Thread: What is going on in North Carolina??

As Sergeant Joe Friday said, only the facts!

Does anyone know what is going on in NC as far as their licensing law. A person from NC that knows first hand would be great.

From what I have heard it looks like NC is going off the deep end and is limiting what an inspector can report on.

Similar Threads:

• Hello everyone, new member in South Carolina
• Hello from Raleigh North Carolina
• Asheville North Carolina
• Inspector Needed: North Olmsted, OH
• City woman burned by fake chimney repairs; Contractor to be ... - The North Bay Nugge

To make a very long story long, here is part of the current rule:

(d) Written reports required by this rule for pre-purchase home inspections of three or more systems shall include a
separate section labeled “Summary” that includes any system or component that:

(1) does not function as intended or adversely affects the habitability of the dwelling; or

(2) appears to warrant further investigation by a specialist or requires subsequent observation.

This summary shall not contain recommendations for routine upkeep of a system or component to keep it in proper
functioning condition or recommendations to upgrade or enhance the function, efficiency, or safety of the home. This
summary shall contain the following statements:

“This summary is not the entire report. The complete report may include
additional information of concern to the client. It is recommended that the client read the complete report.”

----------------------------------------------------

This is now all being changed somewhat and interpretations vary of the current and the proposed version. The proposed version is actually out for more work now due to major complaints involving reporting safety issues.

Most inspectors thought that safety upgrade items could not be in the summary but in fact they could always be, we just could not recommend they actually be upgraded. ie. GFCI is broken and needs to be replaced, goes in summary since it is not an upgrade. No GFCI exists. (can't say to install one since it was not required when house was built) Just simply have to state the facts, not one present.

Now the next version is to be determined but the goal of NC is to only have the facts in the summary. The summary is not really a summary since it is not a rewrite of the report so they should call it something else really.

One of the issues with allowing safety item recommendations in the summary is that the source of the information is usually code based. Codes may vary across the state and inspectors knowledge of these codes varies also.

Furthermore, we are not allowed to do code inspections unless state certified to do so. No inspector should want to do code inspections since a small issue missed pertaining to a dimension involving the foundation or something could result in a bonafide repair quote of $50,000 to truly correct the actual minor issue to meet the code. Want to be that inspector?

I am involved somewhat with helping on this and hope my proposal is considered. I have been looking at the big picture around this industry since I started studying it 4 years ago and think I see the light finally. The industry needs updating and consistency is necessary if we expect the agents to ever learn the details about houses in most of our reports.

can a HI Report have 3 Identified / Listed Sections

- Report
- Report Summary
- Summary (as required by NC Legislation).

Does the Law suggest that you can not have multiple summarizations encompassing different elements of the building / structure?

highlighting with bold is mine)

Originally Posted by Bruce King

To make a very long story long, here is part of the current rule:

(d) Written reports required by this rule for pre-purchase home inspections of three or more systems shall include a separate section labeled “Summary” that includes any system or component that:

(1) does not function as intended or adversely affects the habitability of the dwelling; or

(2) appears to warrant further investigation by a specialist or requires subsequent observation.

This summary shall not contain recommendations for routine upkeep of a system or component to keep it in proper functioning condition or recommendations to upgrade or enhance the function, efficiency, or safety of the home. This summary shall contain the following statements:

Is it just me, or does the part in bold in (1) contradict the part in bold in the last paragraph?

Seems to me an easy way around that "shall not contain" "recommendations" is to do what I have always said before - do not "recommend" installing GFCI protection, instead, simply state "GFCI protection is missing at ... ".

Now you can put it in the summary, and, let the others worry about whether or not is should be, may be, is not allowed to be, or can be, 'in the summary. You, the HI, should not really care "when" GFCI protection was required where and a what point in time, just simply state that there is no GFCI protection installed (based on current nationally recognized standards), thus "GFCI protection is missing" at those locations.

What? The pro-licensing boot licker's here who tout government intervention into our profession now become pissy & whiny when that same government agency nullifies their sacred Standards of Practice, say it ain't so?

Get used to the stupidity, here in Florida we had inspectors supporting licensing without any standards.

Originally Posted by Joseph P. Hagarty

can a HI Report have 3 Identified / Listed Sections

- Report
- Report Summary
- Summary (as required by NC Legislation).

Does the Law suggest that you can not have multiple summarizations encompassing different elements of the building / structure?

It does suggest that, but it may not be an issue if an HI develops his own reporting method as long as the rule is substantially met. This is part of my proposal, to purposely divide certain issues in the summary so it is evident as to which ones are typically not addressed by sellers but are still important.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

highlighting with bold is mine)


Is it just me, or does the part in bold in (1) contradict the part in bold in the last paragraph?

Seems to me an easy way around that "shall not contain" "recommendations" is to do what I have always said before - do not "recommend" installing GFCI protection, instead, simply state "GFCI protection is missing at ... ".

Now you can put it in the summary, and, let the others worry about whether or not is should be, may be, is not allowed to be, or can be, 'in the summary. You, the HI, should not really care "when" GFCI protection was required where and a what point in time, just simply state that there is no GFCI protection installed (based on current nationally recognized standards), thus "GFCI protection is missing" at those locations.

I agree about the contradiction, this is one reason for the overhaul in progress.

Jerry, I do not remember seeing your advice about not making the actual GFCI installation recomendation before, what is your reasoning on that?

It seems like a blank check for a clients atty. that could argue that the HI only mentioned something and was negligent in making it known to the homebuyer that it needed to be actually installed before occupying the house therefore allowing an injury or death to occur.

All defects should be addressed by the appropriate trade person, licensed or otherwise qualified to perform the repair and/or installation, ie; GFCI - Electrical contractor. Presumably, that contractor would than explain why the absence of the GFCI would / could be hazardous to the occupants well being and extended life. That is the long way around, but, I suppose that is what they (Realtors/government) want. Seems like they are trying to make it difficult for consumers to find out why something is a defect and therefore not demand that it be remedied. So much for protecting the consumer - just protect the commi$$ion. or am I reading it wrong?

Originally Posted by Bruce King

Jerry, I do not remember seeing your advice about not making the actual GFCI installation recomendation before, what is your reasoning on that?

It's all in the wording. Go back and re-read what I said.

If it is supposed to be there and it is not, it is "missing" ... right? ..., and, of course, "missing" items are written up ... right?

Not a "recommendation" but a "statement" - I.e., under the list of things which are wrong/bad/not-working/whatever-you-call-it and need to be corrected is: GFCI protection missing in bathrooms, kitchen, wherever. You are not "recommending" it be replaced, you are outright saying "install GFCI protection where missing".

It's all in how you word things.

True, all HIs can do is "recommend" ... as related to 'HIs cannot "require" anything be done or corrected, but ... HIs *can* state "the following items need to be done/corrected/replaced/whatever-you-want-to-call-it" and then list your items.

That's not a "recommendation", that's a "statement".

A lot of HIs state "I/we recommend the following" and then list their list, to me, that was never acceptable. I used 'the following are missing/broken/bad/not working and need to be ... '

Jerry,

I see, that is how NC wants us to do it....

That way the agent can tell the buyer " the HI did not actually recommend anything so the seller does not have to address that one".

Originally Posted by Bruce King

That way the agent can tell the buyer " the HI did not actually recommend anything so the seller does not have to address that one".

Bruce,

I don't see how you, or the agent, can get that out of "install GFCI protection where missing" and you've listed the "where missing" locations.

Either I'm not explaining it right, you're not understanding it right, or I'm not understanding what you are understanding, but ...

When you have a part of your report which states that you "recommend" this action - that's what the state is saying not to put into the summary.

However, nothing in there says you cannot put into the summary where you have a part of your report which states that 'such and such, and such, and this and that, and that, and this other thing "need to be done" as listed' - those items go into the summary.

Once in the summary, how can you or the agent say that the HI is not saying to do anything?

As I said before "It's all in the wording" you chose to use.

The state is telling HIs that you need to get some 'b*lls' and actually take a stand and make a statement instead of fluffing it off to a 3rd party through a "recommendation" or that dreaded 'further evaluation' thingy. The agents are hoping that is not going to happen, knowing that so many HIs feed at the agents trough.

I AM NOT saying that applies to 'YOU' as in 'you personally', but to 'you' as in 'you plural for NC HIs'. That's what I see in that law - it wants HIs to either take a stand or not bother putting it in the summary.

If it does not go in the summary, 'it's not actionable' as far as the agents are concerned, but, you can trust that 'it will be actionable' for an attorney should something be hidden in the report, not making it to the summary, and it causes a problem or becomes an expensive repair for the new owners.

Just my take on it.

Jerry, we are on the same page... except part of the NC requirements



NC does not allow any upgrade recommendations in the summary.
They allow us to make the statement "GFCI's missing" only with no recommendation for anything period in the summary. The body of the report can recommend anything we want to.


The next NC rule is slated (unless changed at next meeting) to have the words Repair: or Investigate:
in front of each summary item.

The agents and sellers will only have to attempt to address the "Repair:" items.



The problem with safety and upgrade recommendations is simply this:
NC has found the majority of inspectors to be incapable of producing a proper inspection and report. To ADD ON the responsibility of reporting ALL safety issues as well and NOT missing any will cause more legal issues, complaints and investigations than they already have. Note: don't even think NC is the only state with this problem, its in all states, just as with all professions.


BUT, our job and ethical responsibility is to at least report what we can based on our knowledge and put it in the summary since a summary is required and possibly the only part actually studied by the buyer.


The NC HI board is under the department of insurance.
Here is a quote from the website:

The North Carolina Home Inspector Licensure Board is chartered to safeguard the public health, safety, and welfare - protect the public from being harmed by unqualified persons by regulating the use of the title "Licensed Home Inspector" and by providing for the licensure and regulation of those who perform home inspections for compensation.


Due to the presence of the word "safety" in this statement is one of the reasons the new rules are now being being tweaked. They just can't limit our safety reporting when they have promised the public the above statement.

The task now is to figure out how to do this and still allow some real estate to be sold while keeping the HI's out of court.

I have submitted a simple plan to NC and hope it gets included in the next round of decisions.

Bruce wrote: "NC does not allow any upgrade recommendations in the summary.
They allow us to make the statement "GFCI's missing" only with no recommendation for anything period in the summary. The body of the report can recommend anything we want to."
____________________________________________


What I would do is just that... make the statement, "Gfci's missing at___" But at the end of that statement, put in parentheses: (refer to page, 14, section II, paragraph a)

Now, when they get to 14, II, a (or whatever area you put it in)-- it would clearly state that this was a safety concern that I recommend upgrading to what we now know to be a safer means of protecting the occupants from the possibility of an electrical shock.

It doesen't say you cannot reference where to read more about what is in the summary...

rr

Originally Posted by Bruce King

Jerry, we are on the same page...

Not yet, at least not quite.

NC does not allow any upgrade recommendations in the summary.

They allow us to make the statement "GFCI's missing" only ...

BINGO!

You state that all "missing" GFCI protection needs to be corrected. That's not a "recommendation", nor is it an "upgrade".

... recommendation ... recommend anything we want to.

Wrong word to use.

The next NC rule is slated (unless changed at next meeting) to have the words Repair: or Investigate: in front of each summary item.

There's your word to use NOW (and I don't seem to be able to get this across - *do not use the word* "recommendation" or "recommend") - "REPAIR" (I was using "needs to be corrected" which is the almost the same as "repair" - except that "needs to be corrected" includes "replace" and some will argue that "repair" does not include "replace").

The agents and sellers will only have to attempt to address the "Repair:" items.

Great, again, there is your word: "REPAIR"

... upgrade recommendations

You used those two words again.

BUT, our job and ethical responsibility is to at least report what we can based on our knowledge and put it in the summary since a summary is required and possibly the only part actually studied by the buyer.

I totally agree, so *do not* "recommend" anything, simply state it is in need of repair, i.e., "REPAIR: GFCI protection is missing at the following locations ... and needs to be REPAIRED."

The task now is to figure out how to do this and still allow some real estate to be sold while keeping the HI's out of court.

See above.

I knew if I spent enough time on here I would find the almighty Jerry wrong sooner or later. (actually the second time)


The thread is about NC Jerry, we are not allowed at the current time to do what you are suggesting.

Originally Posted by Bruce King

The thread is about NC Jerry, we are not allowed at the current time to do what you are suggesting.

Show that to me.

So far, nothing you have posted prohibits you from doing what I've said.

Let me show you the different simple safety upgrade reporting methods and how they are currently allowed in the summary:


No GFCI's are present in the house and needs to be repaired.
(this is not ok, a recommendation was made)


No GFCI's are present in the house and should be evaluated by electrician. (this is not ok, a recommendation was made)


No GFCI's are present in the house and you should not live there until they have been installed.
(this is not ok, a recommendation was made)


No GFCI's are present in the house. (this is ok)


No GFCI's are present in the house, refer to the remainder of the report for more information.
(this may or may not be ok, they can decide either way because a recomendation was made to go look at a recommendation)

In the big picture it may matter little since most home inspection reports go unread.

But... if one is inclined to fight this watering down of the licensing bill then the way to do it is through the media bypassing the government officials who are now firmly holding the reigns of power.

Take your argument to the public, inform any and all consumer protection groups about what is going on, hold a town hall meeting and invite everyone to an open debate, publicly rub their nose in it and you just might win, or do nothing and live with it, in most cases apathy rules.

Originally Posted by Bruce King

Let me show you the different simple reporting methods and how they are currently allowed in the summary:


No GFCI's are present in the house and needs to be repaired.
(this is not ok, a recommendation was made)

If that is a "recommendation", then *NOTHING* is allowed in the summary as *EVERYTHING* will be a "recommendation" ... by the standard you are applying there.

No GFCI's are present in the house. (this is ok)

That is not okay, it requires no corrective action to be taken. That's like saying 'No range, dishwasher, clothes washer, clothes dryer, or refrigerator are present in the house.' - soooo???

According to the standard YOU are applying, ANYTHING corrective action is a "recommendation" and thus is "not allowed".

What that law wants is *what is needed* and for the home inspector to *just say so*, that, if it is just 'your recommendation', that law does not want it in the summary, as in 'I recommend you repaint the exterior.', yeah, okay, sooooo??? Versus 'The paint has all peeled off the wood siding and wood is deteriorating - repaint the friggin' house.', this is not a "recommendation", it is a statement of a required action.

I know I am not the person with the largest vocabulary here, I barely passed English in high school and never went to coolege fer mo edumacation, but, shirley, I am not saying it so all wrong that you can't grasp it ... am I?

We are talking about safety upgrades....

I edited the above post to make it more clear by adding the two words safety upgrade. Now I know you will catch on....

Of course regular writeups can have recommendations in the summary, I thought you knew we were discussing NC safety upgrade issues.

Originally Posted by Bruce King

We are talking about safety upgrades....

I edited the above post to make it more clear by adding the two words safety upgrade. Now I know you will catch on....

Of course regular writeups can have recommendations in the summary, I thought you knew we were discussing NC safety upgrade issues.

You used the term "upgrade" three times above and the word "recommendations" once.

Obviously, my communication skills have failed me.

Originally Posted by Bruce King

Let me show you the different simple safety upgrade reporting methods and how they are currently allowed in the summary:


No GFCI's are present in the house and needs to be repaired.
(this is not ok, a recommendation was made)


No GFCI's are present in the house and should be evaluated by electrician. (this is not ok, a recommendation was made)


No GFCI's are present in the house and you should not live there until they have been installed.
(this is not ok, a recommendation was made)


No GFCI's are present in the house. (this is ok)


No GFCI's are present in the house, refer to the remainder of the report for more information.
(this may or may not be ok, they can decide either way because a recomendation was made to go look at a recommendation)

Our state, which has pretty much adopted the ASHI SOP, requires that HIs call out, as 'significantly deficient', and system, component or item that does not function or is "unsafe".

"Unsafe" is defined as any system, component or item that poses a significant risk of personal injury or property damage based upon the item being damaged, deteriorated, improperly installed or "changes in current construction standards".

This means that houses, built before GFCIs and without them, are significantly deficient. They pose a safety hazard because current construction standards (NEC, for example, as opposed to mere local codes) say that GFCI protection is required and will save lives.

In our state, HIs have a fiduciary responsibility. Code inspectors and electricians and roofers and plumbers and GCs do not. Legally, HIs are held to a higher standard.

Morally,. I don't want my clients to die or get injured (less referrals that way).

"Functioning as intended" with regards to safety issues (it was safe 30 years ago, but is not safe now, according to "current construction standards") is a lazy cop out.

Nuff said.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

You used the term "upgrade" three times above and the word "recommendations" once.

Obviously, my communication skills have failed me.

Maybe this will help..........

Read the first few posts again...

We are not discussing "how it should be" or "how Jerry wants it to be" or "how Bruce wants it to be", we are simply discussing how North Carolina wants it to be.

Sorry I did not remind you of this sooner, but I like to argue with you anyway. : )

To bring into perspective the task that NC faces with the work in progress on the new rules:

Here is a rough draft of some house issues we all see that I quickly put together with the help of some other inspectors. Don't expect or look for perfection, this is just a start.

The headings are from NC SOP so save your comments on those.

PLEASE do not paste any code, but I would like additions to the list in simple plain short sentences, we will all know what you mean without an essay.

Also note that the list does not contain much of the common aging, maintenance or defect type problems. Those type problems are not what the NC work in progress is all about so please save those.




Issues Home Inspectors are expected to report to their client that are not the typical problems or defects that homeowners usually know about :


Structural Components

Girders not resting on the center third of a pier.
Foundation bolts or straps not exactly proper. (wind zones will differ)
Trusses with repairs and no engineers letter or drawing.
Older homes with no rafter bracing.
Older homes with over spanned floor joists.
Older homes with attics converted into living space with bouncy floors.
Older homes with temporary type jack posts under girders and floor joists.
Older homes with no footers under the foundation.
Improper deck construction methods.
Improper fasteners used with new ACQ treated lumber.


Exterior

No landings at exterior doors and interior stairways (where a door opens into it).
Garage door wall switch mounted lower than 60 inches.
Garage door sensors mounted higher than the recommended six inches.
Old garage door openers without any photo sensors.
Garage door manual locks present with an opener attached. (caused house fire in SC)
Garage walls, ceiling or door to house not fire rated or covered properly.
Older homes with evidence of buried oil tank.
Large trees or limbs over or near the house.
Sink holes or fire ant mounds in the yard.
Pool safety issues, fencing, gates etc.
Polybutylene piping even with updated fittings.
Polybutylene piping with plastic fittings.
Possible lead based paint and/or asbestos on older homes.
Walk in attic areas with no railing to prevent walking onto un-insulated sheetrock ceiling as often found over garages.





Roofing

Chimney top too close to the roof or other structure.
Old homes with crumbling mortar and bricks on large chimneys, in attic and crawlspace.



Plumbing

No bonding of metal water pipes.
Hot and cold backwards at faucet or fixture.
Missing or improper TPR valves on water heaters.
Water heaters older than the recommended 10-12 years and in area where damage will occur if leaking.
Cold Water Shut Off missing at Water Heater


Electrical

Lack of 4-wire feeds to sub-panels.
Improperly bonded neutrals to ground in sub-panels.
Breakers and Fuses oversized greater than the circuit protected.
Two wire, 2-prong outlets with no ground. (not a major issue but needs disclosure)
Two wire circuits on 3-prong receptacles.
Abandoned cables not terminated in boxes.
Zinsco and Federal Pacific Stab-lok panel concerns.
Knob and tube wiring concerns.
Old fuse panels that can easily get wrong size fuses inserted.
Lack of smoke detectors in bedrooms.
Lack of smoke detectors in house and or not tied in together.
Lack of carbon monoxide detector. (required in Meck. County)
Garbage disposal missing the protective bushing for the cable.
Lack of AFCI's on newer homes.
Gas cooktops with ignitor power connected to GFCI circuit.
Bootleg or false grounds on 3-prong outlets.
No grounding rod.
No lighting in stairways.
Stairway lighting switches not within reach before ascending/descending the stairs.
Open splices and junction boxes with no covers and too full.
Lamp wire used as permanent wiring.
Extension cords used as permanent wiring.
Metal pull chain light fixtures.
Light bulbs too close to shelving or closet items.
Overhead service cable too low over driveway or deck etc.
Outdoor panels, fixtures or boxes that are not rated for exterior use.
Recessed lighting covered with insulation that is non IC rated.
Solid Aluminum branch circuit wiring.


Heating

Fireplace hearth too small or not present.
Fireplace mantle too close to firebox opening.
Appliance connector entering hvac cabinet or passing through wall/floor.
No protective bushing where gas line enters metal cabinet (sharp edge and vibration).
Lack of proper one inch clearance to B-vent pipes.
No grounding or bonding on gas lines.
CSST gas lines without grounding.
Fireplace and water heater flues in contact with combustible materials.
Improper combustion air for gas appliances.
Gas appliances in bedrooms or other unapproved locations.
Gas shut off missing where needed.
Lack of proper combustion air for gas hvac or water heater units.




Air Conditioning

Disconnects located behind unit or out of sight of the unit.


Interiors

Lack of handrails when four or more risers are present.
Lack of grippable handrails.
Handrails and railings that are too low.
Stairs with improper/different size risers or treads.
Baluster spacing that allows a 4" sphere to pass through.
Lack of safety glass near stairs etc.
Sliding glass doors not tempered, safety glass, safety filmed
Bedroom windows too small or missing for fire ingress/egress.
Improperly installed attic folding stairs. Wrong fasteners, improper side meshing.
Double keyed deadbolts.
Mold like substances.
Possible lead based paint and/or asbestos on older homes.
Kitchen cabinets that are installed with sheetrock screws or improperly fastened.


Insulation and ventilation

Improperly vented attics, ridge openings blocked with shingles.
Bathroom or kitchen exhaust terminating in attic.
Exhaust fan in Bathroom missing when no window is present.




Built in Kitchen appliances

Dishwasher missing the wall switch. (not an issue in some areas.)
Oven missing the anti-tip bracket.
Excessive grease buildup in and around ovens or cooktops.
Microwave ovens that are not properly mounted to the cabinet.

Originally Posted by Bruce King

Maybe this will help..........

Read the first few posts again...

We are not discussing "how it should be" or "how Jerry wants it to be" or "how Bruce wants it to be", we are simply discussing how North Carolina wants it to be.

Sorry I did not remind you of this sooner, but I like to argue with you anyway. : )

(sigh)

Bruce,

YOU need to go back and re-read those posts again, and open your eyes and mind when doing so. Maybe, hopefully, you will see that it does not state what you are saying it states.

You are locked into your position, so be it. My limited communication skills have not opened your mind yet, so I will never be able to do that.

Keeping this discussion going is a waste of Brian's server storage space.

Originally Posted by Bruce King

To bring into perspective the task that NC faces with the work in progress on the new rules:

Here is a rough draft of some house issues we all see that I quickly put together with the help of some other inspectors. Don't expect or look for perfection, this is just a start.

The headings are from NC SOP so save your comments on those.

PLEASE do not paste any code, but I would like additions to the list in simple plain short sentences, we will all know what you mean without an essay.

Also note that the list does not contain much of the common aging, maintenance or defect type problems. Those type problems are not what the NC work in progress is all about so please save those.




Issues Home Inspectors are expected to report to their client that are not the typical problems or defects that homeowners usually know about :


Structural Components

Girders not resting on the center third of a pier.
Foundation bolts or straps not exactly proper. (wind zones will differ)
Trusses with repairs and no engineers letter or drawing.
Older homes with no rafter bracing.
Older homes with over spanned floor joists.
Older homes with attics converted into living space with bouncy floors.
Older homes with temporary type jack posts under girders and floor joists.
Older homes with no footers under the foundation.
Improper deck construction methods.
Improper fasteners used with new ACQ treated lumber.


Exterior

No landings at exterior doors and interior stairways (where a door opens into it).
Garage door wall switch mounted lower than 60 inches.
Garage door sensors mounted higher than the recommended six inches.
Old garage door openers without any photo sensors.
Garage door manual locks present with an opener attached. (caused house fire in SC)
Garage walls, ceiling or door to house not fire rated or covered properly.
Older homes with evidence of buried oil tank.
Large trees or limbs over or near the house.
Sink holes or fire ant mounds in the yard.
Pool safety issues, fencing, gates etc.
Polybutylene piping even with updated fittings.
Polybutylene piping with plastic fittings.
Possible lead based paint and/or asbestos on older homes.
Walk in attic areas with no railing to prevent walking onto un-insulated sheetrock ceiling as often found over garages.





Roofing

Chimney top too close to the roof or other structure.
Old homes with crumbling mortar and bricks on large chimneys, in attic and crawlspace.



Plumbing

No bonding of metal water pipes.
Hot and cold backwards at faucet or fixture.
Missing or improper TPR valves on water heaters.
Water heaters older than the recommended 10-12 years and in area where damage will occur if leaking.
Cold Water Shut Off missing at Water Heater


Electrical

Lack of 4-wire feeds to sub-panels.
Improperly bonded neutrals to ground in sub-panels.
Breakers and Fuses oversized greater than the circuit protected.
Two wire, 2-prong outlets with no ground. (not a major issue but needs disclosure)
Two wire circuits on 3-prong receptacles.
Abandoned cables not terminated in boxes.
Zinsco and Federal Pacific Stab-lok panel concerns.
Knob and tube wiring concerns.
Old fuse panels that can easily get wrong size fuses inserted.
Lack of smoke detectors in bedrooms.
Lack of smoke detectors in house and or not tied in together.
Lack of carbon monoxide detector. (required in Meck. County)
Garbage disposal missing the protective bushing for the cable.
Lack of AFCI's on newer homes.
Gas cooktops with ignitor power connected to GFCI circuit.
Bootleg or false grounds on 3-prong outlets.
No grounding rod.
No lighting in stairways.
Stairway lighting switches not within reach before ascending/descending the stairs.
Open splices and junction boxes with no covers and too full.
Lamp wire used as permanent wiring.
Extension cords used as permanent wiring.
Metal pull chain light fixtures.
Light bulbs too close to shelving or closet items.
Overhead service cable too low over driveway or deck etc.
Outdoor panels, fixtures or boxes that are not rated for exterior use.
Recessed lighting covered with insulation that is non IC rated.
Solid Aluminum branch circuit wiring.


Heating

Fireplace hearth too small or not present.
Fireplace mantle too close to firebox opening.
Appliance connector entering hvac cabinet or passing through wall/floor.
No protective bushing where gas line enters metal cabinet (sharp edge and vibration).
Lack of proper one inch clearance to B-vent pipes.
No grounding or bonding on gas lines.
CSST gas lines without grounding.
Fireplace and water heater flues in contact with combustible materials.
Improper combustion air for gas appliances.
Gas appliances in bedrooms or other unapproved locations.
Gas shut off missing where needed.
Lack of proper combustion air for gas hvac or water heater units.




Air Conditioning

Disconnects located behind unit or out of sight of the unit.


Interiors

Lack of handrails when four or more risers are present.
Lack of grippable handrails.
Handrails and railings that are too low.
Stairs with improper/different size risers or treads.
Baluster spacing that allows a 4" sphere to pass through.
Lack of safety glass near stairs etc.
Sliding glass doors not tempered, safety glass, safety filmed
Bedroom windows too small or missing for fire ingress/egress.
Improperly installed attic folding stairs. Wrong fasteners, improper side meshing.
Double keyed deadbolts.
Mold like substances.
Possible lead based paint and/or asbestos on older homes.
Kitchen cabinets that are installed with sheetrock screws or improperly fastened.


Insulation and ventilation

Improperly vented attics, ridge openings blocked with shingles.
Bathroom or kitchen exhaust terminating in attic.
Exhaust fan in Bathroom missing when no window is present.




Built in Kitchen appliances

Dishwasher missing the wall switch. (not an issue in some areas.)
Oven missing the anti-tip bracket.
Excessive grease buildup in and around ovens or cooktops.
Microwave ovens that are not properly mounted to the cabinet.

Bruce,

Being as I was unable to get you to open your mind to new concepts, you need to go way back to the beginning to this:

"To make a very long story long, here is part of the current rule:

(d) Written reports required by this rule for pre-purchase home inspections of three or more systems shall include a
separate section labeled “Summary” that includes any system or component that:"

Simply make separate reports for each system or separate reports for every two systems.

That will allow you to put whatever you want in your summaries, or to not have a summary.

I am reducing it to the most simplest form for you.

By the way, you truly did this "To make a very long story long, ... "

No Jerry, you are the one who made this thread painfully long.
I am just trying to get the facts across, its not even my opinion.

I see you are starting to catch on finally except the part about not having a summary, remember we are discussing NC, they do require a summary.


The best analysis I can provide of your posts is that the issue can be broken down into two main parts.

1. You do not understand the NC rules as they are now.

2. You think, that to recommend something, the word recommend or some form of it has to be used.


Now, you will post some more twists to this, because we all know that your main goal is to get the last word. You are losing a lot of credibility when that is your underlying goal.