manufacturers defect, or poor installation?

**George Hallaron** · 09-28-2014, 08:32 AM

I inspected a roof that was 14 yrs. old yesterday and found this condition. I'm not quite sure what causes this issue although I do have my suspicions. Any opinions of what causes this would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

IMG_4781.JPG IMG_4783.JPG IMG_4786.JPG IMG_4769 (2).JPG

**Jerry Peck** · 09-28-2014, 09:36 AM

Looks like a manufacturers defect to me.

**Jeff Zehnder** · 09-28-2014, 10:20 AM

My gut says Jerry is correct but someone with a really accurate pressure washer is a lower ranked second guess.

**Jerry Peck** · 09-28-2014, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by Jeff Zehnder

.. but someone with a really accurate pressure washer is a lower ranked second guess.

Jeff,

I doubt it was a pressure washer as the edges of the missing granule areas is too well defined* and extends up under the adjacent shingle tabs/layers.

*Except for the few areas where it looks like the granule hopper was either jammed or out of granules and only a few granules fell out of the hopper.

My only reservation against the manufacturing defect is that one would think that a roofer would not lay those shingles, he would throw them down and grab some others ... wait ... a roofer waste a bad shingle, especially when most of a bundle was bad? Nah, those must have been made that way, so install those weird shingles anyway ...

**Dom D'Agostino** · 09-28-2014, 12:37 PM

It's both a manufacturers defect followed by poor installation practices.

Dom.

**Eric Barker** · 09-29-2014, 05:13 AM

Originally Posted by Dom D'Agostino

It's both a manufacturers defect followed by poor installation practices.Dom.

I'd say that it's primarily due to lack of brain cell activity during installation.

**Jeff Zehnder** · 09-29-2014, 05:54 AM

Jerry,

Sorry my response was just in jest and I obviously my comic timing is off...
I agree with your first post.

**Garry Sorrells** · 09-29-2014, 06:48 AM

Agree Manufacture defect. To uniform in location of granular loss.

Eric,
What do you base installation as cause???

**George Hallaron** · 09-29-2014, 07:15 AM

Thanks for all of the feedback fellas.

My first inclination was that it was a manufacturer's defect, but then I thought, "what kind of person would knowingly install defective shingles?" and then as I read all of your responses it came to me. Someone who either did not know any better (Not likely), or someone who didn't give a hoot! When this house was built, the building code enforcement in this area was? Let's just say that the builders and the A.H.J. were very incestuous. (J.M.O.) But it has gotten a lot better since then. (also J.M.O.) My other thought was that, whomever the roofer was that installed the roof is no longer in business. (The more likely scenario)

At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is that the buyer, my client, hired an inspector that actually took the time to navigate the roof. The seller was present at the inspection and he told me that he purchased the house two years ago. When I informed him of how long the inspection would take he was quite surprised. He told me that when he had his inspection performed, that the inspector he hired was in and out in 45 minutes on a 3,800 square foot house. He also told me that his inspector did not even get on the roof. I have very little tolerance For those type of inspectors.

OK, enough ranting for one post.

Thanks again,

**Vern Heiler** · 09-29-2014, 09:57 AM

Originally Posted by George Hallaron

Thanks for all of the feedback fellas.

My first inclination was that it was a manufacturer's defect, but then I thought, "what kind of person would knowingly install defective shingles?" and then as I read all of your responses it came to me. Someone who either did not know any better (Not likely), or someone who didn't give a hoot! When this house was built, the building code enforcement in this area was? Let's just say that the builders and the A.H.J. were very incestuous. (J.M.O.) But it has gotten a lot better since then. (also J.M.O.) My other thought was that, whomever the roofer was that installed the roof is no longer in business. (The more likely scenario)

At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is that the buyer, my client, hired an inspector that actually took the time to navigate the roof. The seller was present at the inspection and he told me that he purchased the house two years ago. When I informed him of how long the inspection would take he was quite surprised. He told me that when he had his inspection performed, that the inspector he hired was in and out in 45 minutes on a 3,800 square foot house. He also told me that his inspector did not even get on the roof. I have very little tolerance For those type of inspectors.

OK, enough ranting for one post.

Thanks again,

My guess would be faulty adhesive. The shingles most likely did not look this way when installed, probably took 8-10 years for it to show up. No roofer is going to jeopardize a whole roof job for a couple bundles that he can take back for a full refund and any HI that could not see that from the ground would not be around long.

**Eric Barker** · 09-29-2014, 06:32 PM

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

Eric, What do you base installation as cause???

I see two problems: bad shingles and someone wasn't thinking when they installed them.

**Vern Heiler** · 09-29-2014, 07:13 PM

Originally Posted by Eric Barker

I see two problems: bad shingles and someone wasn't thinking when they installed them.

They've had 14 years to get this ugly. The good news is they should get 15-20 dollars warranty money after pro-rating; that's as long as they don't find a shingle missing a nail....

**Garry Sorrells** · 09-30-2014, 06:33 AM

Originally Posted by Eric Barker

I'd say that it's primarily due to lack of brain cell activity during installation.

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

Agree Manufacture defect. To uniform in location of granular loss.

Eric,
What do you base installation as cause???

Originally Posted by Eric Barker

I see two problems: bad shingles and someone wasn't thinking when they installed them.

Eric,
Explain exactly what you are inferring with "...someone wasn't thinking when they installed them".

Do you think that the installer 14 yrs ago could see that the granules were going to come off? If so how would they have known?

**Mike Moser** · 10-01-2014, 06:22 AM

It appears that the installer use a diagonal method during installation. This is generally correct by most manufacturers. The loss of granule is due to either report asphalt mix or a bad press during the installation. When installing this would not be visible. It is definitely a factory defect. I base this on having installed well over 3000 roofs myself , and I've seen this defect in many instances. You did not say whether the shingle is a class C which is a paper mat or a class A which is a fiberglass mat.
Using this type of defect is found on a class C paper mat. The saturated asphalt may not have fully coated the paper mat and through time moisture can travel from the cut edges and/or through a bad press of granules. Usually a bad press is the cause of this "scuffing".
There recently was a rather large class-action lawsuit against organic classy shingles that was almost 3/4 of $1 billion. This appears to be that type of defect however usually is more consistent rather than limited to what appears to be just several bundles.