Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 66 to 102 of 102

Thread: TPR pipe

  1. #66
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,777

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Page View Post
    Don't wanna play this game anymore...can I have my ball back, please.

    ip
    Just reread the entire thread to-date. I have a question but will not ask since things have degenerated to ??????/

    I will ask if all the balli hooing back and forth is specific to CA . CA being unique to the universe and CA being the original question point.

    Please correct me if I am wrong. All Building Code is dependent on what a state or locality chooses to use as the basis for their codes. Then that locality chooses to alter that Code for their own needs. Thus a county can alter their Code requirements however they want. Furthermore each Permit Inspector can intemperate and/or exempt an installation as a permitted variance to the Code by their own discretion.

    I start with my local county code. What any world, international or national code is secondary. CA , WA, FL, LA are all different. Are you all arguing over the same locally specific code requirements?

    Ian,
    I think that you have lost your ball for good. Like Health Care bill it does not matter what you want they will do what they think is best for you.

    Inspection Referral

  2. #67
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,250

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Page View Post
    Don't wanna play this game anymore...can I have my ball back, please.
    Quote Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells View Post
    Ian,
    I think that you have lost your ball for good.
    I've passed the ball back to Ian, hopefully he does not through that same ball back out into play again.

    Sometimes questions get answered, then someone disputes the answers, which leaves only a couple of options: a) let the misinformation stand; b) refute the misinformation and repeat the correct information.

    Ian,

    See you at the next game.

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  3. #68
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lancaster, CA
    Posts
    153

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Page View Post
    Don't wanna play this game anymore...can I have my ball back, please.

    ip
    Hi IAN...

    Get a copy of the California Plumbing Code.. The CPC. For fast reference of everyday stuff, get the

    * Code Check for California Edition *

    I say this as you've been looking up IRC stuff and a bit of this and that for advice. We're in CA buddy. Your first comments were close with the mention of the 210 valve AND a pressure relief valve on the outside of the house.

    Our building code very simply says to "terminate outside within 6-24 inches from the ground OR OTHER APPROVED LOCATION *

    This is section 608.5 of the CPC

    I would suggest living in Oceanside a quick call to your building dept is warranted to determine the use of:

    210 valves
    AND
    TPR discharge end points - accepted locations.


    Good Luck!


  4. #69
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Snowbird (this means I'm retired and migrate between locations), FL/MI
    Posts
    4,086

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Oh no, that might get him busted, performing critical plumbing not just REPAIRS as a handyman without a plumbing license on a residence he just inspected, doesn't own or occupy, and isn't exempt from requiring a license, upon work that was likely unpermitted, uninspected, earlier, on the sly!

    That section of the CPC was cited and quoted much earlier in the thread - but explicit how-to step by step "how to" instructions were not immediately forthcoming to Mr. Handyman - but instead the means were fully provided to an end (how to terminate the discharge) it just required an understanding and careful reading of a series of posts; hence the venomous reply early on!

    Remember, one of his first few posts here (from this topic discussion: http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_i...ther-guys.html
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Page View Post
    IMO - and yes, we are all allowed to have one (or more) without being flamed...the 'Code of Ethics' is way to broad .

    I know that may be in conflict with most but...I am a Handyman AND perform Inspections. I am extremely ethical and fair with all my clients and customers.

    That's probably why I get calls to repair some of the issues I have I identified during the Inspection. I don't offer a bid at the time of the inspection. I don't find things wrong, just so I can fix them later. I report what I find and leave it up to the client. If they want to use my findings as a bargaining chip or have them repaired before or after the sale, it's their choice. In fact I encourage them to get bids from any and all other sources. If they want to call me, perhaps a month or two later - after the inspection (and the sale) to change out a perfectly good toilet or install new faucets - I see absolutely nothing wrong with providing that service nor am I conflicted in any way. I'm sure there are those that do, but I simply can not follow their reasoning...the old saw..."conflict of interest" just doesn't cut it for me.

    I have built numerous relationships with customers, with the handyman side of the business, which have lead to dozens of inspections and vice versa.

    I know my limitations and fully abide my my State's Contracting and Licensing regulations.

    If you have your own personal standard and live by that, that's your perogative. It doesn't mean that someone who has a different standard is less or more ethical. I am not convinced that you are a better or more ethical person than I or perform a more thorough inspection, simply because you support a wordy, incongruous statement. It really is about honesty, trust and integrity, a 'Code' I'm a dues paying member of and fully subscribe to.

    There are simply too many variables and 'what ifs?' with 'ethics' to be functional.

    Furthermore, where is the conflict of interest in attending to items that were not part of the inspection in the first place?

    Recently a client for whom I had done the inspection for called me to construct and install a gate - at the inspected house - which was not even in existence at the time of the inspection. And that makes me 'conflicted' how?

    I also have several clients, from inspections, who have called on me months after the sale to paint and hang wall-paper (a profession not readily found in which I have decades of experience) - areas not specifically subject of any home inspection.

    I chose to perform that service, if you don't that's your choice and maybe your State's mandate. I personally like to make repairs etc. and consider it a very rewarding service for those that don't or can't.

    Perhaps any HI 'Code of Ethics' might be more workable if it referred specifically to items which were found "...in need of repair" during the inspection rather than the blanket statement of not performing work period.

    I happened to have taught several 'Ethics' classes in a previous career. One thing I am sure of...there is no right answer.

    Okay...your turn
    He also added this to the discussion as he continued:
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Page
    Nowhere in my post did I claim to make repairs (following an inspection).

    The B and P code specifically prohibits 'repairs' - only identifying them as a bad business practice.

    The examples I gave (and was very careful to chose my words wisely) included installations or improvements. Installing a previously non-existent gate and 'changing out a perfectly good toilet or faucet and hanging wall-paper or painting' are not repairs.

    Repairs are usually what happens after something is broken and you fix the same thing to make it whole.

    The aforementioned items are purely cosmetic in nature and are not precluded under the wording of the above regulation.

    Hey, I didn't write the regulation, don't blame me.

    Certainly they may fall under other aspects of the Licensing regulationsand Trades. I do not represent myself as a Contractor of any nature but as a Handyman.

    I limit my work to under $500 per job, therefore no specific trades license is required, under current CA regulations.

    BTW, I have a very good attorney.

    I also believe that being a Handyman makes me a better Home Inspector (not better than anyone else - just better). I am able to impart my knowledge to the customer and at least know what I am talking about through practical experience.
    No wonder he's been so nasty and now wants his ball back!!!

    The vast majority of HIs regulated or not, are bound by a Code of Ethics. "Ian Page" has declared himself to not be one who is so inclined; and thinks he is not prohibited from making repairs, designing and performing corrections, etc. to properties he has inspected. His definition of "repair" is convenient for his argument, but not in keeping with the law, IMO, and I think some of what has been displayed on the instant topic string demonstrates that he doesn't always know what he is talking about.

    Last edited by H.G. Watson, Sr.; 12-05-2010 at 10:35 PM.

  5. #70
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lancaster, CA
    Posts
    153

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    You are Correct Mr Watson... I didn't see that section of the post...playing on both sides of the proverbial fence isn't a good place!!


    IAN... listen
    As well as the CPC in CA.. If you offering repair services, you are very likely *subject to* Business and Profession Code 7197a.1 - as *repairs* are specified as prohibited. This is fairly well known by experienced Brokers as well... it will come to bite ya or leave you in a position of... how shall I say "manipulation"

    Other types of construction (obvious items outside the general SOP or Inspection Report) *may* be permitted... but what is mentioned is clearly within the SOP and sounds like it was reported. In my opinion, you would be better served by those who know you for your inspection services to know little or none at all of your "handyman services". I feel this discredits you Ian. It's just my opinion, but hey... I've survived in the inspection business for 13 years. It's tough "out there".. it's friendly in here!

    I recommend becoming more familiar with guidelines in our friendly "Land of Fruit and Nuts", or you may find your self admonished by someone else other than posters here. Maybe a local inspector meeting? Just a thought!

    We all makes mistakes.. learn from it and move on and forward!

    That's the point of coming here and *learning*.. don't take offense, just take the benefit!

    Good Luck!!!


  6. #71
    Widdershins Saunders's Avatar
    Widdershins Saunders Guest

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry Peck View Post
    I can only presume that, by you asking that question, it means you either cannot read or do not comprehend what you read ... which goes a long way toward explaining some of your other posts.
    No, I understood what you said -- The confusion lies in just how proud you are to have been called out, Jerry.

    Still waiting for you to suck it up and defer to the actual experts, BTW.


  7. #72
    Widdershins Saunders's Avatar
    Widdershins Saunders Guest

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Quote Originally Posted by Rich Goeken View Post
    Widdershins,

    OK. Games over. If you want to convey information---good. If you want to make snide remarks about people----bad. I'm tired of seeing a message from you with, perhaps, one fact---but including blindsiding someone at the same time.

    Let's stop here and try to keep it on a professional level.

    Thanks,

    Rich
    If you follow the thread, Rich, you'll note that I have never once escalated beyond the escalation of the previous post.

    Here's the deal, Rich -- My "one fact" should be obvious to everyone -- Including Jerry.

    What I find most troubling is that not one of the participants in this thread seems even remotely interested in arriving at the truth.

    Did you ask for the contact information to ascertain the truth?

    Did Ian, Stuart or Mr. Watson?

    No -- Not one of you did.

    I'm right -- I would have dropped this 8 or 9 posts ago if I didn't think I was.

    Here's the deal -- I contacted the AHJ in Jerry's neck of the woods 5 or 6 weeks ago and spoke with the Lead Inspector -- I cannot and will not quote him verbatim -- But the general consensus was and is, is that Jerry is full of Shite.

    Yeah -- They, meaning the final arbiters, don't have a very high opinion of Jerry down there.


  8. #73
    Widdershins Saunders's Avatar
    Widdershins Saunders Guest

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Furthermore each Permit Inspector can intemperate and/or exempt an installation as a permitted variance to the Code by their own discretion.
    They can until they happen upon a bulldog like me.

    When a code is adopted, it is codified as law -- Granted, regional amendments are also codified as law.

    OTOH, every once in awhile a trades person encounters a person like Jerry who thinks they can twist the adopted code to meet their own narrow interpretation.

    I've never put up with it in the past, and I'll be damned if I'll put up with it this close to retirement. If this were a real time issue involving me, Jerry and the outcome of a sign off, I'd immediately go over his head -- And if that didn't result in a sign off -- I'd go to the body who approved the code and plead my case. I've done it before and I'll do it again -- Thus far my success rate is 100%, BTW.

    Bottom line -- There is a built in appeals process in every municipality, city, county and jurisdiction in the lower 48 that allows for the overruling of capricious decisions made by code inspectors -- I know this because I've done it time and time again over the past 30 years.


  9. #74
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,250

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Quote Originally Posted by Widdershins Saunders View Post
    They can until they happen upon a bulldog like me.
    I've found that bulldogs spend more time licking themselves after marking their territory than they do anything else.

    Other than that, they are pretty useless.

    OTOH, every once in awhile a trades person encounters a person like Jerry who thinks they can twist the adopted code to meet their own narrow interpretation.

    I've never put up with it in the past, and I'll be damned if I'll put up with it this close to retirement. If this were a real time issue involving me, Jerry and the outcome of a sign off, I'd immediately go over his head -- And if that didn't result in a sign off -- I'd go to the body who approved the code and plead my case. I've done it before and I'll do it again -- Thus far my success rate is 100%, BTW.
    Probably because you act you are a bull in a china shop and you think you can run over others by using "attitude".

    Fortunately, here, you will run into people who actually use their brains and think more than they try to bully their way through things, and when that happens ... the bull is distracted by the red cape, which is when the bull gets speared ... then we get together for a bar-b-que ... and we do not have to go far for the steak to through on the barbie either, its just been freshly speared.

    Not unlike that other post in another thread where I asked about what it meant when John shot the bull with Jerry ...

    ... and someone responded that we were having bar-b-que!

    Widdershins, you really do need to come to grips with what little you can do and that being a bully does not always get your way.

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  10. #75
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    No. San Diego Co., CA
    Posts
    562

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    So now Watson - I refuse to grace you with a title - you have succeeded in pissing me off. I extend my congratulations because that doesn't happen very often. You have made assumptions about my motive(s) for my original post, debunking my character and integrity, based on previous posts in other threads. I had given you the benefit of the doubt with your knowledge of technical issues on a variety of other matters but I see communication, understanding, comprehension and the ability to share one's knowledge without offending are not your strong points.

    Suffice to say, I am a Handyman and proud to provide that service. I also completed the inspection on the duplex from which this post originated. The WH and TPR were as photographed and I sought opinions from this board as to how the issue could be remediated FOR MY OWN PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE AND GRATIFICATION - though I may share that knowledge with the client if called upon (I wasn't). Furthermore any information I do glean will be of future use. I appreciate all contributors - as you can see information varies around the country, and good people disagree.

    It was not my intention to post further until I had received a response from the AHJ - as yet none despite two left messages. The thread, despite still receiving useful information, had degenerated and it was time to go. I had started it and thought appropriate to end it.

    I was not asked, nor did I ever offer to provide any plumbing service, nor any other work of any nature, at this inspection - not that it is any business of yours. I am not answerable to you, which is reciprocated, but your latest post, making disparaging remarks has roused my ire. You think you know me. You think you know the Inspection business but based on your postings - I beg to differ. If you approach clients in the same manner as you post, no wonder you travel from State to State. It's hard to catch up with a moving target. Please do not make assumptions about me, respond to any future posts of mine or add un-asked for information or un-called for comments. They will not be appreciated or read.

    However, if you are ever in my area and need an honest, reliable, trustworthy handyman, please don't hesitate to send me an email. I am, however, pretty booked up until well into the New Year. Thank you.


  11. #76
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    No. San Diego Co., CA
    Posts
    562

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Tim
    Please read my quotes by Watson carefully and comprehend. I do not/have not performed repairs on homes I have Inspected. I do offer my experience to inspection clients as to what it may take to fix or repair discovered issues. I see this as both reasonable and obligatory as they are typically looking for an 'Answer Man' and are paying for it. Who else are they likely to turn to within the short term window of negotiations?

    On occasion and without remuneration I have also referred them to licensed and qualified trades persons who can provide any necessary repairs. I do provide a handyman service and have performed work at homes I have inspected. However, the work includes that which is outside aspects and issues typically identified, examined or otherwise evaluated during an inspection. I do get referrals from both aspects of the business which compliment each other. This, IMO, is NOT in conflinct with my States mandates or regulation (I am not affilliated with any group or organization and therefore not bound by them) AND if it's not (I have a good legal basis for determining so) then where is the argument? Other than perhaps it's not something you, or other Inspectors, would chose not to do. Choice being the operative word. There is no ethical dilemma or dichotomy on my part.

    As I previously posted, I did not begin this thread with any other motive or reason other than to become informed and solicit varying ideas to remedy a problem. For Watson to 'assume' and insinuate that my reasoning to be somewhat underhanded is completely eroneous and out of line. I truly appreciate the good intentions of your comments, knowledge sharing and valuable insight, however. I suppose we shall agree to disagree on some issues.

    ip


  12. #77
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,777

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Page View Post
    Tim
    Please read my quotes by Watson carefully and comprehend. I do not/have not performed repairs on homes I have Inspected. I do offer my experience to inspection clients as to what it may take to fix or repair discovered issues. I see this as both reasonable and obligatory as they are typically looking for an 'Answer Man' and are paying for it. Who else are they likely to turn to within the short term window of negotiations?

    On occasion and without remuneration I have also referred them to licensed and qualified trades persons who can provide any necessary repairs. I do provide a handyman service and have performed work at homes I have inspected. However, the work includes that which is outside aspects and issues typically identified, examined or otherwise evaluated during an inspection. I do get referrals from both aspects of the business which compliment each other. This, IMO, is NOT in conflinct with my States mandates or regulation (I am not affilliated with any group or organization and therefore not bound by them) AND if it's not (I have a good legal basis for determining so) then where is the argument? Other than perhaps it's not something you, or other Inspectors, would chose not to do. Choice being the operative word. There is no ethical dilemma or dichotomy on my part.

    As I previously posted, I did not begin this thread with any other motive or reason other than to become informed and solicit varying ideas to remedy a problem. For Watson to 'assume' and insinuate that my reasoning to be somewhat underhanded is completely eroneous and out of line. I truly appreciate the good intentions of your comments, knowledge sharing and valuable insight, however. I suppose we shall agree to disagree on some issues.

    ip
    Ian I am a little confused. A previous posting by you that HG Watson listed in line posting #69 had you quoted as stating :

    " That's probably why I get calls to repair some of the issues I have I identified during the Inspection. I don't offer a bid at the time of the inspection. I don't find things wrong, just so I can fix them later. I report what I find and leave it up to the client. If they want to use my findings as a bargaining chip or have them repaired before or after the sale, it's their choice. In fact I encourage them to get bids from any and all other sources. If they want to call me, perhaps a month or two later - after the inspection (and the sale) to change out a perfectly good toilet or install new faucets - I see absolutely nothing wrong with providing that service nor am I conflicted in any way. I'm sure there are those that do, but I simply can not follow their reasoning...the old saw..."conflict of interest" just doesn't cut it for me. "


    Which is it?
    Either : " That's probably why I get calls to repair some of the issues I have I identified during the Inspection." ----- "If they want to call me, perhaps a month or two later - after the inspection (and the sale) to change out a perfectly good toilet or install new faucets"

    Or: "....
    . I do not/have not performed repairs on homes I have Inspected. "

    I admit I do not know CA licensing law as it pertains to Home Inspections, so clue me in. Is there no time specification as to when a Home Inspector can return to perform any type of work on the property that the Lic HI had inspected?

    In Maryland it is one year from date of inspection. There is no fuzzy line between what was in the report and other types of work. Work is work and not permitted.
    Also, does CA require you to be Licensed to preform Home Improvements (basically any type of work on the property) ?

    Not jerking your chain, just wanting to broaden my understand of other states.


  13. #78
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,777

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Thinking of just starting different thread, but since you all are here.

    Is if in conflict with code to use flexible 3/4" copper to go 190 degrees around WH. No elbows just a continuous curve?

    I can see how code strives to reduce friction and increasing pressure by restricting the number of 90s or elbows. Thus the idea of a curved line application to going around WH.


  14. #79
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Snowbird (this means I'm retired and migrate between locations), FL/MI
    Posts
    4,086

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Quote Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells View Post
    Thinking of just starting different thread, but since you all are here.

    Is if in conflict with code to use flexible 3/4" copper to go 190 degrees around WH. No elbows just a continuous curve?

    I can see how code strives to reduce friction and increasing pressure by restricting the number of 90s or elbows. Thus the idea of a curved line application to going around WH.
    Not permitted, yes in conflict.

    See Sections referenced earlier above and referenced in the following thread relative to California: http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_i...rain-pipe.html

    Additionally, the length of copper corregated flexible connctions (inlet and outlet of water heating storage type vessle) are further limited as to length by the CPC.

    Hard drawn copper tube. Pressure and temperature ratings. Corregated copper flexible connectors are pre-manufactured, approved/listed as an assembly, and cutting off the threaded connector on the terminal end is an adulteration of the product. These are also not designed to be connected end-to-end and doing so would be violative of the instructions.

    See additional notations and discussion on the above (clickable link) thread, and you'll also find references in other threads on the subject.

    We are talking about storage type water heaters which are of a reasonable size such as pictured, not insty-hot devices or thse with minimal gallon capacity, right?


  15. #80
    Mike Inspector's Avatar
    Mike Inspector Guest

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Page View Post
    Tim
    I do provide a handyman service and have performed work at homes I have inspected. ip
    Ian,
    You are in direct violation of California B&P Code 7197 by your own admission

    7197. (a) It is an unfair business practice for a home inspector, a
    company that employs the inspector, or a company that is controlled
    by a company that also has a financial interest in a company
    employing a home inspector, to do any of the following:
    (1) To perform or offer to perform, for an additional fee, any
    repairs to a structure on which the inspector, or the inspector's
    company, has prepared a home inspection report in the past 12 months.
    (2) Inspect for a fee any property in which the inspector, or the
    inspector's company, has any financial interest or any interest in
    the transfer of the property.
    (3) To offer or deliver any compensation, inducement, or reward to
    the owner of the inspected property, the broker, or agent, for the
    referral of any business to the inspector or the inspection company.
    (4) Accept an engagement to make an inspection or to prepare a
    report in which the employment itself or the fee payable for the
    inspection is contingent upon the conclusions in the report,
    preestablished findings, or the close of escrow.
    (5) A home protection company that is affiliated with or that
    retains the home inspector does not violate this section if it
    performs repairs pursuant to claims made under the home protection
    contract.
    (b) This section shall not affect the ability of a structural pest
    control operator to perform repairs pursuant to Section 8505 as a
    result of a structural pest control inspection.



    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Page View Post
    However, the work includes that which is outside aspects and issues typically identified, examined or otherwise evaluated during an inspection.
    ip
    B&P code is plain and simple- (1) To perform or offer to perform, for an additional fee, any repairs to a structure on which the inspector, or the inspector's company, has prepared a home inspection report in the past 12 months.

    NO EXCEPTIONS listed at all


  16. #81
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    No. San Diego Co., CA
    Posts
    562

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Mike

    Thank you for posting the applicable CA law as it applies to Home Inspectors. However only item (a) 1, is applicable in the is case. As you can clearly see the operative words here are "...shall not perform or offer to perform any REPAIRS...". Please look up any definition of that word you care to. It does not, in any way, shape, or form include installing , placing any new item which was not in need of repair or issues improved solely for cosmetic purposes. Repair means to make broken or non-working things whole or if they can not be made whole then replaced with a working item (so as to make the item whole). If a perefectly working bathroom fixture is replaced for cosmetic purposes only, then no repair is effected. The fixture was not broken, was therefore in no need of repair or to be made whole from a broken or inoperative condition.

    Neither would it include installing or improving any item, considered to be cosmetic in nature which is likely outside the scope of a standard Home Inspection. The 'gate' installation - referred to in a previous thread and resurected by Watson - is an example. The item was not in existence at the time of the inspection, consequently outside the scope. Neither was it a replacement of an existing gate in need of repair. That work, therefore does not fall under the purview or authority of BP 7197, which specifically refers to REPAIRS. It makes no mention of providing other work or installation(s). That's the language of the statute. It matters not how you wish to interpret it, the language and the legal definition of REPAIR is clear to me and without ambiguity. Now if the CA legislature had wanted to add the words 'or work', or 'provide additional services' etc. then we would not be having this discussion, but they have not.

    Over time, the HI industry and most HI organizations have included the word 'work'. (Inspectors shall not etc...) in their SOP Code of Ethics, but that's not what CA law decrees. It's not semantics, I am not playing around with the word or its definition to make my case. I read BP 7197 the way it is written without adding my own words to it, I encourage you to do the same. If you find any other reference to HIs 'working' within any other CA Code, please share it with me, though any such research will be duplicative.

    I do not solely rely on my own opinion - though I do have many years of legal procedure to rely on. I have learned to interpret codes and statutes as to how they read and not impose any inuendo or alternative meaning. I also have a very close connection with an ex-member of the State Legislature, previously working at the Better Business Bureau, who also confirms my position. I do not wish to rehash every aspect of my previous post(s) except to say my argument and position remain intact. I have performed WORK which did not include making REPAIRS, at homes I have inspected. I have never maintained to have made Repairs at these homes. If you care to, just read the words as written without applying your own concept of what they mean.

    Gary - furthermore...

    Currently there is no specific requirements, under CA law, for 'Handyman' licensing. The issue is how much work is performed, the nature of the work and contractual obligations. The general opinion from the Legislative body is no State license is required if the work performed, including materials is under $500. per job. All of my Handyman work falls under that category. Nevertheless, most trades do require a State license of some sort but that is if the business performed is over and above the $500 limit. For example, installing the gate - as referred to previously - was NOT a repair (neither was it at a 'structure' refered to in the BP code). It took about 6 hours and material $50. The bill was well under the imposed limit. Is there risk and opportunity to circumvent the law, of course, but I chose not to. I apply integrity and honesty in all aspects of my business. Neither do I consider myself hypocritical by joining any organization which imposes a rule I can not conduct a legitimate business under.

    ip


  17. #82
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,777

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Ian,
    Interesting, no lic req under $500. I can see why so many illegal aliens flock to CA.
    I guess the state legislature only was interested in protecting those home owners that have money to spend on the larger projects or more expensive items. $500 doesn't go far today but even the smallest job should offer protection for the home owner, though licensing is not perfect it helps.

    Parsing the definitions of repair and work is interesting.
    Has there been any formal legal president established to confirm your position on repair vs work?
    Has anyone been taken to task for performing work and it being deemed as repair?
    Or, has CA Licinsing Board posted a formal position on what their interpretation is?


  18. #83
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    NY Finger Lakes Area
    Posts
    206

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Quote Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr. View Post
    Not permitted, yes in conflict.

    See Sections referenced earlier above and referenced in the following thread relative to California: http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_i...rain-pipe.html

    Additionally, the length of copper corregated flexible connctions (inlet and outlet of water heating storage type vessle) are further limited as to length by the CPC.

    Hard drawn copper tube. Pressure and temperature ratings. Corregated copper flexible connectors are pre-manufactured, approved/listed as an assembly, and cutting off the threaded connector on the terminal end is an adulteration of the product. These are also not designed to be connected end-to-end and doing so would be violative of the instructions.

    See additional notations and discussion on the above (clickable link) thread, and you'll also find references in other threads on the subject.

    We are talking about storage type water heaters which are of a reasonable size such as pictured, not insty-hot devices or thse with minimal gallon capacity, right?
    Don't think I saw anything about corrugated connectors-I believe the question related to soft, or flexible copper tubing.


  19. #84
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Snowbird (this means I'm retired and migrate between locations), FL/MI
    Posts
    4,086

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Quote Originally Posted by Gregory Booth View Post
    Don't think I saw anything about corrugated connectors-I believe the question related to soft, or flexible copper tubing.
    Gregory Booth,

    The question referred to flexible copper.

    I addressed both possibilities.

    What about the CPC earlier citation and language I provided earlier in the instant topic discussion, my prior posts in the instant topic discussion, the referenced other topic discussion, and the reference to "hard-drawn copper pipe" in my responses did you find lacking, regarding addresing the possibility of soft copper tubing for a TPRV discharge in California?

    Previously posted Citation:
    608.5 Relief valves located inside a building shall be provided with a drain, not smaller than the relief valve outlet, of galvanized steel, hard-drawn copper pipe and fittings, CPVC, or listed relief valve drain tube with fittings that will not reduce the internal bore of the pipe or tubing (straight lengths as opposed to coils) and shall extend from the valve to the outside of the building, with the end of the pipe not more than two (2) feet (610 mm) nor less than six (6) inches (152 mm) abovethe ground or the flood level of the area receiving the discharge and pointing downward. Such drains may terminate at other approved locations. Relief valve drains shall not terminate in a building's crawl space. No part of such drain pipe shall be trapped or subject to freezing. The terminal end of the drain pipe shall not be threaded.

    Gary's question:

    Thinking of just starting different thread, but since you all are here.

    Is if in conflict with code to use flexible 3/4" copper to go 190 degrees around WH. No elbows just a continuous curve?

    I can see how code strives to reduce friction and increasing pressure by restricting the number of 90s or elbows. Thus the idea of a curved line application to going around WH.
    My response:

    Not permitted, yes in conflict.

    See Sections referenced earlier above and referenced in the following thread relative to California: http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_i...rain-pipe.html

    Additionally, the length of copper corregated flexible connctions (inlet and outlet of water heating storage type vessle) are further limited as to length by the CPC.

    Hard drawn copper tube. Pressure and temperature ratings. Corregated copper flexible connectors are pre-manufactured, approved/listed as an assembly, and cutting off the threaded connector on the terminal end is an adulteration of the product. These are also not designed to be connected end-to-end and doing so would be violative of the instructions.

    See additional notations and discussion on the above (clickable link) thread, and you'll also find references in other threads on the subject.

    We are talking about storage type water heaters which are of a reasonable size such as pictured, not insty-hot devices or thse with minimal gallon capacity, right?
    And CPC requires pressure testing of 100 PSI OR One-and-one-half times the system or componant exposure, which ever is higher.

    Nobody wants TPRV discharge "a-flipping" and "a-flopping" around when exposed to high temp or high pressure relief evacuation, or expansion/contraction to dislodge from airgap - or so restricted that it fails or causes another componant to fail, when subjected to forces of thermal expansion or contraction.

    Further, it must not be able to be pinched, crushed, bent, or otherwise restricted.

    Last edited by H.G. Watson, Sr.; 12-10-2010 at 06:52 PM. Reason: No change in content or spelling errors, just fixed quote formatting.

  20. #85
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    NY Finger Lakes Area
    Posts
    206

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    H.G.--While I can't say for sure, I think that post 78 was, most likely, referring to soft, flexible copper tubing. You have, I believe, assumed that the reference was to corrugated, flexible,copper connector-assemblies. You missed the intent of the question--why don't you just say so...better yet, just say nothing (for a change). And BTW, learn how to spell corregated(sic).


  21. #86
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Snowbird (this means I'm retired and migrate between locations), FL/MI
    Posts
    4,086

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Ah, yes the old typo/spelling complaint. Petty. You had no problem determining my intent. When you're down to one-handed stylus typing and have more than 8 decades under your own belt, perhaps if you're still living and walking, you can try walking in my shoes. In the meanwhile you may "can" your pettiness regarding a question that was not yours, and your determining what Garry S was or was not asking.

    As far as my having missed anything regarding the intent of Garry's question, that is up to Garry to decide, not you.

    I addressed both soft copper and copper water heater connectors, both are flex, neither are allowed for a TPRV discharge in California.


  22. #87
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    No. San Diego Co., CA
    Posts
    562

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Garry

    California is obviously a border State but I don't think it tops the list for an undocumented workforce. A State 'Handyman' lic. (Home Improvement Contractor) was available a few years ago (repealed 2004) but for some reason the Legislature did away with it in preference to having 43 identified trades having individual licenses. A General Contractor's lic. provides a limited 'umbrella' license but the work I perform would not fall under its definition. Furthermore I have no interest in becoming a GC and my work does not solely consist of any of the other trades mentioned. I basically perform DIY stuff for people who are unable to DIT. As for 'protecting the public' - I am a registered business with Business lic. 99% of my work is from referral or personal knowledge. I have built up quite a large client base over the years and my reputation with them is unblemished.

    I assume that because the old Handyman law was repealed, the legislature did not recognize this service or licensing requirement as a significant problem. I am not aware of any legal precedent being set over the wording of BP 7197. I have sought legal advice and opinion from the Contractor's Lic. Board and BBB on which my business model is based and to that extent, follow the applicable law.

    ip


  23. #88
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,777

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Ian,
    Again interesting. In today's society allowing anyone into your home that is not Lic ., Insures and Bonded is a grave mistake. Even if its to just screw in a light bulb (a little unde $500). I have a small but active segment of business that I service which require some real simple (do it your self) work. But the allowing of random workers onto your property is foolish on nothing other than the simple liability of the property owner. I am sure that the law changes had nothing to do with those that should not be there in the first place.

    Thanks for your reply


  24. #89
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Omaha
    Posts
    143

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Why not extend the PVC across the closet behind the WH. Have a pipe reducer on the pvc with the larger end pointed up. Now extend the copper pipe so it is over the reducer with the required air gap. Use the largest size cooper pipe that is reasonable.

    The goal is a safe discharge from the TPR valve and to collect the discharge. A typical discharge is a small amount of water followed by dripping as the valve can not reseat due to lime/scale deposits. A massive discharge is likely to overwhelm any drain pipe if there is an air gap.


  25. #90
    David Bell's Avatar
    David Bell Guest

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    I think this thread has lasted longer than my first marriage! But there was more arguing here. Code unfortunately is always going to be interpreted by human beings that see things differently.


  26. #91
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Posts
    3,746

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    "Here's the gist, Jerry; Lines 1 and 2 require that if the T&P is to be discharged into the sanitary sewer, then the T&P must be discharged into a trapped indirect drain, within the same room, and with no less than a 1" air break/air gap."




    That should be "not less than 1.5" air gap", not 1".

    I'm probably gonna hate myself for posting this.

    ' correct a wise man and you gain a friend... correct a fool and he'll bloody your nose'.

  27. #92
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Snowbird (this means I'm retired and migrate between locations), FL/MI
    Posts
    4,086

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell View Post
    "Here's the gist, Jerry; Lines 1 and 2 require that if the T&P is to be discharged into the sanitary sewer, then the T&P must be discharged into a trapped indirect drain, within the same room, and with no less than a 1" air break/air gap."




    That should be "not less than 1.5" air gap", not 1".

    I'm probably gonna hate myself for posting this.
    Where in the California Plumbing Code or otherwise are you basing this? Citation, please.

    Flood level includes the flood level rim of a waste receptacle or fixture.

    2006 plumbing chapters of the IRC are not applicable in California.

    California utilizes Uniform Plumbing Code and Uniform Mechanical Code basis for its codes, at least at the present (modified with state-wide ammendments and local ordinance/code ammendments/further restrictions). The UPC, and the California Plumbing Code are more restrictive than the I-codes, a "higher" standard, i.e. more restrictive.

    Regards another's "all 'trade size' being equal" argument, that is erroneous and in conflict with the actual language from the CPC, the UPC, and the standards for which the TPRV are manufactured to.

    Again, the CPC citation offered several times already specifically states regarding the discharge for such valves:

    [quote] '...that will not reduce the internal bore of the pipe or tubing...'

    Regarding any unlicensed contractor, including a unlicensed contractor "HANDYMAN" performing work irrespective of the dollar amount in or upon a residence in California, and especially those operating under the "apparent loophole" of the "less than $500" ... There is no requirement that said homeowner, tenant, occupant, etc. has to PAY for such work, even when performed ... and such proclaimed deblts are unenforceable - by lien, by litigation, small-claims or otherwise, there is NO basis to do so - expressly in California law, lack of a contractors license is an affirmative defense - and unlicensed work is deemed un-meritorious of payment, and unlicensed contracts (verbal or otherwise) are deemed un-worthy of enforcement.

    Last edited by H.G. Watson, Sr.; 12-11-2010 at 08:18 AM.

  28. #93
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Posts
    3,746

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Where in the California Plumbing Code or otherwise are you basing this? Citation, please.


    Since you asked
    The Cross Connection Control Manual published by the University of Southern California, which is approved, accepted and adopted by most states (including California) as the standard for cross connection control.
    I do not have my manual with me, but a quick search found this:
    http://www.usc.edu/dept/fccchr/airgap.html

    An Air Gap is a physical separation of the supply pipe by at least two pipe diameters (never less than one inch) vertically above the overflow rim of the receiving vessel. Ö

    Two pipe diameters of the ĺĒ pipe, which is 1.5Ē

    Your welcome
    Rick


    Flood level includes the flood level rim of a waste receptacle or fixture.
    Yeah, your point being?


    2006 plumbing chapters of the IRC are not applicable in California.
    Iím not talking about the 2006 IRC, but I understand why you thought I might be.


    California utilizes Uniform Plumbing Code and Uniform Mechanical Code basis for its codes, at least at the present (modified with state-wide ammendments and local ordinance/code ammendments/further restrictions). The UPC, and the California Plumbing Code are more restrictive than the I-codes, a "higher" standard, i.e. more restrictive.
    OK, but is there anything in it that is contrary to what Iíve said?

    I donít see where anything youíve said below has anything to do with what I said.


    Regards another's "all 'trade size' being equal" argument, that is erroneous and in conflict with the actual language from the CPC, the UPC, and the standards for which the TPRV are manufactured to.

    Again, the CPC citation offered several times already specifically states regarding the discharge for such valves:

    [quote] '...that will not reduce the internal bore of the pipe or tubing...'

    Regarding any unlicensed contractor, including a unlicensed contractor "HANDYMAN" performing work irrespective of the dollar amount in or upon a residence in California, and especially those operating under the "apparent loophole" of the "less than $500" ... There is no requirement that said homeowner, tenant, occupant, etc. has to PAY for such work, even when performed ... and such proclaimed deblts are unenforceable - by lien, by litigation, small-claims or otherwise, there is NO basis to do so - expressly in California law, lack of a contractors license is an affirmative defense - and unlicensed work is deemed un-meritorious of payment, and unlicensed contracts (verbal or otherwise) are deemed un-worthy of enforcement.


    ' correct a wise man and you gain a friend... correct a fool and he'll bloody your nose'.

  29. #94
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Posts
    3,746

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    More than 5 hours and still no comeback.
    Must be searching my criminal history, aliases, divorce papers.

    ' correct a wise man and you gain a friend... correct a fool and he'll bloody your nose'.

  30. #95
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Snowbird (this means I'm retired and migrate between locations), FL/MI
    Posts
    4,086

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell View Post
    More than 5 hours and still no comeback.
    Must be searching my criminal history, aliases, divorce papers.
    Rick Cantrell,

    Uncalled-for-demanding impatience, petulance, rudeness, demanding and snarkiness, especially on an older, exhaustingly long thread and your latest revival of same.

    A mere "air gap" as YOU have presented, at drain termination is not specified for relief valves installed indoors in california plumbing code and does not meet the requirements spelled out in CPC 608.5 for permissive approval as an alternate location for relief valve drain termination.

    A 6" minimum termination of the relief valve drain above flood level of the area receiving the drainage IS specified. This "gap" at the discharge termination serves to release to atmosphere the energy (temperature and/or pressure) i.e. dissapate - in a safe location/manner prior to introduction to "the area receiving discharge". Minimum 6" superceeds a mere 1-1/2 times.

    If you're not going to bother to refer to the applicable code or the quoted citations already provided, why should I bother responding to you or your obviously erroneous application of inapplicable information? Let alone within your 5 hours, and especially when you make snarky remarks.

    CPC 608.5 does not use the word "gap" or the term "air gap". It does specify a minimum 6" elevation termination above the flood level of the area receiving discharge - that includes the flood level rim of a receptacle receiving that drainage - and thereby requires indirect 6" gap to be minimally considered as another "approved location" for drainage for same.

    "Such drains may terminate at other approved locations" must do so meeting the "SHALL" requirements for such drains for relief valves installed indoors. This includes minimum 6" and not to exceed 24" "gaps" and that the drain termination "points downward".

    A mere "air gap" as you have described does not meet with, superceed or comply with the requirements for CPC 608.5 for RELIEF valve drains. Unlike a washing machine discharge, for example, a relief valve discharge located inside a building, in California which may further be in a confined space but accessible, observable, and with ready access, and at a wide range in elevation/atlitude - requires more than you suggest, at a minimum, in California.

    Some equipment requires even more stringent requirements. Depends on the manufacturer and the equipment, and its approval status and/or limited acceptance in California.

    Last edited by H.G. Watson, Sr.; 12-12-2010 at 09:28 AM.

  31. #96
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Posts
    3,746

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    "Uncalled-for-demanding impatience, petulance, rudeness, demanding and snarkiness, especially on an older, exhaustingly long thread and your latest revival of same."

    You are right, it was uncalled for, my apologies.

    However, you seem to think it's perfectly OK for you to question everyone about anything. You question their motives, and qualifications, demand citations and references. But let someone respond to you with a comeback and you don't like it at all.

    If you think I'm wrong, then show me where I'm wrong.
    I'm here to learn, and hopefully even to teach others on occasion.
    You seem to be an intelligent and educated person.
    But You seem to always want to fight someone.
    Use your education to help others instead of being so antagonistic


    BTW
    I was responding to a post that said a 3/4" pipe needed a 1" air gap
    I said
    The air gap on a 3/4" pipe is not less than 1.5"

    I provided a link to USC that showed the same.
    Again, If you think I'm wrong , I'm listening.
    Oh, and try to keep it on topic. You many times drift away from the topic, and make obscure references that I don't understand.


    Are you here to learn or to teach?
    From what I can see you don't do either.
    An Inspector should not only find faults, but also tell why it's a fault THEN say what should be done.
    All you do is find faults, almost never do you offer advice or constructive criticism.


    And my guess is, there are more than a few people on here that are saying to themselves, "I wish I'd said that".

    Last edited by Rick Cantrell; 12-12-2010 at 01:19 PM.
    ' correct a wise man and you gain a friend... correct a fool and he'll bloody your nose'.

  32. #97
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,250

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell View Post
    "Uncalled-for-demanding impatience, petulance, rudeness, demanding and snarkiness, especially on an older, exhaustingly long thread and your latest revival of same."

    You are right, it was uncalled for, my apologies.

    I thought you were describing H. G. Watson in that quote, then I went back and re-read the posts above and say it was the reverse ... I wonder why I first thought it was you describing H. G. Watson ... ????



    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  33. #98
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Columbus GA
    Posts
    3,746

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    "I thought you were describing H. G. Watson in that quote, then I went back and re-read the posts above and say it was the reverse ... "

    Yeah, when I read it I was thinking
    Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

    ' correct a wise man and you gain a friend... correct a fool and he'll bloody your nose'.

  34. #99
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    552

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Hay Guys!!!

    Have a Happy Holidays!!!!

    Rich


  35. #100
    Widdershins Saunders's Avatar
    Widdershins Saunders Guest

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Uncalled-for-demanding impatience, petulance, rudeness, demanding and snarkiness, especially on an older, exhaustingly long thread and your latest revival of same.
    Well, this is both interesting and educational.

    It's interesting to know that the personality conflict between Jerry and myself isn't the only personality conflict to beset this board -- OTOH, it's educational to know that two participants I follow the most closely wouldn't urinate on the other if he were fully engulfed in flames.


  36. #101
    Widdershins Saunders's Avatar
    Widdershins Saunders Guest

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    I've found that bulldogs spend more time licking themselves after marking their territory than they do anything else.

    Other than that, they are pretty useless.
    Jerry, given your contributions to this thread to date, it is immediately apparent you couldn't find your own arse armed with a map and a flashlight.

    Probably because you act you are a bull in a china shop and you think you can run over others by using "attitude".
    No, Jerry -- I run over others in the name of bringing the cost down for my clients.

    There is a framework and process for challenging the decisions/ineptitude of Code Inspectors for a reason -- Namely, because AHJ's are human, and subject to the same arrogance, narrow-mindedness and arseholiness as that of the rest of humanity.

    Fortunately, here, you will run into people who actually use their brains and think more than they try to bully their way through things, and when that happens ... the bull is distracted by the red cape, which is when the bull gets speared ... then we get together for a bar-b-que ... and we do not have to go far for the steak to through on the barbie either, its just been freshly speared.
    I imagine most folks reading that were every bit as offended by your assumption that you speak for them as I was.

    Here's the deal, Jerry -- A quick perusal of this forum shows that most of the regulars view you as a necessary evil -- You seem to have a fairly decent grasp of the oft varying codes of the land.

    OTOH, it is immediately apparent you haven't taken the time to keep yourself current on the varying Code cycles, adoptions and Amendments.

    Not unlike that other post in another thread where I asked about what it meant when John shot the bull with Jerry ...
    Deflection noted.

    ... and someone responded that we were having bar-b-que!
    Deflection noted.

    Widdershins, you really do need to come to grips with what little you can do and that being a bully does not always get your way.
    And therein lies the rub, Jerry -- You're one of those 'holier than thou" sumbitches who thinks his word is the 'Final Word'.

    D00d -- I've laid so many of you arrogant arseholes to waste over the past 40 years that I finally stopped counting some 20 years ago.

    Jerry -- I know that you're so drunk with power you'll never fully understand this, but humor me nonetheless -- I know exactly who you are, exactly which licenses/accreditations you hold (including the expired ones you claim to hold) and exactly how much power you actually exert, not so much, actually.

    Pray you never face me in a Court of Law.

    This thread and your ineptitude will be Exhibit A.


  37. #102
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    26,250

    Default Re: TPR pipe

    Quote Originally Posted by Widdershins Saunders View Post
    OTOH, it is immediately apparent you haven't taken the time to keep yourself current on the varying Code cycles, adoptions and Amendments.
    I doubt that you will find many, if any, who would agree with that, but, that statement is further evidence of ... (see below) ...

    And therein lies the rub, Jerry -- You're one of those 'holier than thou" sumbitches who thinks his word is the 'Final Word'.

    D00d -- I've laid so many of you arrogant arseholes to waste over the past 40 years that I finally stopped counting some 20 years ago.
    ... further evidence of that you described yourself quite accurately - thinking that you know ... make that 'knowing' that you know ... (in your own mind, you think you 'know') ... more than anyone else.

    Jerry -- I know that you're so drunk with power you'll never fully understand this, but humor me nonetheless -- I know exactly who you are, exactly which licenses/accreditations you hold (including the expired ones you claim to hold) and exactly how much power you actually exert, not so much, actually.
    So, you can read after all, as in reading my web site ... wait, you can't read can you, because if you could then you would know that I don't claim to hold any expired licenses/accreditations- you would have read that they are certifications I previously held, such as my Certified Pest Control Operator, which I did not renew in 2006 as I no longer had any need for that license given what it cost yearly to maintain that license. You will find that true of the certifications I no longer hold or hold as inactive (until this past year I held both my Certified Building Contractor and Certified General Contractor as active, and finally placed my Certified Building Contractor as inactive as there is absolutely no reason to maintain both as active - my Certified General Contractor can do everything my Certified Building Contractor can do ... and more ... so there was absolutely no need for me to have kept it active for the last 8 years or so that I have kept it active.

    But you would know that stuff ... if ... if you could read and if you did read.

    Pray you never face me in a Court of Law.
    Yes, I would be quite embarrassed to eliminate you so quickly, I really like people who are more knowledgeable and challenging, as that causes me to learn more about more things, which I like doing.

    From your posts ... it is quite obvious that you dislike learning more about things. That it is either 'your way' or 'get-out-of-your-face' ... which just what causes people who actually know how little you know to stand there and endure your spitting while trying to educate you.

    This post, and your others, have shown more about you than you planned, and it is not a pretty sight to behold.

    Last edited by Jerry Peck; 12-14-2010 at 09:00 PM. Reason: I should add: there is an intentional 'reading and comprehension test' for Widdershins in the above. I'll see if he sees it.
    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •