ASK THE INSPECTOR : Roof May Need Even More Repairing Than Code Requires

Question: We were ready to close escrow on our home when the buyers’ home inspector stirred up trouble over the roof repairs.

The house is about 35 years old and has two layers of shingles. According to the roofing contractor, the building code allows a third layer to be applied. But the home inspector says the roof structure is sagging and should not be loaded with the weight of additional shingles.

Removing the old material will add about $500 to the cost of the job and seems to us to be a needless expense. As far as I’m concerned, the roof is strong enough to support another layer of shingles. If a third layer would truly be detrimental, it wouldn’t be allowed by code. Don’t you agree?

Answer: I don’t agree. The Uniform Building Code allows three layers of roof material on a structure, but code requirements are not intended to be followed blindly. The building code defines itself as a “minimum standard.” Therefore, codes should be applied to each situation in the light of common sense.

When the code recommends a maximum of three roof layers, the implied assumption is that the roof structure is framed and reinforced in compliance with other pertinent building codes.

If your roof is sagging under the weight of only two shingle layers, it is reasonable to assume that there is a general lack of integrity in the rafter framing.

Building construction and repairs often give rise to conflicts over interpretations of the code. The best criterion by which to resolve such disagreements is to consider the original intent of the code.

With provisions addressing maximum roof layers, the obvious purpose is to protect the framing from structural damage. Therefore, if sagging is already evident, there is reason to believe that a significant problem exists; in which case the situation at hand should take precedence over the letter of the law.

As an alternative approach, it may be possible to reinforce the rafters with additional framing, but the cost of doing this will surely exceed that of removing the old shingles.

My advice is to remove the old shingles, as the inspector has advised. This may cost a few hundred dollars more, but it will protect you from potential liability problems after the close of escrow. And just to be safe, it would be a good idea to have the rafter framing checked to determine exactly why sagging has occurred.

Prioritize Findings of Inspection Report

Q: I hired a home inspector to evaluate a residence I’m trying to buy. Now that the inspection is done, it seems that I was ripped off. My inspector found a laundry list of problems with the house, including defects with the electrical wiring, the furnace, the skylights and a whole lot more.

But when I presented the sellers with the report and demanded repair of each and every item, they broke off negotiations and refused to sell me the house. What’s the use of a home inspection if all it does is blow the deal or force me to buy the house in as-is condition?

A: First, no one is forcing you to buy the house. Your inspector has provided you with pertinent information. What you do with that knowledge is a matter of choice, to be exercised with prudence and thoughtful consideration.

Second, common sense dictates that if the home has problems with the electrical wiring and furnace, the inspection report for which you paid hundreds of dollars may have saved you thousands.

Finally, it is essential that you gain a clearer understanding of the position an inspection report occupies in a real estate transaction. The purpose of a home inspection is to get a clear indication as to the overall quality and general condition of the property. Upon viewing the report, you need to make some reasonable assessments:

1. Is this house still worth buying?

2. What repair items are considered immediate structural or safety issues that sellers should be expected to address?

3. What items should be regarded as routine maintenance, not requiring immediate attention?

The inspection report is not a shopping list of demands with which to extort the seller. There is a big difference between presenting a reasonable list of repair requests, consistent with the property’s asking price, and issuing a manifesto of demands, dictated at gunpoint.

As a buyer, you are no doubt familiar with the term “negotiate.” This process, when exercised wisely, involves a balanced and inoffensive presentation of your purchase requirements, not forgetting that the seller also has a financial and personal stake in the proceedings.

A reciprocal volley of correspondence should transpire until a mutually satisfying result is achieved. Unfortunately, you appear to have bypassed this essential communication process.

Defects involving electrical wiring, gas fixtures and plumbing are conditions that need to be addressed, and most sellers understand this. Repair requests involving significant problems of this nature are usually regarded as reasonable and acceptable.

Common miscellaneous conditions such as gate repairs, door adjustments, repainting or the pruning of shrubbery are included in an inspection report purely for disclosure purposes. A thorough inspector will inform you of such conditions so that you will be fully aware of what you are buying.

Too many transactions fall out of escrow because buyers use a home inspection report as a redress of grievances. My recommendation is to weigh the importance of every disclosure in the report, with the understanding that there is no such thing as a flawless house.

If you have questions or comments, contact Barry Stone through his Web site at https://www.housedetective.com. Distributed by Access Media Group.