Thread: Your wording?

If you check a heat pump , during the present time of year and the temp difference is in normal range. What wording do you use on your report?

Similar Threads:

• wording
• Re-inspection wording
• What wording to use about windows
• Proper wording
• Foundation repair wording

Function ok.

Originally Posted by M. Waller

If you check a heat pump , during the present time of year and the temp difference is in normal range. What wording do you use on your report?

See if any of the following float your boat:

I operated the heat pump and it was cooling/heating properly.

When I turned on the heat pump it worked properly

The heat pump is working properly.

The heat pump is OK, it is cooling/heating properly.

Also include the verbiage "at time of inspection".

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

Also include the verbiage "at time of inspection".

I have that in my contract and in the disclaimers at the begining of my report in a blurb of mandated verbiage that our state requires to be put into all reports.

Originally Posted by M. Waller

If you check a heat pump , during the present time of year and the temp difference is in normal range. What wording do you use on your report?

HEAT PUMP:
: A heat pump is basically a reverse- cycle air conditioner. The evaporator and condenser switch functions.
: The heat pump was operated in the cooling mode but was not operated in the heat mode because the ambient temperature was to high and to do so could damage the coil or compressor.
: If heat pump works in one mode it should work in other mode also, with a few exceptions one being reversing valve failure.

ok,
I was wondering why because of this reason :

I do an inspection on a house and the Heat Pump worked great. A month later the buyers move in and shortly after that it died. They called a local HVAC company out there to come check it and the techs said that they had been out there just a few weeks back.
The buyers agent then gets involved and asked to see the work order on the unit, the techs show it to them both and said they were just asked to charge the unit to get it to "Pass an inspection" as ordered by the selling AGENT.

While I have not been called about any of this, it has me concerned as to my wording. I have something like the ones above but I thought about adding something like "even though the unit tested properly at time of inspection, it is suggested to have the unit cleaned and tested by HVAC tech"

( I am shooting off the hip on the above line but you get the idea)

Originally Posted by M. Waller

ok,
I was wondering why because of this reason :

I do an inspection on a house and the Heat Pump worked great. A month later the buyers move in and shortly after that it died. They called a local HVAC company out there to come check it and the techs said that they had been out there just a few weeks back.
The buyers agent then gets involved and asked to see the work order on the unit, the techs show it to them both and said they were just asked to charge the unit to get it to "Pass an inspection" as ordered by the selling AGENT.

While I have not been called about any of this, it has me concerned as to my wording. I have something like the ones above but I thought about adding something like "even though the unit tested properly at time of inspection, it is suggested to have the unit cleaned and tested by HVAC tech"

( I am shooting off the hip on the above line but you get the idea)

The problem with just calling out everything in a home inspection to be evaluated eliminates you and us and makes us look like idiots (well I do anyway)

If there is no concerns with the unit then that is what you write. " The AC condenser was in good order at the time of the inspection. I found no concerns with the units." You should do a simple temp differential check at the return and supply vents. 15 to 20 degrees for older units and maybe about 12 to 13 degrees for units in the past couple to three years. Of course the age and max breaker size minimum, location of the disconnect blah, blah, blah.

I did have a lawyer send me a complaint and bill from a client I had three months earlier. It stated that they were looking for 5,500 for a complete new system.

No manufacturers tag, older looking unit, inside forced hot air unit had issues, duct work had issues. I recommended that the entire system be evaluated by an HVAC company.

First I told them politely in the letter to read the report and if they did not still have a copy I would send them one. Then I told them to forget it. Don't re read the report. Please bring me to court, I could use the extra money.

I know you were talking heat pumps but same thing, nothing wrong, nothing wrong. "at the time of the inspection"

I do agree with the looking like an idiot part, plus how many would really take that extra step..

Originally Posted by M. Waller

ok,
I was wondering why because of this reason :

I do an inspection on a house and the Heat Pump worked great. A month later the buyers move in and shortly after that it died. They called a local HVAC company out there to come check it and the techs said that they had been out there just a few weeks back.
The buyers agent then gets involved and asked to see the work order on the unit, the techs show it to them both and said they were just asked to charge the unit to get it to "Pass an inspection" as ordered by the selling AGENT.

While I have not been called about any of this, it has me concerned as to my wording. I have something like the ones above but I thought about adding something like "even though the unit tested properly at time of inspection, it is suggested to have the unit cleaned and tested by HVAC tech"

( I am shooting off the hip on the above line but you get the idea)

We can not predict the future. Mechanical items break all the time, so if it is working at the time of the inspection that is about all we can say. I always tell my clients that they should take out a home warranty regardless of the age of the system or appliance. I then tell them that the inspection does not cover anything that breaks down, that is why they need a warranty.

I think that the sellers agent and the HVAC tech should be called out. With the EPA issues in place for the A/C guys they are not supposed to just charge a unit without repairing the leak. The sellers agent well that just sounds like some of their normal SOP to get to the money.

Mechanical items fail, that's just the way it is. If it worked the day of the inspection and you noted it's general condition and any problems, you've done your job. Lawyers make those calls hoping to scare money out of an HI. As Scott said, you can't predict the future.
When I hear, 'we just recharged the unit', me next questions are always ... Did you find the leak and where was it?. If they can't answer that well ... guess what goes in the report.
Being the suspicious SOB that I am of the RE world, I look at the grass, bushes , flowers, whatever is around the condenser to see if it is recently trampled. I gotten some good intell from that. Asking the right questions can lead to surprising answers.

If I'm satisfied with the installation and operation I mark it as "Satisfactory." A good contract will cover the limitations. My HVAC page, for example, lists the specifics to the system, the conditions and my recommendations. Any further comments as to page related limitations that are not in the contract are on the back side of the HVAC page.

I know that many training "schools" teach new inspectors to always recommend further evaluation. A good inspector, with a good report, should not need to resort to this. If, operating within well established parameters and with a good solid background, an inspector should have no problem reporting satisfactory conditions when problems are not found.

Quite honestly, I have little regard for recommending a contractor for the simple and only reason to cover one's butt. To me, it indicates a need for additional training for an inspector who is unsure of his/her abilities.

here, here Eric Barker!!!
Very well said

I agree with what Eric says; but I do have one problem. Here in NJ, I don't see many heat pumps. Every time I do get one, I have to re-read what the proper procedure is to inspect them. With that said, this is what my macro says:

Heat pump was tested using normal operating controls. The unit operated properly at time of inspection. As with all mechanical equipment, the unit may fail at anytime without warning. I cannot determine future failures. A heat pump is basically a compressor-cycle air conditioning system that can operate in reverse. As long as the unit is functioning properly in either the heating or cooling mode, it is an indication that the major components (compressor, fans, and coils) are operational. Adequate air flow is important to the efficiency of these units; the filter should be kept clean as with air conditioners. If a detailed evaluation of the heating or cooling capacity of this units is desired, a licensed HVAC contractor should be consulted prior to closing.

The most common problem I find with heat pumps is the compressor is not raised the required height above the ground.

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

I operated the heat pump and it was cooling/heating properly.

When I turned on the heat pump it worked properly

The heat pump is working properly.

The heat pump is OK, it is cooling/heating properly.

Originally Posted by Darren Miller

The unit operated properly

The common thread among the above is the use of the term "properly".

How can one state that it something is working "properly" given that one is only doing a "visual" ("non-invasive" would be a better term) inspection?

I always used the term "conditionally acceptable" and defined that term in my report. I.e, it is "acceptable" given stated "conditions".

I can see someone who used 'working "properly" ' or wording to that affect ending up in court and paying to replace a system which was "conditionally acceptable" but which was not working "properly" - being as "properly" means exactly in accordance with the manufacturer's installation instructions and operating instructions.

If you state a furnace is working "properly", then what is or is not "proper" will be judged by the mfr.s specifications. Most of these specifications involve measurements that require special training and instrumentation not normally within the scope of a home inspection. The first question would arise, "how did you determine what is acceptable?" or "at what point specifically, does it become unacceptable?". Having said that, I also tend to agree with Eric's point that in order to make a referral, you must have a red flag to trigger it. For instance, if you cannot get the unit to heat or cool to what you would expect is a satisfactory or acceptable level, then you may refer it for service and inspection by a qualified professional. Comfort is very subjective and a personal thing. My in-laws are keeping their house about 85-87F right now and he is still freezing. Unacceptable to most but they wish it was warmer. His comfort level is probably being skewed by medication but how do you measure a person's comfort? You don't. It can be tested to the mfrs. specs. but that should be required only when and if there is a reasonable indication it is not performing to acceptable levels.

Some of you perform various tests to see if a water heater is "drafting" or not. In the summer, the natural draft tends to reverse. Often, water heaters will backdraft regularly in summer then draw like DaVinci in winter. Any inspection or test is just a snapshot in time. We can try to replicate some conditions such as with Worst Case Depressurization Testing and Blower Door tests but even those cannot cover every eventuality.

"Heat pump was tested using normal operating controls. The unit operated properly at time of inspection."

By operated properly, it means I turned the stat to a level below room temperature, the compressor turned on, the blower turned on, warm air blew out of the registers, cooler air got sucked thru the return and the temperature difference was within the guidelines.
I determined the unit operated properly using normal operating controls.

Originally Posted by Darren Miller

"Heat pump was tested using normal operating controls. The unit operated properly at time of inspection."

By operated properly, it means I turned the stat to a level below room temperature, the compressor turned on, the blower turned on, warm air blew out of the registers, cooler air got sucked thru the return and the temperature difference was within the guidelines.
I determined the unit operated properly using normal operating controls.

It *appears* to be functioning as designed. I found no concerns at this time.

Can't get in trouble with *appears* because, hey, "it *appears* to be functioning as designed and I found no concerns at this time"

Originally Posted by Darren Miller

"Heat pump was tested using normal operating controls. The unit operated properly at time of inspection."

By operated properly, it means I turned the stat to a level below room temperature, the compressor turned on, the blower turned on, warm air blew out of the registers, cooler air got sucked thru the return and the temperature difference was within the guidelines.
I determined the unit operated properly using normal operating controls.

Darren,

There is that "properly" again.

There is no way you can determine if a unit is operating "properly" just by using the normal operating controls.

All you can state as fact is 'Yes, the system did turn on when I moved the thermostat calling for it to turn on, and, yes, it did turn off when I moved the thermostat calling for it to turn off.' No more, and maybe even less.

""Heat pump was tested using normal operating controls. The unit operated properly at time of inspection."

For me: "using normal operating controls" is cover by SOP requirement.
"At time of inspection" is covered by my contract.

No need for me to say it again anywhere in the report. That leaves "Satisfactory" as my comment with a note of the temp. diff. found.

Less for me to write, less for the client to slug through when reading.

I use the word

*appeared* throughout my report. Everything we do is based on a visual, even with some testing of systems. Using the terminology *appeared* as in *appeared* to be functioning as designed.

Or The roof shingles and flashing *appeared* to be in good order. We don't know if they only put 2 nails per shingle.

The range *appeared* to be in good working order.

The windows *appeared* to be in good working order.

If something is wrong past you visual and minor operation of a window, range, roof shingles, heat pump, you cannot be wrong with the word *appeared*. The standards explain what we inspect for and our minimum limits.

Jerry Peck *appears* to be fairly intelligent!!!!!!!!! Certainly can't go wrong with that! For all I know he may be an idiot. But he *appears* to have it together

Maybe it's just me but the word "appears" appears to indicate an element of doubt. It's the only circumstance in which I use it.

No reason to get away from *appears*

It does in fact appear to be functioning as designed. You can tell know more than that with out a thoroughly exhaustive inspection.

What is it that everyone seems to be afraid of.

Uh, let me see, I ah, inspected it, and, ah, well, its working. Speaking of working. To who's' standards, to what degree. If it is not working properly then is it working at all?????

The safest word that you could use is it *appears* or *appeared* to be working as designed.

It does not say that there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. It appears to be working as designed. You are doing a visual and some minor hands on testing. From that visual and minor hands on testing it appears to be working as designed. If it is vibrating, dented up, coils kicked in, missing suction line insulation, shredded wiring, not blowing cold air or hot air then it is not functioning as designed, in need of repair. Questionable operation then evaluation and repair.

Does that say it will not stop working tomorrow, no.

Does that say there is nothing wrong with it, no.

Does that say you did an exhaustive inspection, no.

At this moment in time (at the time of inspection) it appears to be functioning as designed. Is there a leak in the system, don't know.


Your client

Well those tests you made, does that mean it is working properly? Well, I would not use the word *properly* or for that matter *working* or for that matter *functioning* or any other word that might be twisted to say working perfectly.

Folks, this is the testing and visual I did. From those tests and visual it *appeared* to be functioning as designed. Appeared to be in good working order.

Yes folks. The system is 3 years old and everything appears to be in good order. I did not find any concerns at this time. (almost never happens) but it does.

Instead of sticking your neck out with words like "properly", "normal", and "satisfactory" or weakening your writing with CYA words like "appears", why not just write what you did and what you observed?

Darren summed it up nicely when he wrote:

I turned the stat to a level below room temperature, the compressor turned on, the blower turned on, warm air blew out of the registers, cooler air got sucked thru the return and the temperature difference was within the guidelines.

That's the way I would write it in my report. If I didn't find any problems with the unit, then I would add that too: "I did not find any problems with the unit."

Let the reader conclude in his mind that the unit is functioning "properly" -- you don't need to do it for him.

The down side is that someone may find a problem with the unit after you did your inspection. That particular problem, whatever it is, is either within or outside the scope of your inspection. If outside the scope, then it's not your problem. If inside the scope, then you blew it, and you need to make it right.

When you do it this way, the argument revolves around whether or not it is reasonable for you to have discovered the problem during the course of your inspection -- which is right where you want the argument to be -- instead of trying to defend your definition of "proper", "normal" or "satisfactory".

Here in North Carolina our state board has actually stated that they do not want is using the word "appears" in our reports. I guess it appears to be a problem.

Thank you gentlemen

Like I said , not arguing, I have used a lot of phrases/terminology in the past and just found the clients, and my self like the word appears.


So with your test and visual that you did do, do you think the unit is working properly???? Well Mr Johnson, it appears to be working just fine right now.

Nothing weak about appears.

The garage puts a fuel pump in your car. Well Mr Johnson, we put the fuel pump in and it appears to have taken care of the problem. Well thanks Joe, now what was the total bill?

To not even mention anything about the operation of the unit sounds a bit weak to me.

Hey folks, I did some tests and a visual. And?????what does that tell you of the operation Joe. Well, uhm, gee, I guess, it seems, well, its working!

Or, does this sound better. Well Mr Johnson, it appears to be in good working order at this time. I did not find any concerns at the time of the inspection.

Yes, It is covering you a** but at the same time you are responding to more than "I turned it on and it works right now and it seems to be sucking and blowing air right now. Oh yeah, it gets down right chill in here as well.

I inspected a home this morning with an 18 year old system.

It roasted the house out and also froze it out.

I told the client about the age and that being my biggest concern but also told him that the obvious was that at this moment it appears that the system is functioning extremely well for its years and appears to have been well maintained. Why did I tell him that, because it did appear to be well maintained and did roast and freeze the house out. Why would I even consider telling him anything but my observations and opinion. I also told him that because of the age he should start putting some big dollars away because it would cost him 5,000.00 or better for a new system shortly.
He asked me If he should ask for an allowance for the system. I said I do not get into negotiations but if it were me I would at least try for it to save a large purchase in the near future. I also told him to obtain an HVAC contract for proper maintenance for this unit or even if he gets a new unit. Yep, I told him, there goes another broken rule, don't tell, suggest. Under no uncertain terms, you need to have an HVAC contract. They will come out twice a year, clean if necessary and test all the components. If you do not do this, a one time call in the middle of the winter will more than likely cost you more and you will be put on the end of the list.

I probably just broke the ten commandments by the standards of many but If I am not there to inspect, give my opinion after my inspection and look out for my client, then why am I there.

Just a quick edit. Nothing sarcastic or demeaning meant to any of the folks in the upper posts.

This is just my opinion

Originally Posted by Anthony Alderman

Here in North Carolina our state board has actually stated that they do not want is using the word "appears" in our reports. I guess it appears to be a problem.

Well in that case just say "It looks like"! It infers just about the same as "appears".

Well in that case just say "It looks like"!

Scott,
I Like That!!!

Originally Posted by Anthony Alderman

Well in that case just say "It looks like"!

Scott,
I Like That!!!

"It looks like."????

It "looks" like it is dirty, gray in color, has some duct tape on it, and the panels don't fit tight, ...

THAT is what "it looks like".

Sheesh guys, you can't some something "looks" when you are meaning "its operation".

Jerry,
It's just total non-committal-ness.... It looks it could be ... or not... or maybe...

"The unit operated properly at time of inspection. As with all mechanical equipment, the unit may fail at anytime without warning."

I like that addition because it does explain that "Tomorrow" it could just be scrap iron.

I am not looking for a way to point out that you need a specialist in each and every area. I just feel that the actions of the Selling agent and HVAC contractor were SHADY to say the least.

I still never got a call from any of them and only heard my information through a third party source that is pretty reliable. Seems the Agent that was representing the buyers went after the selling agent instead of calling me on this issue because she was there and knew it was working.

Originally Posted by M. Waller

"The unit operated properly

"Properly?"

It did?

How do you know that?

I was refering to the part "As with all mechanical equipment, the unit may fail at anytime without warning." that was posted above. It was a copy and paste.

Originally Posted by M. Waller

It was a copy and paste.

Sorry about that. I saw the quotes but thought you were quoting what you write.

I don't think I can state that it is working PROPERLY unless I hook up my refrigeration gages and check the suction and head pressure along with the coil temperature and super heat. Also test the voltage with my meter and check the amp draw on the condenser fan motor and compressor. Did I check the lock rotor amps upon start up? How about the windings on the compressor, did I meg the windings? There are too many thing that make this unit work properly and as inspectors we are just checking the temp diff of 18 - 20 degrees across the evaporator in the cooling mode. Turn on the stat, and did it start, are there any unusual noises. Breaker size, bla bla bla....... This is what I say!

The Air Conditioner was in good working condition at the time of the inspection, the furnace blower motor and condensor started on a call from the thermostat with no unusual noises. The temperature differential was 18 degrees across the evaporator after 20 minutes of run time and the unit cycled off when the thermostat reached the desired space temperature. Filter and condensor were clean.

I can't use the word properly also unless I check all the other controls but I'm not there anymore as an HVAC tech.

Dan Hagman
Hagman Heating and Cooling (not anymore)
ProSite Home Inspections
Altoona, Iowa

As they say in the service industry, "It was working when I left."

Fritzkelly;
Your point is well received! Although,,,,, I still think there is a difference between the word "Properly" and the phrase "good working condition"

1. Properly = Conforming to established standards, accurate, precise, exact.

2. Good working Condition = operating adequate, functioning, "to form or be a condition of" limit or restrict as a condition.

Properly is too technically exhaustive and a firm statement of accuracy and perfection.

Good working condition says that it is not perfect but functioning at the time of inspection.

Play on words is tough to get a handle on and I am still learning.
We all face this every day and it is too bad we have to protect ourselves like we do because we are trying to help other people.

Dan Hagman
ProSite Home Inspections
Altoona, Iowa

Originally Posted by Dan Hagman

Fritzkelly;
Your point is well received! Although,,,,, I still think there is a difference between the word "Properly" and the phrase "good working condition"

1. Properly = Conforming to established standards, accurate, precise, exact.

2. Good working Condition = operating adequate, functioning, "to form or be a condition of" limit or restrict as a condition.

Properly is too technically exhaustive and a firm statement of accuracy and perfection.

Good working condition says that it is not perfect but functioning at the time of inspection.

Play on words is tough to get a handle on and I am still learning.
We all face this every day and it is too bad we have to protect ourselves like we do because we are trying to help other people.

Dan Hagman
ProSite Home Inspections
Altoona, Iowa

Dan,

If something is in "Good Working Condition", it is, therefore, "Working Properly", which is also the same as "Working as Intended".

"Good working condition says that it is not perfect but functioning at the time of inspection."

"Good working condition" is not the equivalent of "not perfect but functioning", define "functioning" ... that is the same as "Working as Intended", i.e., "it is *functioning*".

If it were not "Working as Intended", it would not be "functioning" would it, it would "non-functioning".

Just because it is blowing out cold air when cooling or hot air when heating does not make it "functioning" or "functional".

That simply means it is not completely dead ... yet.

Fritz said it pretty good, and here is the simplified way: State what you did and what it did, describe it and its condition, and, when you find something 'not right' with it, write that down as a deficiency which needs to be corrected (i.e., repaired, replaced, whatever as necessary).

Jerry and Fritz,
Thanks for the diolog, this is good. I am a new inspector and have allot to learn about the wording here so this is a good thing. This is a topic of great concern and a good one for a webcast sometime.

Dan

Someone said that an inspector spends the first ten years trying to perform the perfect inspection and then next ten years trying to write the perfect report.

I never took writing very seriously or communication for that matter before becomming an inspector. Now it consumes me.

I'm currently reading Frank Luntz's "Words That Work" published in 2007. Anyone read it?

Chris, Oregon

Originally Posted by Chris Bernhardt

Someone said that an inspector spends the first ten years trying to perform the perfect inspection and then next ten years trying to write the perfect report.

The perfect inspection is the easy part ... never get sued and you must have done 'the perfect inspection'. (Just kidding, the inspection was 'good enough', let's put it that way.)

The perfect report is more difficult to determine - if it stands up in court, it was the perfect report. (Never had my reports tested that way, so I guess I at least did inspections which were 'good enough'. )

Originally Posted by fritzkelly

I think we often are too concerned with wording that will stand up in court rather than wording that will get the point across to our client.

Halalooya

You could not be more right about that Mr Fritz.

Do the report right and get the point across to your client and you won't have to worry whether it stands up in court!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!