Thread: a problem or not

..........

Similar Threads:

• Plumbing Problem Affects Home Sales - Realty Times
• Shoddy work adding to foreclosure problem
• Problem Shrubbery
• problem?

Looks like crumbled stucco coating on a stacked stone foundations wall to me.

Yes it is a problem. Repairs are needed.
It APPEARS to be a slab foundation with rebar too close to the exterior that has begun to rust and pop the concrete off. There may be a parge coat that is flaking off.

Originally Posted by dan orourke

should a structural engineer look at it or would a foundation company suffice?

Depends. What was the rest of the structure like. If this was an anomaly and there were no other signs of stress, as in other crumbling areas of the foundation, interior wall cracks, unsquare doors and windows, evidence of standing water, reversed grade, then I would recommend a qualified foundation contractor.

If the building is new, I would recommend having the builder contacted first.

Everybody has his own style, but I try to finish the entire structural inspection before writing the opinion on the foundation. That helps me decide if I'm going to call for a State licensed structural engineer. I've always though it was stupid to have the foundation listed first on the TEXAS mandated form. Evidence of a failed foundation is found many other places that the foundation itself.

Originally Posted by dan orourke

should a structural engineer look at it or would a foundation company suffice?

Any decent foundation company will have their own structural engineer, either on staff or one they work with regularly.

Ah, I see the rebar now.

Folks, anytime rebar is exposed it is suceptable to rust and should be repaired.

Richard

Originally Posted by Richard Rushing

Folks, anytime rebar is exposed it is suceptable to rust and should be repaired.

Richard

And a "proper" repair is not as easy as it may first seem.

Originally Posted by Richard Rushing

Folks, anytime rebar is exposed it is suceptable to rust and should be repaired.Richard

That's a given. The question became, "Does it need the opinion of an SE or not? I still say, that in the absence of other evidence of structural damage, that calling for an SE is pushing the CYA button too fast. I think recommending that the damaged area is completely inspected by a qualified foundation Company is the first best step. As Jerry mentioned, any reputable foundation company is going to be affiliated with an SE. If, when they chip away all that broken crap that we're not allowed to remove and inspect the rebar, they should be able to determine if it's going to be a permitted repair requiring a structural engineer's review or a patch.

I think what we would all want is to be sure that Uncle Bob doesn't come over with his premix and slap a cover over it. Now, if outside that little perspective we can all see in Dan's picture, Dan sees other structural evidence; or if he comes across other structural issues unrelated to this, but in need of SE attention, that's a different story.

What other structural stuff was there, Dan?

were there weep holes? Looks like moisture in the concrete froze and blew the potion out but the inherant problem would be in the weep hole question.

Originally Posted by dan orourke

thoughts on this photo? problem or not?

Problem! Potentially yes.
Further evaluation required. Time study has/should be performed. Check for other areas for water intrusion same/similar conditions. It may work into a large dollar if not taken care of promptly.
T.Neyedli
www.alphahomeinspections.ca

Originally Posted by Terry Neyedli

Problem! Potentially yes.

Terry,

There *IS* a problem with it, now, not "potentially".

Further evaluation required.

I'll be kind (I see you've only made 7 posts) and let some others here address why HIs do not need to state "further evaluation" and why it makes the HI look like they are wimping out.

Time study has/should be performed.

Time for what? For it to rust more and spall more? You want us to wait until the cost goes up even more than it is now? And to wait until after closing?

It IS a problem NOW. Address it NOW.

Originally Posted by Thom Walker

That's a given. The question became, "Does it need the opinion of an SE or not? I still say, that in the absence of other evidence of structural damage, that calling for an SE is pushing the CYA button too fast. I think recommending that the damaged area is completely inspected by a qualified foundation Company is the first best step. As Jerry mentioned, any reputable foundation company is going to be affiliated with an SE. If, when they chip away all that broken crap that we're not allowed to remove and inspect the rebar, they should be able to determine if it's going to be a permitted repair requiring a structural engineer's review or a patch.

I think what we would all want is to be sure that Uncle Bob doesn't come over with his premix and slap a cover over it. Now, if outside that little perspective we can all see in Dan's picture, Dan sees other structural evidence; or if he comes across other structural issues unrelated to this, but in need of SE attention, that's a different story.

What other structural stuff was there, Dan?

The (initial thread) question by Dan O. was:
"thoughts on this photo? problem or not?"

My statement was a direct answer to the question presented-- Yes... it is a problem. I do agree with your statement (Thom): "I think recommending that the damaged area is completely inspected by a qualified foundation Company is the first best step."

Just so that we are clear to anyone who is reading this thread, ANYTIME you see exposed rebar, it's a repair item-- not sometimes. The extent of the repairs are dictated by the severity of the issue. Some are much greater than others and will require a structural engineer. However, I just don't recommend a PE for a repair job that can be done by a (reputable) foundation company.

Rich

Agreed.

Jerry said, "I'll be kind (I see you've only made 7 posts) and let some others here address why HIs do not need to state "further evaluation" and why it makes the HI look like they are wimping out."

I agree that there are many times that inspectors say "get this evaluated, when they really should be saying, "this thing needs repair".

However, in the case of fireplaces and chimneys I do sometimes tell my clients they need to be evaluated, simply because I wasn't able to look up the flue, view the crown, or look down the flue. There may not be anything wrong, but because of the age of the house, it would be a good idea to have it checked out by a professional.

By the way, to me, wimping out is calling for an expert or engineer at every drop of a hat.

Originally Posted by Jack Feldmann

By the way, to me, wimping out is calling for an expert or engineer at every drop of a hat.

Me too, that's what "further evaluation" is.

"However, in the case of fireplaces and chimneys I do sometimes tell my clients they need to be evaluated ... "

You do it a lot, you say?

Dan, was there a leaking shower pan on the other side of that wall. Looks like the moisture came from inside to me. I would try to find out if there is some sort of leak behind that wall, and I would call out that the foundation needs to be repaired by a qualified foundation repair contractor.

Originally Posted by Thom Walker

If, when they chip away all that broken crap that we're not allowed to remove and inspect the rebar...

Thom, maybe it's a Texas thing, but are you really NOT ALLOWED to do a little digging/damage?

I recommend that a qualified foundation contractor, who utilizes the services of a licensed engineer to design repairs, be contacted to determine all needed repairs & best repair methods, tp estimate costs, and to perform any repairs deemed necessary.

Originally Posted by neal lewis

Thom, maybe it's a Texas thing, but are you really NOT ALLOWED to do a little digging/damage?

God, I hate it I have to back track! "Not Allowed" would not be as accurate as "not required" might be. However, if you consider that in the number of lawsuits filed, Nueces County Texas is second in the Nation. The only reason we're second is because the entire State of New Jersey is first. (That data is several years old. I don't know if we've taken the title or not.) So, it would not be atypical here to find out that the concrete that I peeled away was from the last job that the homeowner's recently departed Grandfather ever did. I would have caused them to become infirtile, impotent, and caused a brain tumor.

In short, I AIN'T TOUCHIN' IT!

ps Are you getting the idea of why I refer to E&O as a target on my back?