Garage door mishap - InspectionNews

Dave Mortensen · #1 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 10:09 AM

Here's the deal...Single Family Home with two garage door openers, the first one worked fine when testing the autoreverse (ie. using a 2 x 4 under the center of the door), the second made a loud bang at the opener, the power went out to the opener and I had to manually open the garage door. The opener failed to operated after that. Realtor and client were present during the test, I notified the seller that the opener failed upon testing and he would need to use the door manually until he had the opener repaired.

He called later to say the first garage door opener does not work now. I told him I would come over and look at it for him, but he might want to see if a GFCI was tripped in the garage since it might feed both garage doors, and also check to see if a fuse was blown in the garage door opener in question.

He emailed me that there was no fuse, his "friend" checked it for him, and he was going to call a garage door repair man to fix it and send me the bill. I emailed him back and said that I was not at fault for a garage door opener which failed under testing and may have caused the second garage door opener from working as well. Interesting that he is not asking me to pay for the first one which failed.

Anway, he appears adamant that I am responsible for the repair of the garage door which operated fine when I was there, but ceased to work after the second one failed. Incidentally, there is power to the outlet for the opener (according to him). Would the failed second garage door cause the first to become inoperative and if so, am I responsible for the fix? I have offered to come over and look at it wth the caveat that I am not a garage door repair man and can not diagnose a bad circuit board, faulty wiring, etc.

Dom D'Agostino · #2 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Mortensen

Would the failed second garage door cause the first to become inoperative and if so, am I responsible for the fix?

Unfortunately, the answer to your first question is irrelevant, as the homeowner will decide the "facts" based on arbitrary and anecdotal evidence.

The second question,

Quote:

am I responsible for the fix?

remains to be seen and has very little to do the "facts".

Keep us posted....

Rick Bunzel · #3 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 10:43 AM

Dave,

I recommend that you go back over and document the current condition of the doors. I agree that both doors are most likely on the same circuit and the fix may be as simple as resetting the breaker but until you examine what is going on it will be your word versus the owner. The last thing you want is to have this cloud the transaction.

//Rick

Aaron Miller · #4 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 11:29 AM

Dave:

If you think there is even the remotest possibility that you damaged something that belongs to the seller - pay for it.

If not, politely explain to them that you have no liability in the case and are not paying to maintain his equipment.

If unsuccessful in this attempt, tell him to FO.

Aaron

Jerry Peck · #5 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 12:46 PM

I would go check it, it he refuses to allow you in to check it, he will have no case to obtain recourse from you later.

If there is power to both openers, they should work - provided that nothing is wrong with the openers.

From your description - I repeat, 'from your description - sounds to me like the one opener "failed under testing" and he (the seller) has the responsibility to repair it.

If there is no power to either opener, check for a breaker or a GFCI which may have tripped.

I cannot imagine how testing the auto reverse (if done properly) can damage a garage door ... after all, they are *designed* to be tested with a 2x4 ... to check the operation of the auto reverse.

When there, find out what make and model it is, look in the internet and go there with a few installation instructions for various models with you, and the CPSC testing information - then politely as possible explain that he has one (possibly two) garage door openers which are in need of repair by HIM, and, you will be more than happy to SHOW him how to properly test his new garage door opener(s) after it (they) are repaired to make sure that the repair person repair them properly.

I know, this goes against all of my 'don't do re-inspections', however, this is not a "re-inspection", it is a 'see, don't bother suing me, because you will lose, so don't even waste my time' educational effort to educate the seller.

Dave Mortensen · #6 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 01:13 PM

Aaron Miller
"Dave:
If you think there is even the remotest possibility that you damaged something that belongs to the seller - pay for it."

I totally agree if there was some negligence on my part, but pushing a button and letting the garage door down on a 2 x 4 doesn't seem out of line for a home inspector responsible for testing the autoreverse function.

I will keep you posted on this, so far I haven't heard if he'd like me to look at it. I do know there was power at the outlet because I checked it (the one that broke) with my Fluke prior to leaving the home. So I think he's right when he says there is power to the other one in question.

Thanks for the responses and I'll talk to you soon...Dave

Dave Mortensen · #7 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 01:15 PM

I should clarify my first post when I said there was no power to the opener, the opener failed to respond to the controls and the light went out also, but the outlet still had power.

Jerry Peck · #8 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Mortensen

I should clarify my first post when I said there was no power to the opener, the opener failed to respond to the controls and the light went out also, but the outlet still had power.

There might be a reset button on the opener.

Dave Mortensen · #9 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 01:28 PM

The way the garage door "banged loudly", I didn't want to attempt a fix. It did appear to have "broke". I hope to get over there and see what's up and will try the reset button on the second opener, thanks for the tip. Dave

Eric Barker · #10 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 01:37 PM

"Been there, done that" with O.H. door openers. Arguing with sellers can be a lost cause. Now I only interrupt the photo sensor beam. I know that the 2x4 test is an industry recommended test but I disagree with it and believe it to be improper.

In each report that I provide it states that, in my view, holding on to the door during closing and providing reasonable resistance is a more adequate method over the 2x4 test. An opener could pass the 2x4 test and still crush a child. My approach provides a better idea of what hazard may exist and without exception, I have had no clients with children not appreciate that.

Do I close the door and hold on to it for resistance? No. Again, there's no standard - it would be a personal judgment call. But it's better than having the door pass the 2x4 test and telling the client that the door is safe.

Now we've argued this before and it's my personal preference to stray outside of the industry standard on O.H. testing and I acknowledge that there are many who disagree with me on this, which is ok.

Dave Mortensen · #11 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 01:51 PM

"Now we've argued this before and it's my personal preference to stray outside of the industry standard on O.H. testing and I acknowledge that there are many who disagree with me on this, which is ok."

I decided to test with the industry standard (2 x 4) after hearing the arguments on this forum, because it seems like a seller would have much more ammunition should the opener malfunction during a non-industry standard test like you are suggesting.

I actually built a force sensor with a load cell and a digital display so as to measure the force applied when the garage door touches a 2 x 4. Nice gadget but since there is no standard as to the amount of force which may be applied and still autoreverse I was back to just using a 2 x 4. Bye the way, I had doors test at over 300# and still autoreverse.

David

Jerry Peck · #12 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 02:04 PM

Also, a garage overhead door which reverses as a height one can safely hold it does NOT mean it will reverse lower ... where it will crush a child.

Jerry Peck · #13 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Mortensen

I actually built a force sensor with a load cell and a digital display so as to measure the force applied when the garage door touches a 2 x 4. Nice gadget but since there is no standard as to the amount of force which may be applied and still autoreverse I was back to just using a 2 x 4. Bye the way, I had doors test at over 300# and still autoreverse.

David

David,

"Bye the way, I had doors test at over 300# and still autoreverse."

No, they did not auto reverse (at least not properly).

The auto reverse feature is supposed to reverse 'on contact', not 'on crushing'.

(But we've been through that before too.)

Dave Mortensen · #14 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 02:08 PM

Erik Barker "Now I only interrupt the photo sensor beam."

I might see garage doors without electric eyes 30% of the time, how do you test those?

Dave Mortensen · #15 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 02:11 PM

Jerry, how do you put the fancy quotation box on the post?

Jerry Peck · #16 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 02:15 PM

Click the 'Quote' button in the corner of the message you are replying to.

Then delete out the stuff you are not replying to (to save Brian's servers from having the entire post show up so many times ... and to make it easier for others to see what you are responding to).

Mitchell Meeks · #17 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 02:33 PM

"Quote"

Aaron Miller
"Dave:
If you think there is even the remotest possibility that you damaged something that belongs to the seller - pay for it."

I know this may not be the place to get into this but I really have a problem with every time something happens for us to just jump up and offer to pay for it. I do not, and I am pretty sure no one else, wants to do an inspection for free. I guess it should be an educational issue to all clients more than anything.

I have heard stories on this board and in person where an inspector missed something or "broke" something (which was probably broken in the first place) and then the seller or even the buyer called them up and they just offered to pay for it just to be done with it. I also have seen contracts where the liability is limited to the cost of the inspection. Something needs to give.

This is one reason why I do not really advertise to do inspections. I would like to because I like a mystery as well as investigating but if I have to do it for free, why do it? Fortunately my bread and butter is general contracting but what about the rest of you guys? Some of you which do it full time.

Sorry about the rant and I will probably elaborate some more on the correct forum. I also know it is off topic from the original question. To that defense, Dave, I agree it probably locked up the gears in the one that quit (I am assuming that it was not locked into position somewhere on the track). Also as for the other one not working, I would not think it would have anything to do with the one that messed up. Maybe it is a circuit problem. Maybe it needs to be "rebooted".

Nolan Kienitz · #18 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Mortensen

... I might see garage doors without electric eyes 30% of the time, how do you test those?

Dave,

Well ... depends upon when the operators were installed. "Back when" the sensors were not available. Can't test for something that was not required "back when" or not installed.

On the other hand there are those sensors that are installed on top of the operator unit and below the ceiling or up in the attic space over the garage. Many images have been posted here with so much work done to install the sensors other than where they belong.

If I run across a home where there are no sensors and the operator unit is of the age "back when" I put a general comment in the report with a recommendation to have the sensors, etc. installed.

Dave Mortensen · #19 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 02:41 PM

[quote=Nolan Kienitz;28840]
Dave,

Well ... depends upon when the operators were installed. "Back when" the sensors were not available. Can't test for something that was not required "back when" or not installed.

My questions was more for Erik as to how he tests when no sensors are on the operator. I too include the language about upgrading to the sensors when they are not on an opener.

Jerry Peck · #20 (**permalink**) 12-31-2007, 05:36 PM

Dave,

Put a '[', then '/quote', then ']' at the end of what you had and it will look like this: