Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns raised by Mr [redacted] in his letter to you I would like to address each concern point by point as follows:· Mr [redacted] first contacted our office on New Year’s Day, January 1, Naturally, our office was closed in observance of the holiday Upon re-opening for business on January 2, I initiated contact with Mr [redacted] to discuss his concerns MrJerry G [redacted] also attempted contact with the customer, upon his return from vacation on at least occasions starting Saturday, January 9, Messages were left but were not returned This is the first communication we have had from Mr [redacted] since January 2, 2016.· Mr [redacted] states he was not informed of the condition of the support columns in the crawl space area On the contrary, the report prepared and provided to Mr [redacted] in hard copy as well as digital format, at the time of the inspection, stated:Noted steel columns provide support to the main girder/support beam(s).Noted some or all of the metal support columns exhibited signs of rusting or deteriorationAs such, the support intended by same may become compromisedSuggest replacement as necessary or sealing same with an appropriate coating (if appropriate) to limit further degradation of the material.This statement occurred on pages and of his report (see attached) Pictures of the columns were also provided to Mr [redacted] depicting same (see attached).· Mr [redacted] states the presence of water as an ongoing problem in the crawl space area At the time of the inspection there was no active water presence on the floor of the crawl space area However, there was evidence of same as indicated in his report as follows:Observed water staining or other evidence of past water presence in the crawl spacefloor areaIt could not be determined if the staining is the result of an isolated, singulartype occurrence or one that occurs intermittentlyThe area should be monitored overtime with appropriate corrective action taken as necessary.This statement occurs on page of his report with pictures of the crawl space also provided (see attached).Moreover, the report contained a recommendation to add a sump pump to the crawl space area should water presence develop (see page 36)An interior floor drain or sump pit/pump was not observedInstallation of same shouldbe considered if water intrusion to the basement/crawl space warrants same.· It is asserted that MrG [redacted] failed to observe and report mold that existed in the crawl space area As discussed with Mr [redacted] on January 2, our inspection is one for mechanical and structural condition and we do not inspect for mold This statement can be found in writing on page of his report as well as in the Building Inspection Agreement he signed on the day of the inspection However, in the course of the inspection a discoloration was observed on the wood support members in the crawl space area as indicated on page of his report and follows:Observed a discoloration of the sub-flooring and/or support membersThe exactcause of this condition could not be determined, however it may be associated withwater presence or a lack of proper ventilation and a resultant accumulation of moisturein this areaOver time, if allowed to continue, degradation of the wood materials maydevelopCorrection is recommended.The discoloration of the wood materials may be a mold, mildew or other fungus likegrowthThis type of growth has been reported to pose certain health hazards to somepeople while in others it may not have an affectAn evaluation of the nature of thediscoloration, i.emold, etc., its extent and appropriate remedial action is not within thescope of this inspection and therefore was not performedIf such a study is desired orrequired it is recommended the services of a qualified professional be engaged toperform same.Accordingly, each of the concerns raised by Mr [redacted] were indeed observed and reported by MrG [redacted] on the day of the inspection After discussing each of these items with our client on Januray 2, an attempt was made to further assist him with helpful suggestions on how to correct the deteriorated columns since he had obviously gone forward with the purchase of the property despite these findings In so far as these findings were presented to Mr [redacted] both in writing and through photographs on the day of the inspection coupled with the fact that at no time did he contact us to inquire of these findings prior to closing, we contend we have performed our duties as contained in our Building Inspection Agreement and NYS Standards of Practice That said, a refund of the fee paid is not justified at this time
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this customer’s concerns In reviewing the report associated with this inspection (copy attached), it was noted the customer did not participate in the inspection, rather arriving at the end of the process. Notwithstanding his absence,
the inspector undertook his responsibilities in earnest and performed the inspection in accordance with NYS Department of State established Standards of PracticeIn doing so, the inspector noted the roof was approximately 20-years old in the report. He went on to state: “Based upon the estimated age and conditions present at the time of the inspection, the roof covering material may be approaching or may have exceeded its useful service life… Given the estimated age and condition of the roof covering, predicting when such replacement will be needed is not possibleAs such, consideration should be given to further evaluation by a qualified roofing contractor.” We simply CANNOT predict the remaining life span of an aged building system, roof or any other type. Moreover, we did not and would not suggest, imply or state such a remaining life span as indicated by this customer. Our inspection report clearly stated the roofing system was aged, it was prone to leakage based on design, evidence of past leakage in the attic was observed and repair or replacement should be anticipated in the near future. Based upon this information, a return of the customer’s fee is not warranted and the request for same is declined
Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns raised by Mr. [redacted] in his letter to you. I would like to address each concern point by point as follows:· Mr. [redacted] first contacted our office on New Year’s Day, January 1, 2016. Naturally, our...
office was closed in observance of the holiday. Upon re-opening for business on January 2, 2016 I initiated contact with Mr. [redacted] to discuss his concerns. Mr. Jerry G[redacted] also attempted contact with the customer, upon his return from vacation on at least 2 occasions starting Saturday, January 9, 2016. Messages were left but were not returned. This is the first communication we have had from Mr. [redacted] since January 2, 2016.· Mr. [redacted] states he was not informed of the condition of the support columns in the crawl space area. On the contrary, the report prepared and provided to Mr. [redacted] in hard copy as well as digital format, at the time of the inspection, stated:Noted steel columns provide support to the main girder/support beam(s).Noted some or all of the metal support columns exhibited signs of rusting or deterioration. As such, the support intended by same may become compromised. Suggest replacement as necessary or sealing same with an appropriate coating (if appropriate) to limit further degradation of the material.This statement occurred on pages 5 and 32 of his report (see attached). Pictures of the columns were also provided to Mr. [redacted] depicting same (see attached).· Mr. [redacted] states the presence of water as an ongoing problem in the crawl space area. At the time of the inspection there was no active water presence on the floor of the crawl space area. However, there was evidence of same as indicated in his report as follows:Observed water staining or other evidence of past water presence in the crawl spacefloor area. It could not be determined if the staining is the result of an isolated, singulartype occurrence or one that occurs intermittently. The area should be monitored overtime with appropriate corrective action taken as necessary.This statement occurs on page 33 of his report with pictures of the crawl space also provided (see attached).Moreover, the report contained a recommendation to add a sump pump to the crawl space area should water presence develop (see page 36)An interior floor drain or sump pit/pump was not observed. Installation of same shouldbe considered if water intrusion to the basement/crawl space warrants same.· It is asserted that Mr. G[redacted] failed to observe and report mold that existed in the crawl space area. As discussed with Mr. [redacted] on January 2, 2016 our inspection is one for mechanical and structural condition and we do not inspect for mold. This statement can be found in writing on page 10 of his report as well as in the Building Inspection Agreement he signed on the day of the inspection. However, in the course of the inspection a discoloration was observed on the wood support members in the crawl space area as indicated on page 32 of his report and follows:Observed a discoloration of the sub-flooring and/or support members. The exactcause of this condition could not be determined, however it may be associated withwater presence or a lack of proper ventilation and a resultant accumulation of moisturein this area. Over time, if allowed to continue, degradation of the wood materials maydevelop. Correction is recommended.The discoloration of the wood materials may be a mold, mildew or other fungus likegrowth. This type of growth has been reported to pose certain health hazards to somepeople while in others it may not have an affect. An evaluation of the nature of thediscoloration, i.e. mold, etc., its extent and appropriate remedial action is not within thescope of this inspection and therefore was not performed. If such a study is desired orrequired it is recommended the services of a qualified professional be engaged toperform same.Accordingly, each of the concerns raised by Mr. [redacted] were indeed observed and reported by Mr. G[redacted] on the day of the inspection. After discussing each of these items with our client on Januray 2, an attempt was made to further assist him with helpful suggestions on how to correct the deteriorated columns since he had obviously gone forward with the purchase of the property despite these findings. In so far as these findings were presented to Mr. [redacted] both in writing and through photographs on the day of the inspection coupled with the fact that at no time did he contact us to inquire of these findings prior to closing, we contend we have performed our duties as contained in our Building Inspection Agreement and NYS Standards of Practice. That said, a refund of the fee paid is not justified at this time.
Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns raised by Mr [redacted] in his letter to you I would like to address each concern point by point as follows:· Mr [redacted] first contacted our office on New Year’s Day, January 1, Naturally, our office was closed in observance of the holiday Upon re-opening for business on January 2, I initiated contact with Mr [redacted] to discuss his concerns MrJerry G [redacted] also attempted contact with the customer, upon his return from vacation on at least occasions starting Saturday, January 9, Messages were left but were not returned This is the first communication we have had from Mr [redacted] since January 2, 2016.· Mr [redacted] states he was not informed of the condition of the support columns in the crawl space area On the contrary, the report prepared and provided to Mr [redacted] in hard copy as well as digital format, at the time of the inspection, stated:Noted steel columns provide support to the main girder/support beam(s).Noted some or all of the metal support columns exhibited signs of rusting or deteriorationAs such, the support intended by same may become compromisedSuggest replacement as necessary or sealing same with an appropriate coating (if appropriate) to limit further degradation of the material.This statement occurred on pages and of his report (see attached) Pictures of the columns were also provided to Mr [redacted] depicting same (see attached).· Mr [redacted] states the presence of water as an ongoing problem in the crawl space area At the time of the inspection there was no active water presence on the floor of the crawl space area However, there was evidence of same as indicated in his report as follows:Observed water staining or other evidence of past water presence in the crawl spacefloor areaIt could not be determined if the staining is the result of an isolated, singulartype occurrence or one that occurs intermittentlyThe area should be monitored overtime with appropriate corrective action taken as necessary.This statement occurs on page of his report with pictures of the crawl space also provided (see attached).Moreover, the report contained a recommendation to add a sump pump to the crawl space area should water presence develop (see page 36)An interior floor drain or sump pit/pump was not observedInstallation of same shouldbe considered if water intrusion to the basement/crawl space warrants same.· It is asserted that MrG [redacted] failed to observe and report mold that existed in the crawl space area As discussed with Mr [redacted] on January 2, our inspection is one for mechanical and structural condition and we do not inspect for mold This statement can be found in writing on page of his report as well as in the Building Inspection Agreement he signed on the day of the inspection However, in the course of the inspection a discoloration was observed on the wood support members in the crawl space area as indicated on page of his report and follows:Observed a discoloration of the sub-flooring and/or support membersThe exactcause of this condition could not be determined, however it may be associated withwater presence or a lack of proper ventilation and a resultant accumulation of moisturein this areaOver time, if allowed to continue, degradation of the wood materials maydevelopCorrection is recommended.The discoloration of the wood materials may be a mold, mildew or other fungus likegrowthThis type of growth has been reported to pose certain health hazards to somepeople while in others it may not have an affectAn evaluation of the nature of thediscoloration, i.emold, etc., its extent and appropriate remedial action is not within thescope of this inspection and therefore was not performedIf such a study is desired orrequired it is recommended the services of a qualified professional be engaged toperform same.Accordingly, each of the concerns raised by Mr [redacted] were indeed observed and reported by MrG [redacted] on the day of the inspection After discussing each of these items with our client on Januray 2, an attempt was made to further assist him with helpful suggestions on how to correct the deteriorated columns since he had obviously gone forward with the purchase of the property despite these findings In so far as these findings were presented to Mr [redacted] both in writing and through photographs on the day of the inspection coupled with the fact that at no time did he contact us to inquire of these findings prior to closing, we contend we have performed our duties as contained in our Building Inspection Agreement and NYS Standards of Practice That said, a refund of the fee paid is not justified at this time
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this customer’s concerns In reviewing the report associated with this inspection (copy attached), it was noted the customer did not participate in the inspection, rather arriving at the end of the process. Notwithstanding his absence,
the inspector undertook his responsibilities in earnest and performed the inspection in accordance with NYS Department of State established Standards of PracticeIn doing so, the inspector noted the roof was approximately 20-years old in the report. He went on to state: “Based upon the estimated age and conditions present at the time of the inspection, the roof covering material may be approaching or may have exceeded its useful service life… Given the estimated age and condition of the roof covering, predicting when such replacement will be needed is not possibleAs such, consideration should be given to further evaluation by a qualified roofing contractor.” We simply CANNOT predict the remaining life span of an aged building system, roof or any other type. Moreover, we did not and would not suggest, imply or state such a remaining life span as indicated by this customer. Our inspection report clearly stated the roofing system was aged, it was prone to leakage based on design, evidence of past leakage in the attic was observed and repair or replacement should be anticipated in the near future. Based upon this information, a return of the customer’s fee is not warranted and the request for same is declined
Thank you for the opportunity to address the concerns raised by Mr. [redacted] in his letter to you. I would like to address each concern point by point as follows:· Mr. [redacted] first contacted our office on New Year’s Day, January 1, 2016. Naturally, our...
office was closed in observance of the holiday. Upon re-opening for business on January 2, 2016 I initiated contact with Mr. [redacted] to discuss his concerns. Mr. Jerry G[redacted] also attempted contact with the customer, upon his return from vacation on at least 2 occasions starting Saturday, January 9, 2016. Messages were left but were not returned. This is the first communication we have had from Mr. [redacted] since January 2, 2016.· Mr. [redacted] states he was not informed of the condition of the support columns in the crawl space area. On the contrary, the report prepared and provided to Mr. [redacted] in hard copy as well as digital format, at the time of the inspection, stated:Noted steel columns provide support to the main girder/support beam(s).Noted some or all of the metal support columns exhibited signs of rusting or deterioration. As such, the support intended by same may become compromised. Suggest replacement as necessary or sealing same with an appropriate coating (if appropriate) to limit further degradation of the material.This statement occurred on pages 5 and 32 of his report (see attached). Pictures of the columns were also provided to Mr. [redacted] depicting same (see attached).· Mr. [redacted] states the presence of water as an ongoing problem in the crawl space area. At the time of the inspection there was no active water presence on the floor of the crawl space area. However, there was evidence of same as indicated in his report as follows:Observed water staining or other evidence of past water presence in the crawl spacefloor area. It could not be determined if the staining is the result of an isolated, singulartype occurrence or one that occurs intermittently. The area should be monitored overtime with appropriate corrective action taken as necessary.This statement occurs on page 33 of his report with pictures of the crawl space also provided (see attached).Moreover, the report contained a recommendation to add a sump pump to the crawl space area should water presence develop (see page 36)An interior floor drain or sump pit/pump was not observed. Installation of same shouldbe considered if water intrusion to the basement/crawl space warrants same.· It is asserted that Mr. G[redacted] failed to observe and report mold that existed in the crawl space area. As discussed with Mr. [redacted] on January 2, 2016 our inspection is one for mechanical and structural condition and we do not inspect for mold. This statement can be found in writing on page 10 of his report as well as in the Building Inspection Agreement he signed on the day of the inspection. However, in the course of the inspection a discoloration was observed on the wood support members in the crawl space area as indicated on page 32 of his report and follows:Observed a discoloration of the sub-flooring and/or support members. The exactcause of this condition could not be determined, however it may be associated withwater presence or a lack of proper ventilation and a resultant accumulation of moisturein this area. Over time, if allowed to continue, degradation of the wood materials maydevelop. Correction is recommended.The discoloration of the wood materials may be a mold, mildew or other fungus likegrowth. This type of growth has been reported to pose certain health hazards to somepeople while in others it may not have an affect. An evaluation of the nature of thediscoloration, i.e. mold, etc., its extent and appropriate remedial action is not within thescope of this inspection and therefore was not performed. If such a study is desired orrequired it is recommended the services of a qualified professional be engaged toperform same.Accordingly, each of the concerns raised by Mr. [redacted] were indeed observed and reported by Mr. G[redacted] on the day of the inspection. After discussing each of these items with our client on Januray 2, an attempt was made to further assist him with helpful suggestions on how to correct the deteriorated columns since he had obviously gone forward with the purchase of the property despite these findings. In so far as these findings were presented to Mr. [redacted] both in writing and through photographs on the day of the inspection coupled with the fact that at no time did he contact us to inquire of these findings prior to closing, we contend we have performed our duties as contained in our Building Inspection Agreement and NYS Standards of Practice. That said, a refund of the fee paid is not justified at this time.