Thread: ANOTHER COCKING PROBLEM

did inspection today with seller providing pre listing inspection--and again for the second time in my life i came across a write up by inspector,that there was a COCKING problem in bathroom. i still don't know how to help the household with that problem--SPELL CHECK INSPECTORS--MY CLIENT COULD NOT STOP LAUGHING

Similar Threads:

• Problem with Radiant Heating leak, Gypcrete and wet bubbleinsulation=BIG WET PROBLEM
• Do you see a problem?
• Is this a problem?
• Ever have this problem?
• a problem or not

So,....what was the real issue?

Probably some cockamamie caulking issue ...

CAULKING

Observation: Window seals.
The packing rod and caulk appeared limp on the double hung window.
We noted, even with the weather striping, this did not cause the packing rod and caulk to maintain a firm a rigid shape on the double hung window which may incur leakage due to the unsatisfying fit for the rod and caulk.
Recommend. Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors, Only use as directed,
Limitation. We did not touch or feel the packing rod or caulk. Visual inspection only.

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

Observation: Window seals.
The packing rod and caulk appeared limp on the double hung window.
We noted, even with the weather striping, this did not cause the packing rod and caulk to maintain a firm a rigid shape on the double hung window which may incur leakage due to the unsatisfying fit for the rod and caulk.
Recommend. Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors, Only use as directed,
Limitation. We did not touch or feel the packing rod or caulk. Visual inspection only.

May I simply suggest - keep your report writing in " simple plain understandable" language for the non-technical client.

Even "google" has a hard time clearly defining what you mean by "your named type 5 inhibitor".

Cheers.......

Years ago I made a funny typo...
I stated the ceiling was slopping instead of using sloping. Spell checked would not have helped.
The client call me and asked what a slopping ceiling was... LOL!
One letter can make a big difference.
Hence, We all are not perfect..Huh?

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

Observation: Window seals.
The packing rod and caulk appeared limp on the double hung window.
We noted, even with the weather striping, this did not cause the packing rod and caulk to maintain a firm a rigid shape on the double hung window which may incur leakage due to the unsatisfying fit for the rod and caulk.
Recommend. Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors, Only use as directed,
Limitation. We did not touch or feel the packing rod or caulk. Visual inspection only.

Simpler: Windows do not appear to be sealed/caulked properly, as a result, the windows may leak, or may be leaking, which could not be detected at this time.

Recommend remove windows and reinstall properly.
(no limitation needed)

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Simpler: Windows do not appear to be sealed/caulked properly, as a result, the windows may leak, or may be leaking, which could not be detected at this time.

Recommend remove windows and reinstall properly.
(no limitation needed)

You guys think too seriously.

Cock and packing the rod?
Even with the window stripping?
Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors is in Viagra.

Geez Louise it's a tough bunch to make laugh.

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

You guys think too seriously.

.
.

Geez Louise it's a tough bunch to make laugh.

That's because we are more serious than that other board ... ...

On a serious note.
Observation: Worn, loose and missing or ineffective caulking and seals on wall openings, window and door, penetrations and protrusions.
Recommend a licensed RBQ caulk and sealing company evaluate and improve; missing , damaged or failed caulking on all wall openings, penetrations, and protrusions.
Act upon any recommendations therein.
Limitations: Observed from the ground.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

That's because we are more serious than that other board ... ...

Ha ha ha!!!!

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

On a serious note.
Observation: Worn, loose and missing or ineffective caulking and seals on wall openings, window and door, penetrations and protrusions.
Recommend a licensed RBQ caulk and sealing company evaluate and improve; missing , damaged or failed caulking on all wall openings, penetrations, and protrusions.
Act upon any recommendations therein.
Limitations: Observed from the ground.

Robert,

You seem to have an aversion to coming right out and saying 'fix it', 'it needs a fixn', and those things?

IF "Observation: Worn, loose and missing or ineffective caulking and seals" ... then they need to be properly corrected ... i.e., they need a fixn, de gots ta git somun dare ta fix it ...

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Robert,

You seem to have an aversion to coming right out and saying 'fix it', 'it needs a fixn', and those things?

IF "Observation: Worn, loose and missing or ineffective caulking and seals" ... then they need to be properly corrected ... i.e., they need a fixn, de gots ta git somun dare ta fix it ...

Wish I could recommend the repair or replacement but I can only recommend a licensed professional evaluate the area of concern.
Liability thing in my neck of the woods, or so it appears.
I have had push back from REA's and homeowners for recommending repairs.

Wall openings are for windows, doors, vents, ducts, pipes.
Killing several birds with one stone.

Windows and doors have is flashing, seals, rubber, foam, PVC, dowling rod at times and weather stripping.
Again, covering all components in wall openings, penetrations and protrusions.

Hope that helps.

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

I can only recommend a licensed professional fix the area of concern.

But that's not what you did.

Since we are in the mood to nitpick ...

I have had push back from REA's and homeowners for recommending repairs.

Who are you working for? Your client is not the RE, or homeowner it's the purchaser(s).

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

But that's not what you did.

Jerry, explain how the narrative, "evaluate and improve," equates to me personally saying fix a component I considered defective or deficient.
I observe the component that appears to be defective or deficient then recommend further evaluation and improvement if deemed necessary by the licensed professional. Liability is passed.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Since we are in the mood to nitpick ...



Who are you working for? Your client is not the RE, or homeowner it's the purchaser(s).

I work for myself.
Clients hire me to inspect a home and report on condition.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

But that's not what you did.

I mistakenly posted fix.

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

Observation: Worn, loose and missing or ineffective caulking and seals on wall openings, window and door, penetrations and protrusions.
Recommend a licensed RBQ caulk and sealing company evaluate and improve; missing , damaged or failed caulking on all wall openings, penetrations, and protrusions.
Act upon any recommendations therein.
Limitations: Observed from the ground.

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

Jerry, explain how the narrative, "evaluate and improve," equates to me personally saying fix a component I considered defective or deficient.
I observe the component that appears to be defective or deficient then recommend further evaluation and improvement if deemed necessary by the licensed professional. Liability is passed.

Robert,

First, the intent of home inspections is not to 'pass the liability' ... the intent is to educate and inform the client as to the conditions of the house, mostly the conditions of the house which need to be fixed (need work).

You report that you found:
"Worn, loose and missing or ineffective caulking and seals"

You then recommended that SOMEONE ELSE:
"evaluate"
... oh, "and improve"

You now put put your evaluation and dumped it in the trash can, deferring to whatever the next person finds ... or says 'no problem' to.

You need to either not bother doing the inspection or stand up and make the call to fix what you said you found not right.

Regarding 'passing the liability' - you just made a firm grip on the liability because YOU found things which were not right ... then YOU passed it off to SOMEONE ELSE to make the call as to whether to fix it or not ... and if that someone else says it does not need to be fixed ... and it turns out that it actually it was not right and should have been fixed ... YOU were the one who reported that things were not right - YOU are holding the liability because YOU did not tell your client to have them fixed.

Oh, yeah, almost forgot ... "improve" is not "fix" ... EVERYTHING can be "improved" on, one can "improve" something which is not even wrong. "Improve" means diddly-squat ... it certainly does not indicate that something needs to be fixed.

When you find something not right, be a stand up guy and make the call that it is not right and needs to be fixed.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Robert,

First, the intent of home inspections is not to 'pass the liability' ...

Who said it was?

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

the intent is to educate and inform the client as to the conditions of the house, mostly the conditions of the house which need to be fixed (need work).

As expressed professional fix, I recommend provincially licensed professionals. The client is aware of any/all issue I deem as defective or deficient.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

You now put put your evaluation and dumped it in the trash can, deferring to whatever the next person finds ... or says 'no problem' to.

That narrative is utilized when every everything requires improvements. I am certain the caulking and sealing company understands how to improve worm and torn caulk.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

You need to either not bother doing the inspection or stand up and make the call to fix what you said you found not right.

I fix nothing. Licensed bonded RBQ Professionals fix what I reported.
Big/Huge differance.
I am not going to tell a professional how to fix a thing.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Regarding 'passing the liability' - you just made a firm grip on the liability because YOU found things which were not right ... then YOU passed it off to SOMEONE ELSE to make the call as to whether to fix it or not ... and if that someone else says it does not need to be fixed ... and it turns out that it actually it was not right and should have been fixed ... YOU were the one who reported that things were not right - YOU are holding the liability because YOU did not tell your client to have them fixed.

You have a vivid imagination and that's for sure.
I will pass on liability to the licensed trades or technical professional every time.
I will also not report code.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Oh, yeah, almost forgot ... "improve" is not "fix" ... EVERYTHING can be "improved" on, one can "improve" something which is not even wrong. "Improve" means diddly-squat ... it certainly does not indicate that something needs to be fixed.

Diddley squat? If you say so.
I fix nothing remember.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

When you find something not right, be a stand up guy and make the call that it is not right and needs to be fixed.

No, the professional fixem them, Jerry.
I recommend the proper licensed RBQ or other trades or technical professional and bring them right to the component by name, model number, room or area and they can correct the defective or deficient component as they see fit.

Jerry, to make a point, Nick Gromicko received a email, then a registered letter from a vendor. "Are your inspectors allowed to recommended repairs, replacement and estimated cost?"
We emailed each other back and for 5 times.
Without getting into specifics, in his last email he conceded and saw my point of view.

Stop using your imagination so vividly. Clients knows what needs fixen. when they use my services.
How do you fix cocking anyhow?

Sorry for the edit.
At times REA or vendor's are mad because I tell my clients what requires fixen.
Even a roofer went to the AHJ provincial board and they told him to do as Mr. Young asked.

Robert,

You're not getting it.

Those things don't need IMPROVING.

Those things need REPORT(FIXING).

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Robert,

You're not getting it.

Those things don't need IMPROVING.


Those things need REPORT(FIXING).

OK, lets take your word (to fix.)


From Service Alberta.

The home inspector or the home inspection businessis not allowed to give you an estimate of the cost ofany repair or improvement identified by the homeinspection.
To fix defects identified by the homeinspector and determine the cost, contact qualifiedtrades people.

Now to put the tread to bed, hopefully, I understand your point.
Windows do not appear to be sealed/caulked properly, as a result, the windows may leak, or may be leaking, which could not be detected at this time.

Recommend a licensed RBQ caulking company correct defective caulk and weather stripping.

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

Recommend a licensed RBQ caulking company correct defective caulk and weather stripping.

Why not stop being weak-kneed and just say:

Needs to be corrected/fixed/repaired (use the best word for the item being referred to)

Then, in your report, you have a page which defines various things, and one of those things could be:
- All items, systems, components which are listed as needing correction, fixing, repair, etc, should have the work done by an appropriately licensed contractor who is qualified to perform the work.

Or something to that affect.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Why not stop being weak-kneed and just say:

Needs to be corrected/fixed/repaired (use the best word for the item being referred to)

Then, in your report, you have a page which defines various things, and one of those things could be:
- All items, systems, components which are listed as needing correction, fixing, repair, etc, should have the work done by an appropriately licensed contractor who is qualified to perform the work.

Or something to that affect.

Jerry, I typically use the word or term correct, replace, provide. It is all built into the reporting system by CD Horizon.
I wanted to use the term service Alberta uses, improve. Ha ha ha
"A home inspection business is not allowed to give you an estimate of the cost of any repair or improvements identified by the home inspection company."
It must have been OK for their team of lawyers.

Jerry, in all honesty, my typical home inspection reports have pages defining various defects in structures systems and component concerns requiring further evaluation and correction by a RBQ licensed professional.
The only way you can work is having a RBQ license in Quebec but that does not stop shoddy work or unlicensed professionals.

The CD report has a check list of terms to use: Repair, Replace, Repair or Replace, Further Evaluation, Provide, Improve,Monitor, Service, Clean, Correct, Request Disclosure.
Minor, Major, etc...
I do not miss a trick and walk a finite line to insure the message is crystal clear to my clients.
Once the Licensed professional takes over, my liability is passed over.

I do not miss a thing or surely try my very best to insure accuracy.
I use to spend 2 hours at clients homes explaining the report to them.
Also, engineers of varying backgrounds love my inspecting and reports and refer me continually.
2 universities as well.
Hope that clears the air.

Sorry for the spelling edit, At least it was not cocking:-)
IMO, this is much ado about nothing but yourself speculation on my report style.
My income could double 6 figgers by working less and being serviceable to under-bussers. Been offered the possibility of earning $150,000 as an inhouse home inspector 5 years back. No thanks.

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

Jerry, I typically use the word or term correct, replace, provide. It is all built into the reporting system by CD Horizon.
I wanted to use the term service Alberta uses, improve. Ha ha ha
"A home inspection business is not allowed to give you an estimate of the cost of any repair or improvements identified by the home inspection company."
It must have been OK for their team of lawyers.

Robert,

Then use the term they use: "A home inspection business is not allowed to give you an estimate of the cost of any repair or improvements identified by the home inspection company."

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Robert,

Then use the term they use: "A home inspection business is not allowed to give you an estimate of the cost of any repair or improvements identified by the home inspection company."

I am not in Alberta...

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

I am not in Alberta...

Whether you are or are not in Alberta, YOU SAID:

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

I wanted to use the term service Alberta uses

So use it.

not allowed to give

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

not allowed to give

And you are NOT giving what you are not allowed to give - read what you posted.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

And you are NOT giving what you are not allowed to give - read what you posted.

Thanks.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Robert,

Then use the term they use: "A home inspection business is not allowed to give you an estimate of the cost of any repair or improvements identified by the home inspection company."

My gosh. So much to do about nothing. But it does really say allot about HIs in general.

Robert is not qualified to offer estimates on cost associated with work/repairs/defects that are noted in the report. If he was qualified with experience and licensing to support cost estimates he would be equated as a professional and be able to offer those cost estimates.

Else he is considered only a Home Inspector (SOP) able to only offer a visual inspection of the property and must differ anything that requires qualification and experienced to someone else.

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

My gosh. So much to do about nothing. But it does really say allot about HIs in general.

Robert is not qualified to offer estimates on cost associated with work/repairs/defects that are noted in the report. If he was qualified with experience and licensing to support cost estimates he would be equated as a professional and be able to offer those cost estimates.

Else he is considered only a Home Inspector (SOP) able to only offer a visual inspection of the property and must differ anything that requires qualification and experienced to someone else.

The issue is not about offering cost estimates (although that is the section Robert posted), the discussion is about actually calling for a "repair" when the description given shows that "repair" is necessary.

Robert then posted that section to show the use of the word "improve", which I re-lighted to show the word "repair".

I don't think you have to be licenced in Quebec to offer estimates. And I believe he is qualified since he has stated numerous times of his experience in a past life in the building trades. I also don't think professionalism has anything to do with quoting since quotes can often vary by up to 300% between estimates. Too many variables. But Robert can enlighten us.

Since we both use the Carson Dunlop reporting system it has a cost estimates for various types of improvement/repair/replacement costs.

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

My gosh. So much to do about nothing. But it does really say allot about HIs in general.

Robert is not qualified to offer estimates on cost associated with work/repairs/defects that are noted in the report. If he was qualified with experience and licensing to support cost estimates he would be equated as a professional and be able to offer those cost estimates.

Else he is considered only a Home Inspector (SOP) able to only offer a visual inspection of the property and must differ anything that requires qualification and experienced to someone else.

I estimated repair, replacement and building costs well over 25 years.
Over 10 with my registered company.
I am putting it to bed this year.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

I don't think you have to be licenced in Quebec to offer estimates. And I believe he is qualified since he has stated numerous times of his experience in a past life in the building trades. I also don't think professionalism has anything to do with quoting since quotes can often vary by up to 300% between estimates. Too many variables. But Robert can enlighten us.

Since we both use the Carson Dunlop reporting system it has a cost estimates for various types of improvement/repair/replacement costs.

Correct Ray, on both counts.

In the recommend section there are 7 categories.
The last being the most unique. (to cost)
The dollar value ranges from $100 to $15,000.
The following is typical.
Add up
Buyer
Seller
Builder
Not determined
Each
Per location
Per room.

You pick which one you require in your recommendation and it is added to the report.

Example, Recommend:
Component: Roof: Flat roof build up:
Recommend; RBQ Licensed roofer replace the BUR roofing system prior purchase.
(cost) up to $1,000 per square.
(to cost) To be paid by the seller, buyer, builder.

We should not determine who pays.
If you can estimate cost, do so diligently.

The winders ain't got no cawk and need some.

Originally Posted by Bob Harper

The winders ain't got no cawk and need some.

Simple and so elegant. Might and estimited cost, 4 chikens per winder.