May 06, 2003

"Okay, now we're bitter..."

I spotted this letter in the Home section of a local newspaper:

We were about 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 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, t wouldn't be allowed by code. Don't you agree?

I can tell from the letter that this man is an executive at a software company for the following reasons:

  1. Anyone who disagrees with him is trying to be troublesome.
  2. He ignores any evidence that supports the troublesome opinion.
  3. He considers the marginal extra cost to do the job correctly is a "needless expense".
  4. Tries to find outside party with no firsthand knowledge of the situation that will support his position.

The home inspector columnist replied to his letter by saying the codes set a minimum standard and the fact that the roof is sagging under the weight of two layers of shingles indicates there is a real problem that needs to be addressed. He also points out to the letter writer that this would help protect him from a lawsuit later should just adding another layer of shingles not solve the roofing problem.

Even with all this I'm still betting that the chances of the guy paying the extra $500 to do the job right are sill less than 50/50. I mean, it's $500 and everyone trying to force him to spend it are just greedy bastards -- unlike him.

Posted by thom at May 6, 2003 02:56 PM
Comments
Post a comment









Remember personal info?