Alarm Siren??

[michael brown]

Saw this apparent electronics gadget on the exterior of a home recently. Is it an alarm siren? Or...?
My second question (are two allowed?) is how I check if an induction cook top burner is operating.
Thanks in advance for the feedback.
Michael in Coos Bay, OR

Similar Threads:

• old smoke alarm
• Smoke Alarm
• Never know when the fire alarm may go off
• Alarm light?
• Smoke alarm placement

[Gunnar Alquist]

Saw this apparent electronics gadget on the exterior of a home recently. Is it an alarm siren? Or...?
My second question (are two allowed?) is how I check if an induction cook top burner is operating.
Thanks in advance for the feedback.
Michael in Coos Bay, OR

Hi Michael,

No idea if that is an alarm. Did you see any alarm equipment inside the home like a keypad, motion detectors, alarm box?

With induction cook tops, I look in the cabinets for pots. I have only seen a half-dozen induction cook tops in the last 23 years, and every one had pots available. I will put a half inch of water into a pot and check each element to see if the water boils. A small amount of water boils frighteningly quickly.

[Dom D'Agostino]

I don't test induction cooktops, and disclaim them.
I don't want to drag out some "test" pan and have someone claim I scratched their glass top appliance.
I'm certainly not going to use a seller's cookware to test the appliance either. (Assuming it's an occupied home).

YMMV.

[Bruce Low]

Per our SOP's here in Wisconsin, home inspectors are not required to inspect appliances, so I would exclude it. I also don't operate the olden-style analog dishwashers, and I never operate laundry appliances, citing my wife won't let me.

My report includes the following appliance disclaimer:

"Operating and reporting on appliances, including kitchen and laundry units, is at the option of the inspector and is done only as a courtesy to client (Wisconsin law does not require their inspection). Inspector is not responsible or liable for any operational, performance or other deficiencies."

Check your SOP's.

[Dirk Jeanis]

I don't test induction cooktops, and disclaim them.
I don't want to drag out some "test" pan and have someone claim I scratched their glass top appliance.
I'm certainly not going to use a seller's cookware to test the appliance either. (Assuming it's an occupied home).

YMMV.

Induction cooktops are WONDERFUL and you can easily protect the surface with a sheet of paper or even a thin sheet of high temp silicone under the pot. It will not burn the paper as long as there is water in the pot/pan and the pot will heat no problem.
It literally takes only SECONDS per burner to test as you can see the water boil at the pot surface almost instantly.

[Dom D'Agostino]

Induction cooktops are WONDERFUL and you can easily protect the surface with a sheet of paper or even a thin sheet of high temp silicone under the pot. It will not burn the paper as long as there is water in the pot/pan and the pot will heat no problem.
It literally takes only SECONDS per burner to test as you can see the water boil at the pot surface almost instantly.

Thank you, but I understand the dynamics of induction cooking.

I never said it was slow, and your post indicates a need to carry additional testing apparatus (silicone sheets or paper) to complete the procedure.

Given the few times per month that I encounter an induction cooking device, I will continue to stand back from adding more tools to my van "just in case" I may need them, and recommend that the client verify proper operation at the appropriate time inside of their option/inspection period.

[Dirk Jeanis]

Thank you, but I understand the dynamics of induction cooking.

I never said it was slow, and your post indicates a need to carry additional testing apparatus (silicone sheets or paper) to complete the procedure.

Given the few times per month that I encounter an induction cooking device, I will continue to stand back from adding more tools to my van "just in case" I may need them, and recommend that the client verify proper operation at the appropriate time inside of their option/inspection period.

I had no intention of causing an argument Dom, and I always have an 8.5 X 11 easily within reach. If you turn on appliances such as an convection range top and or check that they function as part of inspections, then NOT doing so is actually a change in your process and could possibly lead to issues later. Either test ALL appliances/appurtenances or touch none of them and exclude them in your process altogether.
The Refrigerator is below 39 degrees, the freezer is below 25, the AC shows 17 degrees Delta....I do not understand not testing induction, well pumps, or humidifiers, or dehumidifiers, possibly solar water heaters etc. to assure basic function as well. The question is "does one do the complete job or not"?

[Jerry Peck]

Per our SOP's here in Wisconsin, home inspectors are not required to inspect appliances, so I would exclude it.
.
.
.
"Operating and reporting on appliances, including kitchen and laundry units, is at the option of the inspector and is done only as a courtesy to client (Wisconsin law does not require their inspection). Inspector is not responsible or liable for any operational, performance or other deficiencies."

To make sure I am correctly understanding what you tell your clients - you are telling them that they "are not worth your time in giving them the courtesy of running the appliance through any cycle"?

[Dom D'Agostino]

I had no intention of causing an argument Dom, and I always have an 8.5 X 11 easily within reach. If you turn on appliances such as an convection range top and or check that they function as part of inspections, then NOT doing so is actually a change in your process and could possibly lead to issues later. Either test ALL appliances/appurtenances or touch none of them and exclude them in your process altogether.
The Refrigerator is below 39 degrees, the freezer is below 25, the AC shows 17 degrees Delta....I do not understand not testing induction, well pumps, or humidifiers, or dehumidifiers, possibly solar water heaters etc. to assure basic function as well. The question is "does one do the complete job or not"?

No problem here, I'm not arguing either. But I can test a house/kitchen full of appliances and bypass the cooktop if it's not "inspectable" (think vacant home, no cookware, and I've already described how I'm not carrying cookware in my vehicle).

Either test ALL appliances/appurtenances or touch none of them and exclude them in your process altogether.

So I need to operate the "steam" feature on the front load washer/dryer or is the basic cycle good enough? For laughs, how about those older built-in countertop benders from the '50's & '60's?

I believe there's room in our processes for testing some but not all of any product category.

[Randy West]

Regarding the 'device' on the exterior wall, perhaps it is a battery motion detector light. I have one on my exterior wall over my trash cans. Mine is also solar, but they make them that are just batteries.

Regarding:

The Refrigerator is below 39 degrees, the freezer is below 25, the AC shows 17 degrees Delta....I do not understand not testing induction, well pumps, or humidifiers, or dehumidifiers, possibly solar water heaters etc. to assure basic function as well. The question is "does one do the complete job or not"?

Does that mean you actually inspect these items and report those facts in your report? I think my reports are more detailed than most I've seen, including the supply air temp of the ac and furnace. But I don't measure the frig/freezer temp. And I don't 'inspect' well pumps or solar water heaters. I run enough water that the well pump or solar water heater must turn on, but I certainly don't report that I 'inspected' them. Where do you stop- do you do an amp test on the well pump, or pull it out of the casing to visually inspect it. So if I'm not really inspecting something, I'm not going to report that it's OK and possibly buy it later. And I'm not going to say things like 'appears serviceable', 'responded to normal controls', or 'no visible defects noted'. I hate reports with those terms. Any 12 year old could 'inspect' to those standards.

[Jerry Peck]

Any 12 year old could 'inspect' to those standards.

I think many, even most if not all, licensing states require one to be 18 years old ...

From what I have heard/read, some dogs have even passed some "certification" tests.