspection for infestations or infections in, on, or under a structure, lawn, or ornamental;
- - - (c) The use of any pesticide, economic poison, or mechanical device for preventing, controlling, eradicating, identifying, inspecting for, mitigating, diminishing, or curtailing insects, vermin, rodents, pest birds, bats, or other pests in, on, or under a structure, lawn, or ornamental;
- - - (d) All phases of fumigation, including:
- - - - 1. The treatment of products by vault fumigation; and
- - - - 2. The fumigation of boxcars, trucks, ships, airplanes, docks, warehouses, and common carriers; and
- - - (e) The advertisement of, the solicitation of, or the acceptance of remuneration for any work described in this subsection, but does not include the solicitation of a bid from a licensee to be incorporated in an overall bid by an unlicensed primary contractor to supply services to another.

License required:
- 482.071 Licenses.—
- - (1) The department may issue licenses to qualified businesses to engage in the business of pest control in this state. It is unlawful for any person to operate a pest control business that is not licensed by the department.
- - (2)(a) Before entering business or upon transfer of business ownership, and also annually thereafter, on or before an anniversary date set by the department for each licensed business location, each person, partnership, firm, corporation, or other business entity engaged in pest control must apply to the department for a license, or a renewal thereof, for each of its business locations. Applications must be made on forms prescribed and furnished by the department.
- - yada, yada, yada
- - (5) A license under this section is a prerequisite for the issuance of a local occupational license to engage in pest control, as provided in s. 205.1967.

Yeppers, you cannot get an occupational license for pest control without the state license already in your hand.

And if you think the above does not apply to you (not 'you' as in the singular, but as in the plural 'anyone'), then there is this:
- 482.165 Unlicensed practice of pest control; cease and desist order; injunction; civil suit and penalty.—
- - (1) It is unlawful for a person, partnership, firm, corporation, or other business entity not licensed by the department to practice pest control.

No go back and refresh your mind as to what "pest control" is. :D

"The identification of" :p

And I just covered the high points of it. :eek:

[Raymond Wand]

Thanks, for the info, I figured someone who is knowledgable such as yourself could support your position, and would be willing to share.

Even more so that you implied indirectly that Kristi was out of her league with her opinion in MN.

Sorry didn't mean to rile you. ;)


Thanks anyway.

[Rick Cantrell]

"And if you think the above does not apply to you (not 'you' as in the singular, but as in the plural 'anyone'), "


Thats why a lot of smart folks just say "Ya'll".;)

[Billy Stephens]

Even more so that you implied indirectly that Kristi was out of her league with her opinion in MN.


.
Not out her league at all just have to use caution to word, say, or not comment on some things that are observed .
.
.

[Jerry Peck]

Even more so that you implied indirectly that Kristi was out of her league with her opinion in MN.

As Billy said, no one was saying "that Kristi was out of her league", only that in some states, many states?, one is *not allowed* to identify termites as termites (or other covered pests) unless that person is licensed to do so.

In Florida, the home inspector can state the 'damage was observed' or that the wood is 'rotted' (but not 'decayed'), but the home inspector is not allowed (unless licensed as a pest control operator or has an WDO ID card through a pest control operator) to "identify" termites, old house borers, cubicle rot, or other such "identifications" of WDO ('wood destroying organisms', versus just 'wood destroying insects').

Billy was simply cautioning Kristi on "identifying" without a license in case her state has similar licensing requirements.

I had my CPCO license for a number of years, but as I worked toward high end houses and mostly new construction, I found that, in the last year before I retired, for example, I issued 3-5 WDO reports. That for a cost of about $1,500 per year to maintain my license, which includes the required insurance. I did not renew my license in 2006 as I no longer had any need for it, and, in Florida, pest control is not a license you are allowed to take inactive - you either renew or let it go. Once you let it go for more than one year, you have to take all the tests all over again (within the first year you can just renew late with a penalty), so I do not see myself as being a pest control operator at any time in the future.

[Kristi Silber]

But I'm not a business entity. Nor am I in FL or TN.

I didn't even definitively identify anything. I said there were insects making tunnels, and they look very similar to those created by carpenter ants. In an online forum. So sue me. Or arrest me. Call 911, tell them to send out the Bug Squad. :eek:

I don't even care about the insects, I wanna know what the siding is.:confused:

[Ian Page]

Jerry

Though this may seem semantics but there is also a 1st Amendment issue at stake. The difference being is in specifically identifying the pest - which would require appropriate licensing pursuant to Florida an other State's law and having an opinion as to what the pest is. One could certainly say, "...in my opinion, based on previous exposure and experience, the observed damage/degradation is similar to that which is typically caused by..." without making any assertion about the specific make and model to the pest. There is absolutely nothing in law which prohibits anyone from having an opinion. Don't ya just love the Constitution!

The statement could also be suppported by saying, "...Furthermore, I observed active (inactive - live/dead) pests/insects which were similar to those seen on previous occasions and other circumstances, and identified to me as being...(the pest du jour). However, the reporter must be able to prove their expertise and experience, if challenged. It's all in the wording as to how the observations are reported as to whether the opiner falls afoul of licensing law and whether they are acting as a Pest Control operative at the time.

[Jerry Peck]

But I'm not a business entity. Nor am I in FL or TN.

First, did you miss this part: "for each licensed business location, each person, partnership, firm, corporation, or other business entity"?

We know you are not in FL or TN, which is why Billy said "You do in my State." after you said "One doesn't have to be licensed"

Raymond asked "Does your state prohibit you from passing comment on insect activity as a home inspector?", I provided documentation that, at least in Florida, the answer is yes.

The siding looks like hardboard siding - but I think what was said already too. :)

[Billy Stephens]

Oh, please, Billy, trust me on this. I know carpenter ants tunnels with all too much familiarity. This has or had some kind of infestation very like that. You can see the frass. One doesn't have to be licensed to spot damage that's this obvious.


But I'm not a business entity. Nor am I in FL or TN.

I didn't even definitively identify anything. I said there were insects making tunnels, and they look very similar to those created by carpenter ants. In an online forum. So sue me. Or arrest me. Call 911, tell them to send out the Bug Squad. :eek:

I don't even care about the insects, I wanna know what the siding is.:confused:
.
Drat ! It's that dang ole Quote Feature. :D
* the folks that make their living from Pest Control do Care a Great deal.
** some of them care enough to file complaints.;)
.

[Jerry Peck]

Jerry

Though this may seem semantics but there is also a 1st Amendment issue at stake. The difference being is in specifically identifying the pest - which would require appropriate licensing pursuant to Florida an other State's law and having an opinion as to what the pest is. One could certainly say, "...in my opinion, based on previous exposure and experience, the observed damage/degradation is similar to that which is typically caused by..." without making any assertion about the specific make and model to the pest. There is absolutely nothing in law which prohibits anyone from having an opinion. Don't ya just love the Constitution!

That assertation is not covered by the First Amendments - the First Amendments grants free speech, but that is also covered by patent/copyright laws and other laws, such as ... if you want to say that was caused by termites in Florida, then you ARE REQUIRED to be either a licensed pest control operator or have a WDO ID card. :D

Test it, some have, and they have been fined for unlicensed pest control activities - be my guest go ahead if you want to. ;)

[Ian Page]

If I lived in Florida...I probably would. The issue you seem to be missing, or avoiding is within your own quote of the Florida statute.

482.165 (1) " It is unlawful for any person, partneship, corporation etc. to Practice Pest Control..."

Now look at the definition of 'Pest Control', which identifies what actual activities are covered. It says nothing about anyone having an opinion but does address 'identification'. Having an opinion of something does not make that opinion a specific identiffication. Furthermore, the regulation refers to a person, entity etc. performing activities as if in the actual business of Pest control and certainly could, in no way include a lay person having an opinion. Reading the Statute literally, the way you seem to, would include and prevent a homeowner looking a pile of frasse, observing bore holes in the vicinity and going to HD for a can of termicide.

All State's laws are full of language which is voilative of Constitutionally protected issues and usually remain as written until challlenged. Free speech is just that and having an opinion of something in no way violates copywrite or any other law. I certainly would like to hear from any HI who has been subjected to penalty, in Florida (or any other State with similar regulation), for simply having an opinion re. pest infestation or damage caused thereby.

[Jerry Peck]

If I lived in Florida...I probably would. The issue you seem to be missing, or avoiding is within your own quote of the Florida statute.

482.165 (1) " It is unlawful for any person, partneship, corporation etc. to Practice Pest Control..."

Now look at the definition of 'Pest Control', which identifies what actual activities are covered. It says nothing about anyone having an opinion but does address 'identification'.

I'm not the one missing what it says ... "It says nothing about anyone having an opinion" as long as you keep that "opinion" to yourself.

Once you express your "opinion" you have cross the line to "but does address 'identification' " as you have "identified" what the pest which caused the damage to whomever you are talking to/writing report for/is reading the report.

You may not like what it says, but, nonetheless, THAT IS what it says, and THAT IS what they enforce, and PEOPLE DO get fined for it and are given cease and desist notices.

482.241 Liberal interpretation.—The provisions of this chapter shall be liberally construed in order to effectively carry them out in the interest of the public and its health, welfare, and safety.


And if you think the above does not apply to you (not 'you' as in the singular, but as in the plural 'anyone'), then there is this:
- 482.165 Unlicensed practice of pest control; cease and desist order; injunction; civil suit and penalty.—
- - (1) It is unlawful for a person, partnership, firm, corporation, or other business entity not licensed by the department to practice pest control.

No one says you have to like it, but be prepared for:
- 482.191 Violation and penalty.—
- - (1) It is unlawful to solicit, practice, perform, or advertise in pest control except as provided by this chapter.
- - (2) A person who violates any provision of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
- - (3) Any person who violates any rule of the department relative to pest control is guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

- 775.082 Penalties; applicability of sentencing structures; mandatory minimum sentences for certain reoffenders previously released from prison.—
- - (4) A person who has been convicted of a designated misdemeanor may be sentenced as follows:
- - - (b) For a misdemeanor of the second degree, by a definite term of imprisonment not exceeding 60 days.

- 775.083 Fines.—
- - (1) A person who has been convicted of an offense other than a capital felony may be sentenced to pay a fine in addition to any punishment described in s. 775.082; when specifically authorized by statute, he or she may be sentenced to pay a fine in lieu of any punishment described in s. 775.082. A person who has been convicted of a noncriminal violation may be sentenced to pay a fine. Fines for designated crimes and for noncriminal violations shall not exceed:
- - - (e) $500, when the conviction is of a misdemeanor of the second degree or a noncriminal violation.
- - - (f) Any higher amount equal to double the pecuniary gain derived from the offense by the offender or double the pecuniary loss suffered by the victim.
- - - (g) Any higher amount specifically authorized by statute.

[Kristi Silber]

First, did you miss this part: "for each licensed business location, each person, partnership, firm, corporation, or other business entity"?




No, I didn't miss that part. To me the part "...or other business entity" says that one has to be licensed if one attempts to positively identify an insect while acting in a business capacity, which I clearly was not doing when I brought it up in a forum. The same applies to Billy's comments.

You are commenting from the perspective of writing something up in an HI (or other) report. Can you imagine if every Tom, Dick and Harry were held legally responsible for their layman's unpaid opinion about a neighbor's bug problem? Do you really think someone could be successfully sued for that? I doubt it.



Once you express your "opinion" you have cross the line to "but does address 'identification' " as you have "identified" what the pest which caused the damage to whomever you are talking to/writing report for/is reading the report.


Depends on the language used. To me, saying something looks consistent with what one has seen before is very different from positively identifying anything. "The tunnels are similar to those I've seen which have been later confirmed to result from termite infestation" and recommending follow up with a licensed pest controller is vastly different from saying, "the tunnels are caused by termites." I can certainly see how HIs could get into trouble with careless language about this stuff, but is the only option to avoid any mention of what appears to be insect damage?

[Billy Stephens]

while acting in a business capacity, which I clearly was not doing when I brought it up in a forum.
.
The same applies to Billy's comments.

You are commenting from the perspective of writing something up in an HI (or other) report.

" I can certainly see how HIs could get into trouble with careless language about this stuff, ?
.
You are on a Home Inspectors Forum . ( to learn ? )

How else are we to respond to your Post?

If your here for Quick Answers to only specific parts of your statements then we will know how to answer them .
.

[Jerry Peck]

No, I didn't miss that part. To me the part "...or other business entity" says that one has to be licensed if one attempts to positively identify an insect while acting in a business capacity, which I clearly was not doing when I brought it up in a forum. The same applies to Billy's comments.

I doubt Billy was referring to you mentioning "termite damage" on *this forum*, I suspect Billy was referring to relating that information to anyone *on your report*.

Again, I also suspect that Billy, like me, was letting you know the laws may govern what you say *in your report*, such as the laws Billy mentioned and I posted.


You are commenting from the perspective of writing something up in an HI (or other) report.

Now you got it, Kristi, and I suspect Billy was referring to the same thing.


Depends on the language used. To me, saying something looks consistent with what one has seen before is very different from positively identifying anything. "The tunnels are similar to those I've seen which have been later confirmed to result from termite infestation" ...

That is identifying what you think the tunnels are from - you "identified" the cause of those tunnels, and that is indeed, at least in Florida, within the definition of pest control.

The pest control guys fought long and hard fights for the tight control they have, and the legislature heeded their cries because ... because improper application of pest control chemicals and treatments may not simply be useless, they may be hazardous and even deadly.


and recommending follow up with a licensed pest controller is vastly different from saying, "the tunnels are caused by termites."

Nope, not "vastly" different, only "slightly" different.


I can certainly see how HIs could get into trouble with careless language about this stuff, but is the only option to avoid any mention of what appears to be insect damage?

That is not even an option, the option is to report the damaged wood and were it was. Think of it this way, if you saw a poorly engineered structure, would you, not being a licensed engineer, say that it was poorly engineered, or would you refer to a structural engineer for appropriate repairs? What if you called it poorly engineered and the engineer came in, did all the load calculations, and said that there was nothing wrong with the engineering, that the structure was, in fact, well engineered because (and listed things you had not noticed or whatever other reasons the engineer had for that conclusion)? Could you be sought out for giving poor engineering advice? Yep.

If the engineers in the state had a strong licensing program, they may track you down for performing engineering without a license.

Not sure why people "don't get it" as to the fact that there are licenses for things??? :confused:

[Dom D'Agostino]

If I lived in Florida...I probably would. The issue you seem to be missing, or avoiding is within your own quote of the Florida statute.



And you'd lose.

Pest Control was Licensed here in Florida long before Home Inspectors were Licensed.

The Department of Agriculture has fined HI's for claiming "this was termites, this is wood rot, etc." if they don't have the necessary credentials.

We can state it in a manner that gets the point across, but must use different words.

They are very strict, and $10K fines are a good deterrent.

Dom.

[Kristi Silber]

(EDIT: was answering Billy's post here, hadn't seen the other two below that...) YES, in a forum! Where all sorts of opinions are offered that would never be included in a report...and in a thread asking about what kind of siding was shown, not about what insects may have been there. You're the one, Billy, who started the whole argument about whether the tunnels I was seeing were insect tunnels, and I responded, and it seems the whole discussion got side-tracked from there. Sure, I'm willing to learn about legal issues of HIs, and it's fine by me that the conversation went that way. :) However, you know I'm not an HI myself and that none of this would go into an HI inspection report anyway, so why question my right to offer an opinion about what the insect might be? Is the solution to deny that any insect tunnels even exist, as you did?:confused:

[Rick Cantrell]

Krist's report is intended for her employer, not the general public.
As an employee Kristi may be allowed to produce a report for the company, and not be subject to the PCO regulations.
I think maybe.
What do you think?

[Jerry Peck]

Krist's report is intended for her employer, not the general public.
As an employee Kristi may be allowed to produce a report for the company, and not be subject to the PCO regulations.
I think maybe.
What do you think?

I know you would be wrong if in Florida. :)

UNLESS ... unless the company had a Florida CPCO 'qualifier' for the company's operations in Florida ... AND ... and if Kristi had a Florida issued WDO ID card for her inspections in Florida.

Keep in mind, I am talking about Florida - I do not know how many other states have the same or similar pest control licensing laws as Florida has, or if those laws are enforced with the efforts used in Florida.

[Kristi Silber]

Believe me, I understand the necessity of licenses, and the point you all are making. I don't think we even disagree, it's a matter of different perspectives on the same issue. My point is that this is a discussion forum, not a report. Plus I never positively identified any insect, or even suggested that insects still infest the structure.

If Billy had said in post #3 that I shouldn't report an infestation, this conversation would make a lot more sense to me.

As for my own issues when it comes to reporting, I don't even remember whether I said anything about insects, that was turned in a while ago. More importantly, I am in a very different legal position from you - I'm sure the info I provide is protected by multiple layers of legalese, or the company I work for would be much more concerned about how field reps word things. These reports are specifically for insurance companies, not even policyholders are allowed to see them. If I see something, I describe it - that's what I'm taught to do. The liability issues I'm concerned with are those that are associated with the property.

[Kristi Silber]

Was just looking at part e of Jerry's first Statutes post,

(e) The advertisement of, the solicitation of, or the acceptance of remuneration for any work described in this subsection, but does not include the solicitation of a bid from a licensee to be incorporated in an overall bid by an unlicensed primary contractor to supply services to another.

It sounds to me like all this wording is about doing business as a pest controller. I can understand how that might apply to you, but it wouldn't to me because I can't be construed to be paid for my services as such.

[Billy Stephens]

(EDIT: was answering Billy's post here, hadn't seen the other two below that...) YES, in a forum! Where all sorts of opinions are offered that would never be included in a report...and in a thread asking about what kind of siding was shown, not about what insects may have been there. You're the one, Billy, who started the whole argument about whether the tunnels I was seeing were insect tunnels, and I responded, and it seems the whole discussion got side-tracked from there. Sure, I'm willing to learn about legal issues of HIs, and it's fine by me that the conversation went that way. :) However, you know I'm not an HI myself and that none of this would go into an HI inspection report anyway, so why question my right to offer an opinion about what the insect might be? Is the solution to deny that any insect tunnels even exist, as you did?:confused:
.

As this is a Home Inspectors Forum for Home Inspectors and others that are in the Process of joining the Profession to learn. Misinformation , Misstatements that could adversely affect other individuals should be addressed.

You are free to state any Opinion you wish. Just as I am to point out that it might not be wise used in the context of a Home Inspector .
.* geeze
.

[Jerry Peck]

Was just looking at part e of Jerry's first Statutes post,

(e) The advertisement of, the solicitation of, or the acceptance of remuneration for any work described in this subsection, but does not include the solicitation of a bid from a licensee to be incorporated in an overall bid by an unlicensed primary contractor to supply services to another.

It sounds to me like all this wording is about doing business as a pest controller. I can understand how that might apply to you, but it wouldn't to me because I can't be construed to be paid for my services as such.

"but it wouldn't to me because I can't be construed to be paid for my services as such"

Presuming Florida here ... you are 'working for' (being paid) by the company who is addressing the report, you are 'the inspector', and if the company was reporting on wood destroying organism, then 'the company' would need to be a CPCO or have a CPCO qualifier, and you as 'the inspector' would need to have a WDO ID card prior to doing 'the inspection' and prior to putting your findings in a report 'identifying' the pest.

Kristi, there is no need to continue this because, if you were in Florida, and you were doing that *in Florida* ... *you* would need to be either a CPCO or a WDO ID holder. No ifs, no ands, no buts about it. I cannot understand why you do not get it as your posts indicate you are an intelligent person. Oh well, that *is* the way it is here.

[Raymond Wand]

Yes, and its important to keep in mind what legislation affects what state and/or province vis-a-vis home inspectors before we make one statement fit all situations. ;)

I think Dom hit the nail on the head; "state it in a manner that gets the point across, but must use different words."

[Jerry Peck]

I think Dom hit the nail on the head; "state it in a manner that gets the point across, but must use different words."

Totally agree ... and that is what Billy and I have been saying too ... so of course I totally agree. :)

[Kristi Silber]

I can see the point that it's good to get things right for those who read the thread later. But all it would have taken was right at the beginning someone saying that insects shouldn't be identified in inspection reports.


Presuming Florida here ... you are 'working for' (being paid) by the company who is addressing the report, you are 'the inspector', and if the company was reporting on wood destroying organism, then 'the company' would need to be a CPCO or have a CPCO qualifier, and you as 'the inspector' would need to have a WDO ID card prior to doing 'the inspection' and prior to putting your findings in a report 'identifying' the pest.


Who says they're reporting on a "wood destroying organism"? It's possible they might investigate further, but they aren't going to adjust any premiums based on the fact that I saw some tunnels, even if I did report it. I really don't know. ...Actually, I just looked at my training materials, and I'm supposed to report and describe insect damage for my insurance surveys. I believe the company has reps working down there.




Kristi, there is no need to continue this because, if you were in Florida, and you were doing that *in Florida* ... *you* would need to be either a CPCO or a WDO ID holder. No ifs, no ands, no buts about it. I cannot understand why you do not get it as your posts indicate you are an intelligent person. Oh well, that *is* the way it is here.


And I don't understand what the big deal with me talking about insects is, when there are threads all the time about "what kind of insect did/is this?" Those threads don't clarify that reporting on such stuff isn't allowed.

[Kristi Silber]

Quote:

Depends on the language used. To me, saying something looks consistent with what one has seen before is very different from positively identifying anything. "The tunnels are similar to those I've seen which have been later confirmed to result from termite infestation" ...

That is identifying what you think the tunnels are from - you "identified" the cause of those tunnels, and that is indeed, at least in Florida, within the definition of pest control.





NO - I said that the tunnels are similar to something, I did not ever say they were from termites! It's the dance of the words.

I really feel like my words have been twisted, and it got out of control. I never said I'd report any insects or their damage. I never identified anything. What's the big brouhaha?


I agree that the stuff looks similar to hardboard. Maybe it is.

[Ian Page]

Kristi
As you must have read in my posts, I support your position and defend my own. The statute(s) quoted have been misrepresented entirely. The intent of the legislature is not to curtail freedom(s) of speech (read opinions) but to protect the public from ill-informed, unscrupulous persons or entities from performing work as a Pest Control Operator without being properly licensed. The legislation is not a catch-all so as to prevent anyone/someone from having an opinion as to what they observe. The issues are how the observations are made, how they are reported and most importantly, for what purpose.

If insect/pest infestations or damage caused by such, is observed then for sure the matter is going to be referred to a PCO - why? - because I have already formulated an opinion that (a) they are, in fact insects (b) there is damage and (c) the damage and infestation requires remediation. If no opinion is made (as to what is observed) one may as well refer the observation to an auto mechanic for all the good it may do.

For obvious reasons the pest control industry is well regulated in all States but those regulations still, DO NOT, no matter how the Florida statute is herewith presented, supercede anyone's right to have an opinion or belief, nor can the statute suppress an individual's right to express that opinion unless they are (in the instant matter) engaged in specifically indentifying pests as a PCO and acting in that capacity. In which case a licence would be required.

So if my neighbor across the street, in Florida, calls me over to look at the funny looking wiggly things having Sunday lunch on his siding, of course I am going to advise him to get a can of 'termite kill 'em' rather than weed killer and recommend a professional termite inspection. Why? Because I have an opinion that they may be termites and probably not butterflies.

I seriously doubt the intention of the Florida State legislature was to curtail my neighborly advise, as other posters infer by their repeated reference to Business and Profession Code Statutes. Neither would it be their intention to prevent a HI (or any other occcupation), in the normal course of their business, to not have an opinion over any and all issues they may come across as long as they made appropriate recommendations in their report for professional evaluation and/or remediation.

[Billy Stephens]

I can see the point that it's good to get things right for those who read the thread later. But all it would have taken was right at the beginning someone saying that insects shouldn't be identified in inspection reports.


Who says they're reporting on a "wood destroying organism"? It's possible they might investigate further, but they aren't going to adjust any premiums based on the fact that I saw some tunnels, even if I did report it. I really don't know. ...Actually, I just looked at my training materials, and I'm supposed to report and describe insect damage for my insurance surveys. I believe the company has reps working down there.
.
And I don't understand what the big deal with me talking about insects is, when there are threads all the time about "what kind of insect did/is this?" Those threads don't clarify that reporting on such stuff isn't allowed.
.
.
Your Right Kristi,

With Your Unique Employment Requirements coupled with an unrestrained privilege to state Your opinions.

Perhaps future threads should be limited to the General Chit-Chat or Home Owners
sections as to not be confused as Reference Material by anyone when archived.
.
* for clarity Ants are not Termites Carpenter Ants (http://www.gravespestcontrol.com/carpenterants.html)

[Kristi Silber]

Thanks, Ian, for the well-worded post. That seems to me to be accurate, but then I can't speak for those in other states, nor do I know what SOP for HIs is - how things like this are reported (or not) in a home inspection is outside my realm of knowledge. I agree, though, that unpaid opinions, like those commonly offered in this forum, do not fall under any statute I've yet seen.

MN statute is pretty different from Florida's, and says nothing about pest identification:
"Subdivision 1.Requirement.

(a) A person may not engage in structural pest control applications:
(1) for hire without a structural pest control license; and
(2) as a sole proprietorship, company, partnership, or corporation unless the person is or employs a licensed master in structural pest control operations."

Billy, I don't know if you're being sarcastic or what. I don't have unrestrained privelege to state my opinions. I may have a little more leeway than HIs, but even my opinions are stated in terms of "FR suspects..." and we're supposed to always remain objective.

Do you propose that all pest-related questions be moved to chit-chat or homeowners sections, or just mine?

People viewing posts in this forum, if they have any sense, should not take individual posts out of context or believe every post they read here. I would hope that they know their job, its limitations, and the statutes that apply to them. My signature states that I'm not an HI, and don't do what HIs do. Until now, that hasn't really been an issue.

I hope I haven't annoyed or offended anyone here. I like all those who've replied in this thread.:)

[Billy Stephens]

"

Billy, I don't know if you're being sarcastic or what. I don't have unrestrained privelege to state my opinions. I may have a little more leeway than HIs

Do you propose that all pest-related questions be moved to chit-chat or homeowners sections, or just mine?
.
.
As your threads appear to really be (for your purposes) General Chit Chat. :rolleyes:
.

[Kristi Silber]

It surprises me to hear you say that, Billy, it's very far from the truth. I come here to learn, and if possible, to share my knowledge to help others. I wish I had more knowledge to share.

This thread got off track because of our different perspectives, I think, and resulting misunderstandings. My job is similar in some ways, very different in others. I haven't been trained the way you guys have, I don't have anywhere near the experience or knowledge in such a wide range of things, and I don't have the same resources to refer to.

But I ain't dumb, and have experience in some things.

[kenny martin]

Sorry Kristi.. one of the first things you are taught when you train for your LPCO License here in KY is that detrioration of wood, and the masonite type materials, all have a time when they look like infestation damage.. in your photo it is clear there are no issues with infestation. University of Perdue has the best Entomology studies possibly in the world and Mike Potter wrote the book on it everyone uses as the bible on insects.. we meet with him often in our ongoing continuing ed classes. Your photo clearly shows nothing more than water damage, I blew it up 10 fold and spanned across and there are no insect infestation signs.. and that really is why you should never add anything more to your report than is absolutely clear.. leaving the rest to the Pros.. Here is a great site with more info... University of Kentucky Entomology (http://www.ca.uky.edu/entomology/dept/ipages/mpotter.asp)

[Raymond Wand]

Kenny,

Are you referring to post number four (4) above from Kristi?

That sure looks like more than rot to me, there is frass, and there is a hole which is typical of Carpenter Ants from my pov.

[Kristi Silber]

Well, what can I say? I was there, I've seen a lot of carpenter ant damage, to me it looks very similar to what I've seen before. But I'm not a PCO.

From that U of K site:
"Besides being objectionable by their presence, carpenter ants damage wood by hollowing it out for nesting. They excavate galleries in wood which have a smooth, sandpapered appearance. Wood which has been damaged by carpenter ants contains no mud-like material, as is the case with termites. Shredded fragments of wood, similar in appearance to coarse sawdust, are ejected from the galleries through preexisting cracks or slits made by the ants."

It's the smooth, sandpapered look to the curving tunnels that makes me think ants.

As for my reports, here is how I would state it: "FR [field representative] suspects insect damage in addition to rot." That's it. It's up to the underwriter to decide what to do with my suspicions (probably nothing), but I don't feel I'd be doing my job if I didn't voice my them.

Try to understand that I'm not doing the pro's job. My customer is not the homeowner, seller or buyer, they get none of my findings directly (and, I suspect, little of it gets to them at all), and there's no pro involved unless the homeowner calls one in independently.

So, there's no siding that looks like hardboard but is less dense? Or does hardboard come in a range of densities? I tapped on it, examined some bits that came off, and it just didn't seem like hardboard...but I don't have an extensive knowledge of the different types so I should really take the answers people have given at face value, shouldn't I?:rolleyes: Silly Kristi. Maybe it didn't seem dense because it was so full of insect tunnels!:D ;)

[Michael Avis]

Wow. From the original poster's innocent query of what is this stuff? Responses have morphed into constitutional arguments about 1st amendment rights. Seems a bit far afield.

I enjoyed reading this thread and appreciate the thoughtful replies about freedom of speech and the legalities or illegalities of reporting/not reporting, identifying/not identifying the critters. Not sure which side of the fence I'm standing. I would report this as damage apparently stemming from insect activity or damage that rendered an environment attractive to exploitation by an unidentified species and recommend evaluation by another.

I will respond to Kristi's original question and leave the larger more ethereal plain to others with more time and knowledge in this matter.

I think the stuff in your photo is celotex that has been rendered/fitted by the factory with a "skin" to resist weather. I found this same looking material on a house I inspected in the Philadelphia area recently. It seems like a particularly bad choice of finish in an area that gets any appreciable rain. Maybe it's fine to use in Phoenix. Hope this helps.

[Jerry Peck]

This thread got off track because of our different perspectives, I think, and resulting misunderstandings.

I agree.

[Mike Schulz]

Looks like OSB siding to me. Hate the stuff.

[kenny martin]

Definetily not frass or tunnels from insects.. water damage does the exact same thing as shown in the picture.. 25 yrs. as LPCO technician, 15 yrs Licensed LPCO has taught me the difference, but Mike Potter has helped also!! :D

[Billy Stephens]

infested with what I'm guessing are carpenter ants..


.
No Infestation , ( Moisture Water De-laminated )

Installation Problem ( no gap at the Bottom. ) Water Wicks up causing deterioration and Rot.

Most Likely Composite Siding Identification by Siding Solutions, Inc. (http://www.sidingsolutions.com/pages/IDMasonite.htm)
.


Yes infestation. I could see the tunnels. .


. At any rate, I think the tunnels are more carpenter ant size....


Oh, please, Billy, trust me on this. I know carpenter ants tunnels with all too much familiarity
..
This has or had some kind of infestation very like that. You can see the frass. One doesn't have to be licensed to spot damage that's this obvious.



"The tunnels are similar to those I've seen which have been later confirmed to result from termite infestation" ?


(. You're the one, Billy, who started the whole argument about whether the tunnels I was seeing were insect tunnels, and I responded,?
.
Is the solution to deny that any insect tunnels even exist, as you did?:confused:




If Billy had said in post #3 that I shouldn't report an infestation, this conversation would make a lot more sense to me.
.




I cannot understand why you do not get it as your posts indicate you are an intelligent person.


NO - I said that the tunnels are similar to something, I did not ever say they were from termites! It's the dance of the words.


.
.
* for clarity Ants are not Termites Carpenter Ants (http://www.gravespestcontrol.com/carpenterants.html)



I've seen a lot of carpenter ant damage,

I should really take the answers people have given at face value, shouldn't I?:rolleyes:
.
Silly Kristi. Maybe it didn't seem dense because it was so full of insect tunnels!:D ;)

.
Well I tried.
.
.

[Kristi Silber]

So Kenny, what are you looking for when you're determining whether something is insect damaged, carpenter ants in particular?

(I know termites and ants are different! Not even related, different orders altogether.)

[Rick Bunzel]

I know I am jumping in late here but no one has mentioned the possibility of Dampwood Termites. They will only infest wet, rotted wood. They will make a nest that has structure to it slightly different from carpenter ant galleries.

http://rc-images.s3.amazonaws.com/a3f38f24-441e-40bf-929a-2308604676c1/media/271861/original/271861.jpg?gen=1

I rarely see carpenter ants in rotted wood especially composite siding,

//Rick

[kenny martin]

Carpenter ants have easily identifiable tunnels, none of which are in your pic, they are uniform and smooth, not looking like dry rot or moisture damage that has dried.. they kick out their dead etc.. and the body parts can easily be seen beneath the area especially in a location as you have there.. that's not all but you can easily google and get an education.

[Bill Kriegh]

I hope I haven't annoyed or offended anyone here. I like all those who've replied in this thread.:)

Kristi, you're a funny gal.

If you stood back and looked at what goes on here, you'd find that if many of the folks here were in one room instead of on a forum there'd likely be fisticuffs during discussions of some of this stuff - which would be followed by everybody having a beer (or coffee or whatever) once the issue was settled.

Point is, this forum does, in a somewhat crazy manor, manage to convey a great deal of information that will be ripped apart completely till the actual facts of the matter come out - and that's why it's here.

As lightly as you tread it's unlikely you will be "upsetting " anyone. The only thing I really see as a problem is that your stick for "kneecapping" isn't big enough.

[Kristi Silber]

Bill, thanks very much. Great post, I appreciate it.


Point is, this forum does, in a somewhat crazy manor, manage to convey a great deal of information that will be ripped apart completely till the actual facts of the matter come out - and that's why it's here.


Yes, exactly, and that's why I'm here! I love the debate that goes on. My experience in other forums has been such that I am wary of treading on toes without meaning to. Some people hate it when you speak your mind.

On that note...


Carpenter ants have ... that's not all but you can easily google and get an education.

I have googled for info in the past, that's why I was asking what you were looking for and didn't see.

A couple years ago I had a shed that I wanted to adapt as a chicken coop. Once I started, I realized that it was badly infested with ants. I did my research, looked at them with a magnifying glass, I'm pretty sure they were carpenter ants. They were in the studs, plywood, and styrofoam insulation. I had to tear the whole thing down and start from scratch.

I am not without experience of rotten wood, though of a different nature. I'm an ecologist, and I've spent many thousands of hours in the forest, seen a lot of rotten wood, including a lot of insect infested rotten wood. I'm interested in it, take photos of it, try to find out what's making a particular pattern.

In my experience, water and rot do not normally make curvy, smooth-sided, evenly sized channels looping across the grain that end in a round hole.

Now I post a photo, say I can see tunnels that look very similar to those I've seen carpenter ants make, but also say I couldn't get a good photo of them. And they are obviously not recent tunnels. They're exposed, so the ants (if that's what they are) aren't hanging out there anymore, plus they've been dormant here for months. Insect parts in the frass could have degraded, the wood further rotted and made the tunnels not so clean looking.

So when someone says there are no tunnels based on admittedly poor photos, not having actually been there, can you blame me for defending my position?

One thing I was wrong about is to say it was currently infested. I don't know that.

[Billy Stephens]

.

problem is that your stick for "kneecapping" isn't big enough.
.
Watch it Bill ! Argaaaa! :D Redirect Notice (http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_NMnplX83AqQ/TMnLhEfGpbI/AAAAAAAAARY/GeRZ1LcLEdE/s1600/peg-leg.jpg&imgrefurl=http://hillbillyvampire.blogspot.com/2010_10_01_archive.html&h=295&w=449&sz=20&tbnid=bJFIOzPjV99BlM:&tbnh=89&tbnw=135&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dpeg%2Bleg%2Bpirate%2Bphoto%26tbm%3Dis ch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=peg+leg+pirate+photo&docid=MCO2LmvWuSBV-M&sa=X&ei=oE4fT_XhNM6ctweG18wp&ved=0CDAQ9QEwAA&dur=5572)
* I'm down to One Cap.

[Jim Scott]

This is a classic example of deteriorated pressed wood siding. Does not matter what brand it is, however there is at least one just going into litigation. (there are many) IT IS DETERIORATED PRESSED WOOD SIDING. I could somewhat see holes in the picture posted, but no frass and no nesting materials, or fecal matter were present. As a state pest inspector, I could not call insect infestation in this product (by photos provided) due to the lack of evidence. I could however call dry rot and deterioration in the siding product, which most likely involves the entire structure, including framing.

At this point I would direct the listing and buyer agents to contractors and multiple web sites to do there own research and walk away with a pay check. That is my job!

I have a hard time understanding how this got so out of control. It was a simple question, which needed a simple answer.

I actually enjoy this web site, but do get tired of bored people with too much time on their hands. Come on people, lets share information and not go down the dark side. PLEASE!!!!

Jim

[Billy Stephens]

. It was a simple question, which needed a simple answer.

.
Most Likely Composite Siding Identification by Siding Solutions, Inc. (http://www.sidingsolutions.com/pages/IDMasonite.htm)
.taken from Post #3
.

[Garry Sorrells]

Somewhat reluctant to stick my toes into these waters, but what the hae.

Is it the taken position (referencing Florida Lic Law) that a description of damage using a comparison of appearance to that of damage caused by an insect as only a graphic description is prohibited by law ? The point being, that the description is an adjative and not a a noun. Not a definitive identification of an insect but a limited descriptive comparison if pref fessed as "similar to but not identified as" or something to that effect ?

[Garry Sorrells]

Billy,
Per your "...Subpoena duces tecum..."
bring with you under penalty of punishment
All Kristi would have to do is cut it the area out and take it with her for presentation???

[Billy Stephens]

Billy,
Per your "...Subpoena duces tecum..."
bring with you under penalty of punishment
All Kristi would have to do is cut it the area out and take it with her for presentation???
.
If that is what your Attorney advised.
. post # 21 is informative.
.

[Raymond Wand]

Kristi,

Was the decayed wood the bottom plate of the framing or the siding?

I see what appears to be frass.

[Raymond Wand]

Further; curious as to the term 'fine'. A fine can be issued, but doesn't mean there is guilt.

How many fines are issued and how many of these fines are actually prosecuted? Is it a summary conviction offence were one has the option to pay the fine which acknowledges guilt or does the the person have the right to his day in court?

Does anyone know?

[Billy Stephens]

I see what appears to be frass.
.
Good Morning Raymond,

I think that has been definitively answered in post #'s 59, 63 & 67.

* buy the way I love Canadians.:)
.

[Caoimhín P. Connell]

Uhhh.. what is "MDF"?

Cheers!

CaoimhÃ*n P. Connell
Forensic Industrial Hygienist
Forensic Applications Consulting Technologies, Inc. - Home (http://www.forensic-applications.com)

[Mike Schulz]

CPC I hope you where not setting us up with a come back but here you go: Medium Density Fibreboard (http://www.design-technology.org/mdf.htm)

[Jerry Peck]

Uhhh.. what is "MDF"?


Not what is shown. :)

MDF stands for Medium Density Fiberboard.

[Jerry Peck]

Is it the taken position (referencing Florida Lic Law) that a description of damage using a comparison of appearance to that of damage caused by an insect as only a graphic description is prohibited by law ? The point being, that the description is an adjative and not a a noun. Not a definitive identification of an insect but a limited descriptive comparison if pref fessed as "similar to but not identified as" or something to that effect ?

To make that reference you would need to be, you would be in effect be, identifying the organism which made the damage, so, yes, that would be prohibited by the Pest Control licensing folks for home inspector who are not either licensed as a CPCO or a WDO ID card holder.

The line is a fine line, think of it as the fine solid yellow line down the center of a 2-lane highway ... stay on your side of the solid yellow line and your risk of getting hit head-on are rather low, but ... cross that solid yellow line and your risk of getting smacked go up quite dramatically. You might be lucky for quite some time, but the more time you spend crossing the line, the more often you cross the line, is when you should start thinking of making sure your will and testament is current and updated, and your life insurance policy is paid in full ... :D

There really *is no need* for a home inspector to report the damage as 'looking like termite damage' when you that needs to be done is report the damage and that it needs to be repaired.

I'm not quite sure why there is all the fuss about following state laws - if your state has home inspector licensing laws, would YOU want non-licensed people to go around doing home inspections without a license?

The shoe needs to be able to fit both feet, don't try to find a way around what you don't like and you think is not necessary if you don't want others to try to find a war around what they don't like and think is not necessary.

Does your state have home inspector licensing? If so, do you grumble and complain about unlicensed home inspectors? Everyone needs to think about it and apply it to what they do and what they complain about.

If it's fit for the goose, it's fit for the gander ... or however that goes. :)

[Kristi Silber]

There really *is no need* for a home inspector to report the damage as 'looking like termite damage' when you that needs to be done is report the damage and that it needs to be repaired.




I don't know, to me it seems crazy that you can't even say there might be termites (or whatever) and that the client should get an expert in. If anything, you're sending work to the PCOs. Otherwise the client might repair the damage and leave the source of the problem untreated, and that doesn't seem fair to them.

Raymond (and everyone) there was decayed siding and I thought I saw evidence of tunnels there but can't be sure now. Just a few feet away was where the photo in post 4 was taken - that's of a wooden window sill. SO I may have been wrong about the siding itself showing signs of infestation...hey, I might have been wrong about the wood, too. But it bothers me that others say I was definitely wrong and that there were no signs of tunnels, based on a bad couple of photos.



This is a classic example of deteriorated pressed wood siding. Does not matter what brand it is, however there is at least one just going into litigation. (there are many) IT IS DETERIORATED PRESSED WOOD SIDING. I could somewhat see holes in the picture posted, but no frass and no nesting materials, or fecal matter were present. As a state pest inspector, I could not call insect infestation in this product (by photos provided) due to the lack of evidence. I could however call dry rot and deterioration in the siding product, which most likely involves the entire structure, including framing.

....I have a hard time understanding how this got so out of control. It was a simple question, which needed a simple answer.

(Jim Scott)

The photo in post 1 is deteriorated pressed wood composite siding. Yes, I know. I've known that all along. It doesn't surprise me that you can't see insect damage there because it's a photo of siding. That's what my question was about. I wasn't trying to take a photo of insect damage, and I wasn't asking a question about it.

And yes, Billy, I looked at your link the first time. It shows hardboard. And it's probably true that it's hardboard in this case, too. I was looking for options. Thank you Michael, for that! I couldn't really find much about Celotex siding. And thank you, Rick for the termite suggestion. That's a very cool photo, although disturbing, too. Those galleries are so fine, so delicate-looking.

[Jerry Peck]

If anything, you're sending work to the PCOs. Otherwise the client might repair the damage and leave the source of the problem untreated, and that doesn't seem fair to them.

The CPCO is going to inspect anyway, if any inspections are done, a termite is the first one which would be 'required' by a lender or almost anyone else. ' 'Termite' inspections are basically a given, home inspections are not.

I've been on inspections where the termite company which had treated the house previously did the inspection for the sale and declared there was 'no evidence of', yet when I did my inspection I found live termites in the fascia.

The agent called the termite company, the termite company insisted there was no way there were live termites and that I did not know what I was doing ... so I probed the fascia again and collected some live termites in my hand, walked over to the agent and asked if they would hold this (whatever was in my hand, they didn't know what was there) while I get my computer out, they said 'sure', so I dropped a handful of live termites in the agent's hand ... :D :eek: :D ... you should have heard the shrieking and yelling ... but I got my point across.

Oh, by the way, the termite company was back out to that house within no more than 10 minutes ... 3-4 inspectors and the company owner too ... :cool:

[Billy Stephens]

.
.
Not out her league at all just have to use caution to word, say, or not comment on some things that are observed .
.
.




And yes, Billy, I looked at your link the first time..
.
Well alright y Then.

How about them Giants ?
* New England looks good as well.
** my Brother's coming over for The Game.:D
.

[Garry Sorrells]

Post #21 [quote=Jerry Peck;187812]
- 482.021 
- - (22) “Pest control” includes:
- - - (b) The identification of or inspection for infestations or infections in, on, or under a structure, lawn, or ornamental;

Post #25 "...'damage was observed' or that the wood is 'rotted' (but not 'decayed'), but the home inspector is not allowed (unless licensed as a pest control operator or has an WDO ID card through a pest control operator) to "identify" termites,..."
Jerry,
I do tend to run the thin yellow line.
Not sure how something can be rotted but not decayed, but I get the idea.
So would you say that "damage was found and appears to be insect related in addition to other causes" ? The particular point is not identifying a specific insect. You can have damage from multiple effects in addition to insect damage at the same location.

If it is specifically water damage, you day get a carpenter. If it is water and insect you would say get a carpenter and pest control contractor.

By the same interpenetration a HI in FL can not say that the presence of rats or mice was found. Am I right?

Do you (or anyone else) know of any cases where a HI or a carpenter has been sited for a violation of the Florida Statute for Pest Control (or TN statute) ? Where there was an identification made of an infestation and a recommendation made for a licensed inspection was called for?

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Do you (or anyone else) know of any cases where a HI or a carpenter has been sited for a violation of the Florida Statute for Pest Control (or TN statute) ? Where there was an identification made of an infestation and a recommendation made for a licensed inspection was called for?

Yep, you betcha. Minimum first-timers, first level of enforcement actions, strictly the last year, Florida reports linked below.

If you don't have a WDO you don't make an identification of the past or presence of a wood destroying organism - or you'll end up with a cease and desist letter (warning) request a hearing or not and/or a receive a fine at a minimum. If you're lucky you'll negotiate a small one, and learn your lesson, if not you'll be prosecuted further.

Some recent examples of warnings, with and without fines and negotiated lower fines can be found at the following links below (florida). Cases that have prosecuted further can be found in court records and in some cases references to suspensions of other licenses, involuntary dissolutions of entities, etc.

You can further research yourself, including Contractors licenses, HI licenses; entity and individuals; and the websites if still existing for the 'offenders'; web searches for published cases (apellate, etc.) in FL, and do your own regarding other areas, if you are so curious. Billy S., Jerry P, and Dom A. have also previously provided more than enough information for you to engage in your own quest to satisfy your curiousity. Statutes provide for the penalties involved when one engages in the unlicesened practice of pest control in Florida.

Your "question" quoted above when same has already been indicated from individuals in both states you inquire and yet another has volunteered similar in an adjacent seems to challenge the verasity of what has already been stated by others. Challenge no further, regards to FL, and review the last several quarters of Compliance Actions (enforcement activity) by (within) the branch of the Department itself (clickable links below):

last quarter 2011:
Bottom page 2, "Allied Building Inspection Services Inc., Miami; "Unlicensed Pest Control Operations - Advertising.

http://www.flaes.org/pdf/Memo_869.pdf

Prior quarters:

All-in-one Inspections of South Miami $500 settlement agreement and cease and desist:

http://www.flaes.org/pdf/Memo_866.pdf


National Building Inspections::fine & cease & desist
J Hampton Inc d/b/a/ J Hampton Home Inspections, Miami Beach
Unlicensed Pest Control Operations - reported WDO organisms, warning letter:

http://www.flaes.org/pdf/Memo_860.pdf

Next prior quarter report (1st qtr 2011):

http://www.flaes.org/pdf/Memo_859.pdf


There are other entities and individuals listed as well.

You can find more at: Division of AES, Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control, Published Memorandums - FDACS (http://www.flaes.org/aes-ent/memorandums.html)

That should be enough to get you started in your quest to satisfy your curiousity. You can look up licenses and entites via the appropriate departments, etc. via myflorida.com. Those are just the first level enforcement actions. No need to challenge what was shared/summarized by others, and not really germaine to the discussion, is it; since both you and the OP are far north and in differing jurisdictions, and neither of you are engaged in Home Inspection.

IN.net is an inspector to inspector board. We discuss technical topics as they pertain to the practice of home inspection, and for that matter the reporting aspect for same; not carpentry, and not field data gathering services for third party vendors to underwriting departments of insurers. Quite a few HIs are crossdisciplined/licensed where required in radon testing, WDO, pest control, engineering, electrician, plumbing, septic, contracting, roofing, pool service, etc. Many jurisdictions regulate these activities, amongst others.

P.S. the word is "cite" or "cited" or receive a "citation" to quote, or to reference, not "site" as in location.

[Don Hester]

Wow this thread got going... did it not.

Kristi, FYI, I am a licensed pest inspector also, Washigton State has a very progressive SPI (structural pest inspector ) program.


Moisture ants are a collective name that includes a number of ant species in two major genera. Another common name is cornfield ants.

here is a link on moisture ants-
http://cru.cahe.wsu.edu/cepublications/eb1382/eb1382.pdf

[Kristi Silber]

Sheesh, 84 posts, I just saw that. How strange.

Don, thanks for the interesting article. I don't think we have moisture ants around here. The main structural pests are carpenter ants. Apparently there are termites in southern MN, but they aren't common anywhere in the state.

[Garry Sorrells]

H.G.,
I give Jerry and others great validation on their comments, positions and views. My orientation was to get a little past opinion and personal interpretation of the law in FL. and its application.

What I was looking for was exactly where the person went wrong with their description of what was observed. From my research the disciplinary board does not publish their minutes or the details of a complaint, only the actions taken. No transcript that I can find to review. Most of the time it is not the words used but how they are used. The structure of the sentence and the context of the words.

Thank you on your correction on "site" and "cite" . My typing is at times is faster than my brain and I at times my proof reading is hasty..

As to questions or comments, for research or other purpose, from any person, who ever they are or what ever their background, that are presented in the IN.NET forum, is valid. Short of spam or some members disposition to use the forum for advertising agenda.

Many times a person from one local will either have something in their reference library or will know the quickest way to retrieve that information. Due to familiarity of that state or jurisdiction they understand the specific departments and their web sites.

When I wrote :(post #82)
"... Do you (or anyone else) know of any cases where a HI or a carpenter has been sited for a violation of the Florida Statute for Pest Control (or TN statute) ? Where there was an identification made of an infestation and a recommendation made for a licensed inspection was called for?"

It was not directed at you in particular and in no way was there a demand that there must be a reply. Nor is anyone even required to make any response. H.G., you have no obligation to provide anything to anyone. If you find that a thread or a post that asks for anything that you have an issue with, it is your prerogative not to respond. It is your right not to participate. Non participation at times can be quite valuable. The IN.NET forum,from my observation, is not myopic in the area of home inspections. Which makes it interesting to many.

[Garry Sorrells]

Now, I would like to interject into the description of WDO the following for opinion/comment.
"
You are able to evaluate the wood damage from a “structural” point of view – (it’s damaged beyond repair, its structurally unsound, it’s damaged but still serviceable, etc.)

Yes, you could say that the damage is insect related and to consult a licensed pest control company. You can also indicate that there are water/moisture issues that has damaged the wood, you just can’t “identify” it as wood-decaying fungi.


As long as you evaluate the “percentage/amount” of damage from a structural/engineer/function point of view or indicating that it is some kind of insect damage, you should be fine. You just have to avoid indicating that it IS carpenter ant, or termite damage, or wood-decaying fungi.
"

[Ian Page]

Garry that's largely my position. The references made by HG, though interesting, are lacking in information. I am still not convinced that a Home Inspector, in Florida (and States with similar regulation), in the sole performance of his duties is not permitted to have an opinion as to the cause of damage. After all, the report IS his opinion, with many facts included some of which are used to support the opinion. The vast majority of the cases provided were against persons or entities described as PCOs operating without a licence or in violation of some aspect of their license.

I would still be happy to hear from any Home Inspector who sufferred some penalty - even including a 'warning notice' for having an opinion in his report stating, as you say, the observed damage was 'insect related similar to that caused by...' and should be refered to a licensed PCO for assessment and remediation. Just as you might observe rat or mouse feces in an attic and conclude its from a rodent and not a skunk.

[Garry Sorrells]

Ian,
I am waiting for Jerry to weigh in on my last post.
FL law has created some restrictions and by understanding it, and the reasoning behind it, there may be a time that tailoring language used in a description may relieve potential litigation.

[Dom D'Agostino]

Garry that's largely my position. The references made by HG, though interesting, are lacking in information. I am still not convinced that a Home Inspector, in Florida (and States with similar regulation), in the sole performance of his duties is not permitted to have an opinion as to the cause of damage. After all, the report IS his opinion, with many facts included some of which are used to support the opinion. The vast majority of the cases provided were against persons or entities described as PCOs operating without a licence or in violation of some aspect of their license.


Because if you express your professional "opinion" you are identifying a WDO. The agency doesn't want an HI to tell someone "...in my opinion this looks like termite damage..." because you aren't qualifed to make that determination. This is largely due to the fact that Florida has a huge termite problem, and unknowing home owners aren't aware that special skills and training are required to report WDO.

This has been hashed over and over for years here in Florida, and the point is well understood.

Call out the damage, say what you want (you keep using "opinion") about it; but don't imply, or expressly state, that it's WDO as defined by the State.



I would still be happy to hear from any Home Inspector who sufferred some penalty - even including a 'warning notice' for having an opinion in his report stating, as you say, the observed damage was 'insect related similar to that caused by...' and should be refered to a licensed PCO for assessment and remediation. Just as you might observe rat or mouse feces in an attic and conclude its from a rodent and not a skunk..

I doubt anyone will fess up to that on a publicly accessible BB. I know of 2 such instances involving other inspectors here in Florida. You're welcome to come down here and try it yourself, but seriously, it isn't really a big deal to word your report while maintaining full compliance.

Dom.

[Jerry Peck]

Ian,
I am waiting for Jerry to weigh in on my last post.
FL law has created some restrictions and by understanding it, and the reasoning behind it, there may be a time that tailoring language used in a description may relieve potential litigation.


Garry,

I didn't respond because I have responded to the same above by others who are also trying to get around the licensing laws in Florida for Pest Control Operators and inspectors.

There are just so many ways one can say "only licensed Certified Pest Control Operators and WDO ID card holder inspectors are allowed to identify termites and other wood destroying organisms".

No matter how one tries to skirt the law, and it is a shame to see so many here willing to try to skirt the law, the only real way is to NOT address, describe, identify, or imply termite/insect/decay/etc, and instead just report "damaged wood" and then add structural concern if the wood is a structural component (interior door trim and base is not a structural concern, but are frequently in need of replacement due to damage),

[Kristi Silber]

I don't see anyone trying to skirt the law here - most don't even live in Florida, and the laws vary around the country. The pest control lobby would be pretty strong down there, I suspect. But even if it did hold true everywhere, I think the point is that it is not against the letter or intent of the law to say, "There seems to be insect damage of some sort, get a professional in." You are not identifying anything in such a statement, nor are you acting anything like a PCO would, or taking business from them, advising a treatment...you are simply acting in good faith toward your client. To me that's what it comes down to: I would hate to have to hold my tongue about a problem as serious as insect infestation can be. HIs are not the ones to judge how extensive the problem is, and there might be damage far beyond what you can report. Florida law would have to be really messed up to prohibit recommending professional consult based on suspected insect activity. It would be in nobody's interest.

[Dom D'Agostino]

Florida law would have to be really messed up to prohibit recommending professional consult based on suspected insect activity. It would be in nobody's interest.

Quite the opposite, the law encourages someone to recommend a CPCO to inspect a house for WDO. Those HI that don't carry WDO ID cards routinely tell buyers to get the house inspected, and it works fine.
Down here, its common knowledge by agents, title companies, and HI's etc. that a WDO needs to done by a qualified individual.

Dom.

[Kristi Silber]

How does the law itself encourage that? SOP down there may do so, but the law only says don't act as a PCO without a licence (oversimplification, I know).

I understand that hiring a PCO is commonplace, but we're talking about a particular situation here - or at least I am: an HI sees what he or she thinks is insect damage, and a PCO inspection is not planned, or has already taken place. If the situation were that an inspection is being done by an HI and will be followed by one by a PCO, the point is moot.

Jerry recalled a time when he reported live termites after the pest guys had been there. In such a case in FL should an HI just call it damage and leave it at that?

[Jerry Peck]

Jerry recalled a time when he reported live termites after the pest guys had been there. In such a case in FL should an HI just call it damage and leave it at that?

As a CPCO, I could, and did, address the live termites.

Had I not been a CPCO or a WDO ID card holder, I would have called the termite company (or the termite I used, home inspectors in South Florida typically work with one termite company if the home inspector does not carry a WDO ID card) and tell them that there are something live in the wood where their guys said all was well.

To my knowledge, there is no law which would keep a home inspector from saying they saw 'something live' - of course, though, the home inspector would look a bit silly saying that to their client, but the CPCO they were calling would immediately understand what the home inspector was referring to and would immediately send someone out to find and identify what the 'something live' was. :)

Before I was a CPCO I was a WDO ID card holder I would not ... not ... have identified those termites as being "termites", not for anyone. You basically have to be a WDO ID card holder for 3 years before you can take the test to become a CPCO, i.e., you are required to have 3 years on the job experience before taking your test.

Thus, with me going behind the WDO ID card holder and finding live termites would be no different than me going behind another home inspector and finding things they missed ... or vice versa ... no inspector has a perfect record and no inspector has never missed anything - including termite inspectors, home inspectors, and code inspectors.

[Kristi Silber]

As a CPCO, I could, and did, address the live termites.

Had I not been a CPCO or a WDO ID card holder, I would have called the termite company (or the termite I used, home inspectors in South Florida typically work with one termite company if the home inspector does not carry a WDO ID card) and tell them that there are something live in the wood where their guys said all was well.

To my knowledge, there is no law which would keep a home inspector from saying they saw 'something live' - of course, though, the home inspector would look a bit silly saying that to their client, but the CPCO they were calling would immediately understand what the home inspector was referring to and would immediately send someone out to find and identify what the 'something live' was. :)

Before I was a CPCO I was a WDO ID card holder I would not ... not ... have identified those termites as being "termites", not for anyone. You basically have to be a WDO ID card holder for 3 years before you can take the test to become a CPCO, i.e., you are required to have 3 years on the job experience before taking your test.

Thus, with me going behind the WDO ID card holder and finding live termites would be no different than me going behind another home inspector and finding things they missed ... or vice versa ... no inspector has a perfect record and no inspector has never missed anything - including termite inspectors, home inspectors, and code inspectors.

Well, that's all dandy, but the question remains, what to say to the client in that case? "I just thought I'd call in the bug men again to have a look in case they missed something"? "Something live" does sound ridiculous. You can't even talk to the PCOs without doing it in code?

I guess we just have to accept that Florida has completely inane restrictions on recognition of pest damage. I wonder if California is the same - their pest control lobby must be pretty strong, too.

[Ian Page]

Kristi
We are permitted to have opinions in CA. 1st Amendment holds strong. I can also recognize the difference between insect infestation and mouse poop. All homes sold must have a 'termite clearance' by a State Licensed CPO so whether I see/find termites or other pests during an inspection is somewhat moot. Then again, no State license is required for Home Inspectors.

[Garry Sorrells]

To all,
Post # 87 was a little deceptive in that it was not complete. I wanted to get a few opinions of the statement that I posted. There were two reasons for posting # 87.
-First, I wanted to get people's interpretation to see if there would be any contention on the wording.
-Secondly, I wanted to see if any might recognize how it was worded. Recognize in that the FL HI forum members through their experience, would agree that it was simular to how they were told (at some point in time) was the correct way to to discuss WDO as a non lic person.

I would not say that those that have posted have a desire to "...trying to get around the licensing laws in Florida for Pest Control Operators and inspectors...." (JP post # 91). Sorry if that was your perception. To often we all look at a law and intemperate it from our point of view rather than from an authoritative view of those that control the application of that law. Which is why I hoped to find the actual disciplinary meeting transcript as to then know what exactly was determined to be at fault.

No intention to tweak anyone's noise or sensibilities. Not saying anyone was wrong in part of any opinion that have been given. Not fighting over verbiage or semantics of past posts. Is about understanding and then extrapolating to other states and situations. An discussion and debate is an educational process.

Now, unless like former Pres. Clinton, we question the definition of " is " , we may come to an understanding or consensus, of some sort, on the topic. I as well as others had a hard time accepting that absolutely no reference could be made to WDOs in any way under FL law. Just seemed a little to harsh. Something " appears to be" or "similar to" rather than "is a ___ " definitively, makes a difference.

My post # 87 was a reply to an email requesting clarification of what a HI who is not a Lic WDO would be permitted to say under FL law. I would take the author as an authoritative source.
Here is the complete reply:

From: "Parker, Joe" <Joseph.Parker@freshfromflorida.com>
To: <sorrells@37.com>
Subject: RE: Home Inspection and WDO notification.
Date: Fri 02/03/12 09:49 AM


Mr. Sorrells –


You are able to evaluate the wood damage from a “structural” point of view – (it’s damaged beyond repair, its structurally unsound, it’s damaged but still serviceable, etc.)


Yes, you could say that the damage is insect related and to consult a licensed pest control company. You can also indicate that there are water/moisture issues that has damaged the wood, you just can’t “identify” it as wood-decaying fungi.



As long as you evaluate the “percentage/amount” of damage from a structural/engineer/function point of view or indicating that it is some kind of insect damage, you should be fine. You just have to avoid indicating that it IS carpenter ant, or termite damage, or wood-decaying fungi.



Hope that helps
Joe Parker
FDACS, Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control
c/o UF/IFAS, Mid-Florida Research and Education Center
2725 Binion Road, Rm A109
Apopka, FL 32703-8504
(850) 617-7997 main - (850) 528-5353 cell
Field office (407) 884-2034 Ext 105 - (407) 814-6186 fax
**NEW email address - Joseph.Parker@freshfromflorida.com


Please note: Florida has a very broad public records law. Most written communications to or from state officials regarding state business are public records available to the public and media upon request. Your e-mail communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure.

[Jim Ellison]

That certainly looks like GP Hardboard Siding. I made the mistake of covering a 3,000 sq ft home with it - never do that again...

Status of Class Action Suits involving Composite Sidings (http://www.sidingsolutions.com/pages/classtat.htm)

[Billy Stephens]

.

How about them Giants ?
** my Brother's coming over for The Game.:D
.
.
BTW I'm " The Good looking One."
.

[Jerry Peck]

To all,
Post # 87 was a little deceptive in that it was not complete. I wanted to get a few opinions of the statement that I posted. There were two reasons for posting # 87.
-First, I wanted to get people's interpretation to see if there would be any contention on the wording.
-Secondly, I wanted to see if any might recognize how it was worded. Recognize in that the FL HI forum members through their experience, would agree that it was simular to how they were told (at some point in time) was the correct way to to discuss WDO as a non lic person.

I would not say that those that have posted have a desire to "...trying to get around the licensing laws in Florida for Pest Control Operators and inspectors...." (JP post # 91). Sorry if that was your perception. To often we all look at a law and intemperate it from our point of view rather than from an authoritative view of those that control the application of that law. Which is why I hoped to find the actual disciplinary meeting transcript as to then know what exactly was determined to be at fault.

No intention to tweak anyone's noise or sensibilities. Not saying anyone was wrong in part of any opinion that have been given. Not fighting over verbiage or semantics of past posts. Is about understanding and then extrapolating to other states and situations. An discussion and debate is an educational process.

Now, unless like former Pres. Clinton, we question the definition of " is " , we may come to an understanding or consensus, of some sort, on the topic. I as well as others had a hard time accepting that absolutely no reference could be made to WDOs in any way under FL law. Just seemed a little to harsh. Something " appears to be" or "similar to" rather than "is a ___ " definitively, makes a difference.

My post # 87 was a reply to an email requesting clarification of what a HI who is not a Lic WDO would be permitted to say under FL law. I would take the author as an authoritative source.
Here is the complete reply:

From: "Parker, Joe" <Joseph.Parker@freshfromflorida.com>
To: <sorrells@37.com>
Subject: RE: Home Inspection and WDO notification.
Date: Fri 02/03/12 09:49 AM


Mr. Sorrells –


You are able to evaluate the wood damage from a “structural� point of view – (it’s damaged beyond repair, its structurally unsound, it’s damaged but still serviceable, etc.)


Yes, you could say that the damage is insect related and to consult a licensed pest control company. You can also indicate that there are water/moisture issues that has damaged the wood, you just can’t “identify� it as wood-decaying fungi.



As long as you evaluate the “percentage/amount� of damage from a structural/engineer/function point of view or indicating that it is some kind of insect damage, you should be fine. You just have to avoid indicating that it IS carpenter ant, or termite damage, or wood-decaying fungi.



Hope that helps
Joe Parker
FDACS, Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control
c/o UF/IFAS, Mid-Florida Research and Education Center
2725 Binion Road, Rm A109
Apopka, FL 32703-8504
(850) 617-7997 main - (850) 528-5353 cell
Field office (407) 884-2034 Ext 105 - (407) 814-6186 fax
**NEW email address - Joseph.Parker@freshfromflorida.com


Please note: Florida has a very broad public records law. Most written communications to or from state officials regarding state business are public records available to the public and media upon request. Your e-mail communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure.

Garry,

That is a departure from what Joe had told us in the past as continuing education seminars.

He, and others from the Department, have been VERY EXPLICIT in what home inspectors were and were not allowed to say, and that even saying "that the damage is insect related" was a no-no as you were identifying the fact "that the damage is insect related" and a non-pest control person is not permitted to make that identification.

I wonder how that would hold up when one was charged with performing pest control without a license and one stood up before the hearing board and said "Joe Parker said I could say that was insect damage." (that is what Joe said, and that is what the Department keeps saying a non-pest control person is not allowed to identify)?

Kinda makes one wonder how far one could go with that 'Get out of Jail Free' card ...

[Garry Sorrells]

Jerry,
Thank you for hanging through the thread, I appreciate it. Know you and others were frustrated in representing your positions.

I do not know exactly what title or position Joe Parker holds. I sent him the email as a result of him being the contact person for questions as listed on the web site. I did make a brief attempt to pull up a directory with names, titles and responsibilities but failed.

I did not think you were just making it up as you went along as how to interpret the law.
"...That is a departure from what Joe had told us in the past as continuing education seminars. ..."
Was this in a Home Inspection seminar, Lic WDO inspection seminar or a combination of HI and WDO seminar?
Just wondering if he was preaching to the choir (Lic WDO Insp) and tweaking the noses of those who are not in the choir.

The law as it had been explained to you seems it would not allow an Entomologist with a PHD to identify a termite if that person was not Lic in FL. Even Joe Parker's email would infer that a PHD entomologist would not be able to use the word " IS " in the description if he were not Licensed.

I have hung in on this thread as it peaked my curiosity and intrigued me with how the law may be applied. The reason was as a learning experience for future understanding of how some might write and implement a law that may affect myself or others.

I would think that the "Get out of jail free card" would be valid since Mr Parker's email response is part of public record according to the final tag line of the email "...Please note: Florida has a very broad public records law ...." . The intent of my inquiry was to attempt clarification from an authority in the commission with no alternative purpose or design. Frankly I was extremely pleased but also surprised that I actually received a response at all.

If I had been able to obtain the actual Disciplinary Board's transcript of the actions that they have taken and how they argued their interpenetration and application of the law. I may have dropped it. But, it would have been interesting and informative.

Now the question is, what was verbally stated to you or what was written, establish a president ? I would think that Joe Parker's email being a reasonable and rational interpenetration should prevail and makes a good standard to follow. Though there may be, hopefully not, frenzied zealots at work in directing the interpretations of the law.

Consumer protection is at the root of the law. The Very Explicit interpretation by the department seems to rigid a stance and in a real court of law I think there would be room to argue a description that was not a definitive identification but a descriptive reasoning for suggesting that further interpenetration and action be taken would prevail.

I realize that few would push the question since accepting the explicit interpretation offered would be the easy path. Sometimes I just can not accept the party line being offered as the definitive answer. Especially when I feel that it is flawed.

A true case for " further evaluation is needed ".

[Jerry Peck]

Was this in a Home Inspection seminar, Lic WDO inspection seminar or a combination of HI and WDO seminar?

All of the above.

Those of us with CPCO or WDO ID cards were required to have continuing education, and Joe spoke as some of the seminars.

The issue is sooooo big in Florida that we asked, specifically asked, the questions in the posts above - and the answer were always that only pest control operators were allowed to perform pest control, which included "identifying" any of the listed pests. This was at pest control continuing education meetings.

Likewise, those of us who were also home inspectors had Joe, and others, from the Bureau of Entomology come to our inspector meetings and continuing education seminars. We asked the exact same questions there, and were given the exact same answers there.

Granted, I retired in 2006, so maybe the state has softened their stance some ... I doubt it, but it could have happened.


Now the question is, what was verbally stated to you or what was written, establish a president?

All of what I have stated in posts above.


I would think that Joe Parker's email being a reasonable and rational interpenetration should prevail and makes a good standard to follow.

I would not want to 'take that statement to the bank' as the state may end up taking five grand or so out of my bank account for practicing pest control without a license.

NOT a risk I would want to assume.


Consumer protection is at the root of the law. The Very Explicit interpretation by the department seems to rigid a stance and in a real court of law I think there would be room to argue a description that was not a definitive identification but a descriptive reasoning for suggesting that further interpenetration and action be taken would prevail.

Other have thought the same way and lost. :)


A true case for " further evaluation is needed ".

Nope. A case for "call a pest control company for identification of the cause of the damage", yes - but no 'further evaluation is needed' because the home inspector reported the damaged wood and said it needed to be replaced ... and it does. The pest control company just needs to kill the rest of the buggers who are hiding in the other parts of the wood. :)

[Kristi Silber]

The issue is sooooo big in Florida that we asked, specifically asked, the questions in the posts above - and the answer were always that only pest control operators were allowed to perform pest control, which included "identifying" any of the listed pests.


The key word there being "identifying." It's different saying something is an insect vs. something is a termite. Without identifying the insect, measures for treatment can't be taken.

...But back to siding. A very nice gentleman who doesn't participate in the forum because of the rudeness of some of the members sent me a PM suggesting the siding may be an LP product which is a form of OSB. And that fits what I noticed about this stuff: that it seems layered, it had some fairly large bits of wood in it, less dense than hardboard.

[Jerry Peck]

The key word there being "identifying." It's different saying something is an insect vs. something is a termite. Without identifying the insect, measures for treatment can't be taken.

Not correct.

By saying that the damage was caused by or related to an insect means that you have just identified the damage as having been caused by an insect within the scope of pest control. You do not have to identify the type of inspect, nor the species of insect to have identified that the damage was insect caused or related.


...But back to siding. A very nice gentleman who doesn't participate in the forum because of the rudeness of some of the members ...

If that very nice gentleman would participate in the forum, the percentage of posts which offend him would drip because his posts would increase the percentage of non-offensive posts.

To each their own, but to me, that is not an acceptable excuse to not participate. Apparently he is reading the posts, so what he is saying is the he will take his share the learning but the he will not make his knowledge available to share with the rest of us. He will probably take this as being 'offensive' ... while this is not meant to be 'offensive' to him, sometimes the truth hurts, yeah.

A 'very nice gentleman' would share his knowledge too, or, if the forum was that offensive to him, he would simply not read it, which he is apparently doing because he followed the posts enough to PM you.

Sorry about that, Mr. Very Nice Gentleman, but your participation would help all of us.

[Don Hester]

Garry,

Your bugs must be so special that they need protection ;)

I can not see how it is good for th home owner that if a HI can identify a big/fungi and report it then call for verification and remediation from a PCO. Now you have two sets of eyes evaluating the situation.

Out here in the wild wild west most of us HI's are SPI's (structural pest inspectors).

I have some PCO that rather have me identify and then they can come in and do the work. Then there is no issue of them identifying then applying the pesticide.

This is actually best for the public, well that is if the HI/SPI is doing his/her job.

[Garry Sorrells]

Jerry,

What you state:
"....By saying that the damage was caused by or related to an insect means that you have just identified the damage as having been caused by an insect within the scope of pest control. You do not have to identify the type of inspect, nor the species of insect to have identified that the damage was insect caused or related. ...".

Goes against what Joe Parker had in his email. :
"...As long as you evaluate the “percentage/amount� of damage from a structural/engineer/function point of view or indicating that it is some kind of insect damage, you should be fine. You just have to avoid indicating that it IS carpenter ant, or termite damage, or wood-decaying fungi. ..."

I know -I know : that is what you were told in 2006. And being a card holder it sounded good to you, why rock the boat when it was to your benefit. Maybe it has changed.
This could be a " quest for truth " for a FL Hi to go on if they were up to yanking a few chains and pushing some peoples buttons.

Under the extreme approach to the Law, if a HI were to say in his report to have the damaged wood inspected by a Lic. CPCO or a holder of a WDO ID card the HI would have then expressed a determination/opinion that an insect of some undetermined kind may be involved. And thus be in violation of the law as you have been told.

That is possibly why the position as stated by Joe Parker is different from what had been expressed in you meetings from 2006. Even bureaucrats will change their mantra from time to time. Maybe as a result of a legal proceeding that did not hold for the extreme interpenetration by the commission staff.

Like I have stated I would like to see the transcripts of the disciplinary board.


If the same was true for plumbing a HI could not describe the water found as a plumbing leak. The client would have to ask for divine guidance as to were the water came from if in fact the HI could even say that the liquid on the floor was water.

Don,
I am not in FL nor do not think FL bugs are so special. Just think that stupidity is rampant in government. And we seem to be still trying to determine the definition of " is " is.

If we were in Iran they might have cut a few hands off as a result of the strict interpenetration of stealing work from someone else.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

:) Always love a debate.:D

[Kristi Silber]

Garry, just a semantics question - by "interpenetration" do you actually mean "interpretation"?

Wiktionary defines interpenetration as

"The act of penetrating between or within other substances; mutual penetration (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/penetration)."And Wikipedia:

"Not to be confused with interpretation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretation).

Interpenetration may refer to:

Interpenetration (Christianity) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpenetration_(Christianity)), a term in Christian theology (bka Perichoresis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perichoresis) or Circuminsession (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circuminsession)) that refers to the mutual inter-penetration and indwelling within the threefold nature of the Trinity, God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Interpenetration (Buddhism) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpenetration_(Buddhism)), a concept of Buddhist philosophy proposed in the Avatamsaka Sutra
Interpenetration, in computer 3D modelling collision detection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collision_detection), where two objects collide and become stuck"

[Billy Stephens]

For Your Reading Enjoyment.
.
PCOC | PEST CONTROL OPERATORS OF CALIFORNIA | MEMBERS (http://www.pcoc.org/consumer/ahb/forhire.cfm)
.
* results of a 45 second search. ( if you spent 1/20 the amount of time LOOKING instead of nay saying wonder what could be found?)
.
Added see # 6 Format Document (http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/32/02325.htm&Title=32&DocType=ARS)
.
In California looks like you go before a Criminal Judge ( not a Civil Board ) CA Codes (bpc:145-149) (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=bpc&group=00001-01000&file=145-149)

[Billy Stephens]

For Your Reading Enjoyment.
.
PCOC | PEST CONTROL OPERATORS OF CALIFORNIA | MEMBERS (http://www.pcoc.org/consumer/ahb/forhire.cfm)
.
* results of a 45 second search. ( if you spent 1/20 the amount of time LOOKING instead of nay saying wonder what could be found?)
.
Added see # 6 Format Document (http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/32/02325.htm&Title=32&DocType=ARS)
.
In California looks like you go before a Criminal Judge ( not a Civil Board ) CA Codes (bpc:145-149) (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=bpc&group=00001-01000&file=145-149)
.
Taken from 1st Link ( just to be Clear.)
.
DO I NEED TO BE LICENSED? Under the Department of Consumer Affairs (Business & Professions Code), and under Cal-EPA Department of Pesticide Regulation Codes (formerly CDFA), ANY individual or company who practices pest control FOR HIRE must be licensed. Licenses are required to identify the presence or absence of pests, and for making recommendations for solving the identified pest problems. One must also be licensed if they chose to abate a pest problem. (With or without Pesticides). Lastly anyone handling pesticides must also be licensed.

[Ian Page]

The important words here are " ...for Hire..." and in the context of the code refers to for hire as a PCO, not misconstrued so as to mean anyone hired for some other purpose.

[Jerry Peck]

The important words here are " ...for Hire..." and in the context of the code refers to for hire as a PCO, not misconstrued so as to me anyone hired for some other purpose.

(sigh)

[Billy Stephens]

.
Taken from 1st Link ( just to be Clear.)
.
DO I NEED TO BE LICENSED? Under the Department of Consumer Affairs (Business & Professions Code), and under Cal-EPA Department of Pesticide Regulation Codes (formerly CDFA), ANY individual or company who practices pest control FOR HIRE must be licensed. Licenses are required to identify the presence or absence of pests, and for making recommendations for solving the identified pest problems. One must also be licensed if they chose to abate a pest problem. (With or without Pesticides). Lastly anyone handling pesticides must also be licensed.


The important words here are " ...for Hire..." and in the context of the code refers to for hire as a PCO, not misconstrued so as to me anyone hired for some other purpose.
.
Ian,

The Important thing is to Read It.
If You do Any of Those Things You Need a License.

1. For Hire Yes Need a License.
2. Identify Presence or Absence of Pest. Yes Need a License ." Licenses Are Required to Identify Presence or Absence of Pest. "
3. Make Recommendations For Solving the Identified Pest Problems. Yes Need a License.
4. One Must Also be Licensed if they choose to Abate a Pest Problem ( with or without Pesticides. )
5.Lastly As In SEE THE ABOVE (Do I Need To Be Licensed?) Lastly anyone handling pesticides must ALSO BE Licensed.

Not and or but Any of the things Listed.

Not I handle Pesticides ( but not for Hire.)

Not I can Tell you How to Solve Your Pest Problem but not for hire nor do I apply.

Do Any of The Things Listed . Yes You Need a License.
.
.

[Garry Sorrells]

Billy,
Most of the posts and discussion/debate has revolved around Florida Law and how it has been interpreted, right or wrong and now by who.

Now you are sounding like H.G.W.
* results of a 45 second search. ( if you spent 1/20 the amount of time LOOKING instead of nay saying wonder what could be found?)

Since the discussion was basically revolving around FL and not TN or CA . Each state has its own laws and regs. I have been focused on FL since Jerry is there with experience and in the discussion. And yes I did FL research and followed up with direct contact to a state authority for a determination (for what it is worth) of acceptable wording. Rather than argue personal opinion against Jerry and others understood state opinion on the topic.

Do you have any recognized document that makes a specific determination as to the acceptable wording, for a HI or any one else, that is acceptable under CA law ?
The difference being, not your interpretation, Ian's or general publilc opinion, but a court ruling (or something similar) that supports your position.

I will pass the Torch Of Enlightenment onto you and Ian to debate the issue as it pertains to CA. I do suggest finding a recognized authority to support your positions. Rather than just banter back and forth..... just an idea.:)

Please turn your attention to CA, I will follow with interest. Then , how about TN ?:D

As for me, I am just waiting for CA to slide off into the ocean and make the property that I purchased with the " Smothers Brothers " to become the new beach front. Which will make the entire question mute.;)

[Billy Stephens]

Billy,
Most of the posts and discussion/debate has revolved around Florida Law and how it has been interpreted, right or wrong and now by who.

Now you are sounding like H.G.W.
* results of a 45 second search. ( if you spent 1/20 the amount of time LOOKING instead of nay saying wonder what could be found?)

Since the discussion was basically revolving around FL and not TN or CA . Each state has its own laws and regs. I have been focused on FL since Jerry is there with experience and in the discussion. And yes I did FL research and followed up with direct contact to a state authority for a determination (for what it is worth) of acceptable wording. Rather than argue personal opinion against Jerry and others understood state opinion on the topic.

Do you have any recognized document that makes a specific determination as to the acceptable wording, for a HI or any one else, that is acceptable under CA law ?
The difference being, not your interpretation, Ian's or general publilc opinion, but a court ruling (or something similar) that supports your position.

I will pass the Torch Of Enlightenment onto you and Ian to debate the issue as it pertains to CA. I do suggest finding a recognized authority to support your positions. Rather than just banter back and forth..... just an idea.:)

Please turn your attention to CA, I will follow with interest. Then , how about TN ?:D

As for me, I am just waiting for CA to slide off into the ocean and make the property that I purchased with the " Smothers Brothers " to become the new beach front. Which will make the entire question mute.;)
.
Whatever,
Go Back to the start of the thread Read whats Posted.
* or you could just jump in at the end with a Lotta bla, bla.
.

.

[Darrel Hood]

If the HI identifies damaged wood as water damage, has he performed pest control by identifying the absence of pests? http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_inspection/images/icons/icon12.gif

[Garry Sorrells]

Billy,

Do you have any recognized document that makes a specific determination as to the acceptable wording, for a HI or any one else, that is acceptable under CA law ?

[Billy Stephens]

Billy,

Do you have any recognized document that makes a specific determination as to the acceptable wording, for a HI or any one else, that is acceptable under CA law ?
.

* recognized by who? You.:rolleyes:
** contact your Attorney
.

[Jerry McCarthy]

FWIW California PCO have pretty much the same rules as Florida so out here home inspectors don't use descriptive words like "dry rot", "carpenter ants", etc. We just say there was visual evidence of moisture or insect damage. Recommend retaing a state licensed PCO for further evaluation and treatment and move on.

Status of Class Action Suits involving Composite Sidings (http://www.sidingsolutions.com/pages/classtat.htm)

[Kristi Silber]

Ah, but at least you can say there was insect damage!

Billy, what's up with the chip on your shoulder? How come you're being so sarcastic and nasty these days? Written law is one thing, how it's interpreted and enforced is another; Garry was asking about the latter, and I think it's a legitimate question.

[Billy Stephens]

.
Written law is one thing, how it's interpreted and enforced is another;
.
Garry was asking about the latter,

and I think it's a legitimate question.
.
You answer those Legitimate Concerns.
.

[Jerry Peck]

If the HI identifies damaged wood as water damage, has he performed pest control by identifying the absence of pests?

In many states ... probably ... but not in Florida because Florida pest control laws do not just address 'wood destroying insects', Florida pest control laws specifically address 'wood destroying organisms' and wood rot is an 'organism' and is thus addressed by pest control inspections, and that is why pest control inspectors are WDO inspectors ... not WDI inspectors.

[Ian Page]

Billy
You scored ony 1 out of 5 with the correct answer. I'll let you figure out which one after you read the CA B.P.C. sections in their entirety, in refererence to pest Control.

Hint...it's not 2, 3, 4 or 5.

[Billy Stephens]

.
Taken from 1st Link ( just to be Clear.)
.
DO I NEED TO BE LICENSED? Under the Department of Consumer Affairs (Business & Professions Code), and under Cal-EPA Department of Pesticide Regulation Codes (formerly CDFA), ANY individual or company who practices pest control FOR HIRE must be licensed. Licenses are required to identify the presence or absence of pests, and for making recommendations for solving the identified pest problems. One must also be licensed if they chose to abate a pest problem. (With or without Pesticides). Lastly anyone handling pesticides must also be licensed.


.
Ian,

The Important thing is to Read It.
If You do Any of Those Things You Need a License.

1. For Hire Yes Need a License.
2. Identify Presence or Absence of Pest. Yes Need a License ." Licenses Are Required to Identify Presence or Absence of Pest. "
3. Make Recommendations For Solving the Identified Pest Problems. Yes Need a License.
4. One Must Also be Licensed if they choose to Abate a Pest Problem ( with or without Pesticides. )
5.Lastly As In SEE THE ABOVE (Do I Need To Be Licensed?) Lastly anyone handling pesticides must ALSO BE Licensed.

Not and or but Any of the things Listed.

Not I handle Pesticides ( but not for Hire.)

Not I can Tell you How to Solve Your Pest Problem but not for hire nor do I apply.

Do Any of The Things Listed . Yes You Need a License.
.
.


Billy
You scored ony 1 out of 5 with the correct answer. I'll let you figure out which one after you read the CA B.P.C. sections in their entirety, in refererence to pest Control.

Hint...it's not 2, 3, 4 or 5.
.
Wow Ian,

I can handle Pesticides without a License ?

I can do All Those Other Things Except for the 1st. which is For Hire ?:confused:
.
.

[Ian Page]

Yes Billy, you can....otherwise Home Improvement stores would have empty shelves. The regulation prohibits certain listed pesticides and further prohibits their use by persons FOR HIRE using them. In theory, the listed and controlled pesticides are not available to the general public unless you have a license, which must be shown upon order or purchase.

And basically you can (do all those other things) as long as you are not doing it while representing yourself as a PCO, FOR HIRE, or receiving compensation for performing duties as a PCO. As I said earlier...the operative words are 'FOR HIRE'.

Nothing in the regulations prevents any person from identifying insects, buying consumer available pesticides from any retail outlet and using them around their own property. No License required.

I ain't smart, I just read and digest regulations, as written.

[Raymond Wand]

Looks like a little information in the wrong hands can be a dangerous thing! :)

[Billy Stephens]

Yes Billy, you can....'.

Nothing in the regulations prevents any person from identifying insects, buying consumer available pesticides from any retail outlet and using them around their own property. No License required.

I ain't smart, I just read and digest regulations, as written.
.
Wow Again Ian,

So in California You don't need a Drivers License to Roller Skate, Drive a GO Cart,
or even Cross The Street Against The Light.


.

[Garry Sorrells]

FWIW California PCO have pretty much the same rules as Florida so out here home inspectors don't use descriptive words like "dry rot", "carpenter ants", etc. We just say there was visual evidence of moisture or insect damage. Recommend retaing a state licensed PCO for further evaluation and treatment and move on.

Status of Class Action Suits involving Composite Sidings (http://www.sidingsolutions.com/pages/classtat.htm)

So CA seem to be in alinement (for the most part) with what Joe Parker stated as acceptable. Thanks for the confirmation. Is there any written guide lines from the state (CA) as to wording?


Billy, Do you have any State (TN) produced suggested/mandated wording for anyone to report insect damage observed to a home owner ?

[Billy Stephens]

Billy, Do you have any State (TN) produced suggested/mandated wording for anyone to report insect damage observed to a home owner ?
.
Gary,

The State ( at least Here ) does not Issue Compliance Guidance on the Law.

Tennessee Law is Suppose to be non ambiguous, with Plain Language as to the Intent of The Legislative.
* you boys in CA are it early this AM.
.

[Scott Patterson]

So CA seem to be in alinement (for the most part) with what Joe Parker stated as acceptable. Thanks for the confirmation. Is there any written guide lines from the state (CA) as to wording?


Billy, Do you have any State (TN) produced suggested/mandated wording for anyone to report insect damage observed to a home owner ?

I have been at this gig full-time since 1995 and when I find termites I tell my client that I found termites or signs of termites and that they need to have a PC contractor inspect and treat as needed. With over 5000 residential inspections under my belt, I have never had a problem reporting them like this. It is what it is and they are what the are!

If somebody want to take me to court for telling my client I found termites then so be it, I would relish the time. I just can't see a judge telling me I can not tell my clients that I found termites.

In TN the home inspector license law does not tell use what we can't report on, but it does tell us what we need to report on. FYI, insects are one of those items we do not need to report on under our state law.

[Ian Page]

Garry
I am not aware of any specific wording or written guidelines. Like Scott, if I see evidence of termite infestation, frasse, deteriorated wood etc. (or whaever) I report what I see and recommend evaluation and remediation by a reputable and licensed PCO. Though the point is usually moot as the property requires a clear termite report by the lender in any event. On occasion I might find areas that the PCO may have missed, so between the two reports, the homeowner and buyer have a good idea of the extent of the damage/infestation and appropriate measures can be taken. That's not to say that anything I include in my report will take the place of a PCO/WDO report. Generally, however, it's more of confirming the PCO's findings. It's not uncommon here to have the whole house 'tented' for termites - I don't know about other parts of the country, so any bore holes/frasse etc I find (which the PCO didn't), doesn't make a whole heck of a difference, as long as no repair work is indicated.

Frequently my inspection and the PCO inspection is conducted at the same time and I might bring something to his attention and vice versa.

Billy, your immature reponse(s) are rarely observed in adult behaviour and do not do justice to your intellect, knowledge or experience.

[Dom D'Agostino]

If somebody want to take me to court for telling my client I found termites then so be it, I would relish the time. I just can't see a judge telling me I can not tell my clients that I found termites.

.

I hear what you're saying, but down here, there won't be any court, won't be any judge, and isn't the client bringing a lawsuit. It'll be a quick administrative process followed by a large fine.

Your mileage may vary.

Dom.

[Billy Stephens]

Billy, your immature reponse(s) are rarely observed in adult behaviour and do not do justice to your intellect, knowledge or experience.
.
Noted,

I've grown weary After 3 weeks and 130 Posts ( please read reply #3 .)

It took two LPCO's ( twenty plus years each ) references toThe University of Kentucky The Bug Guy to say No Carpenter Ants are or ever have been present.

Accused of not answering a Simple Question ( please read reply #3 ) and "morphing " this into ( along with other things) a Constitutional Rights Issue .

Then The Law says ( but it don't really mean what it says ) .

To run a Business each must make his/her own choices as to what they think are correct.

Do you really want to continue this ( well beaten ) discussion ?

* oh did I mention ( please read reply #3 ) ?
.
.

[Kristi Silber]

.
No Infestation , ( Moisture Water De-laminated )

Installation Problem ( no gap at the Bottom. ) Water Wicks up causing deterioration and Rot.

Most Likely Composite Siding Identification by Siding Solutions, Inc. (http://www.sidingsolutions.com/pages/IDMasonite.htm)
.

OK, here's post #3. What about it? On the basis of 1 bad photo you tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, there were no insects present. That's how this whole thread got into the subject of pest reporting, when it was originally about siding. You said I was wrong about that, too. I'd said I didn't think it was hardboard, and you show me a bunch of hardboard. I appreciate the effort, but I was looking for alternatives.

You don't have to participate in these 130 post discussions if the topic wearies you so. I don't mind these esoteric tangents, as long as the debate remains civil and respectful. They're intellectual exercises, promoting new thoughts, perspectives and ideas. Sometimes they get bogged down. Eventually they peter out (hmm, what a strange expression!).

If you can't be nice, don't play.

[Billy Stephens]

This is some kind of wood composite siding, about 5/8" or 3/4" thick except where it has gotten wet and rotten and infested with what I'm guessing are carpenter ants.

There it's flaky, made in pressed layers like. Seems not dense enough for hardboard, but like it's something akin to that, so I thought it might be MDF.


.

No Infestation , ( Moisture Water De-laminated )

Installation Problem ( no gap at the Bottom. ) Water Wicks up causing deterioration and Rot.

Most Likely Composite Siding Identification by Siding Solutions, Inc. (http://www.sidingsolutions.com/pages/IDMasonite.htm)
.


OK, here's post #3. What about it?

On the basis of 1 bad photo you tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, there were no insects present.

That's how this whole thread got into the subject of pest reporting, when it was originally about siding.

You said I was wrong about that, too. I'd said I didn't think it was hardboard, and you show me a bunch of hardboard.

I appreciate the effort, but I was looking for alternatives.

You don't have to participate in these 130 post discussions if the topic wearies you so. I don't mind these esoteric tangents, as long as the debate remains civil and respectful. They're intellectual exercises, promoting new thoughts, perspectives and ideas. Sometimes they get bogged down. Eventually they peter out (hmm, what a strange expression!).

If you can't be nice, don't play.

Kristi ?

Yes on One Photo the lack of infestation and the Most Likely Siding Type Link was provided .

Your Original Post was about about infested siding .

Most Likely Followed by a Link is Showing You my opinion of The Type of Siding.


What alternatives were you looking for if the correct answers were provided?

[Kristi Silber]

What was I looking for?

Since I'd already determined to my satisfaction that there was evidence of insect infestation, I wasn't looking for someone to tell me there wasn't. That was never the question, or I would have posted a photo that showed what I thought might be signs of infestation.

Since I'd said I didn't think it was hardboard because it wasn't dense enough, I wasn't looking for that suggestion.

You're free to have your opinion. Why act as if your opinion is the final word?

I was there. Give me a little credit.

This is enough for me, don't want to talk about it anymore, not worth it.

[Billy Stephens]

What was I looking for?

Since I'd already determined to my satisfaction that there was evidence of insect infestation, I wasn't looking for someone to tell me there wasn't.

That was never the question, or I would have posted a photo that showed what I thought might be signs of infestation.

Since I'd said I didn't think it was hardboard because it wasn't dense enough, I wasn't looking for that suggestion.

You're free to have your opinion. Why act as if your opinion is the final word?

I was there. Give me a little credit.

This is enough for me, don't want to talk about it anymore, not worth it.


But there were none?

But even The Title of Your Thread is ( rotten,infested MFD?)

Gee if I look at your original Post it say's it might be MFD followed by a ? mark
+which it was not.

Gosh I answered as best as I could and have been Attacked .BTW They were The Correct answers.

But You asked and You really didn't know what you were looking at.

Well if you really want to and feel we've explored all the " Intellectual Exercises,

Promoting New Thoughts, Prospective s an Ideals ".
.

[Ian Page]

And the final word goes to.............:rolleyes:

[Garry Sorrells]

I will give it a try...
Despite an opinion that this is a "well beaten" discussion.
It took quite a while to get to a point where there was a definitive (if you can accept it) answer on what is allowed in FL.
CA opinion seems to follow the email from Joe Parker (FL).
TN opinion seems to vary.
Billy has a difficult time playing nice with others and does not like extra credit work.
Don and Jerry do not seem to think that Joe Parker's email has any worth.
Kristi was slammed for no good reason.
HG has been really quiet...

If you get tired of a thread no one makes you follow it, so stop.
If you do not want to provide research, don't gripe about what you do provide.
It is hard to support a legal opinion with no real basis for that opinion.

Threads morph and the sun will rise tomorrow.

[Mike Schulz]

and don't forget "Mike is right" :D

[Kristi Silber]

Looks like OSB siding to me. Hate the stuff.

You suggested that way back, didn't you. I didn't ignore it, I tried looking for examples but didn't get very far...then I got caught up in the whole silly bug debate and never got back to the OSB thing.

I can't say for sure that's what it was, but it seems like the best fit based on its composition, response to water, thickness and density. I've been examining hardboard with moisture damage lately, and it's just not the same. Too bad I didn't get good photos of this stuff.

[Billy Stephens]

...then I got caught up in the whole silly bug
.
........
.