|
Posted by mg on June 5, 2007, 10:22 pm
>
>
>
> > I found it interesting reading the posts from people saying "he's a
> > roofer, not a swamp cooler installer." I think this illustrates the
> > differences in the way things are done in different parts of the
> > country. I'll bet those posters live in the east where you have your
> > heating and cooling in your basement.
>
> I've traveled and worked around the country, and I'm familiar with
> swamp coolers and roof mount antennae of various sorts. It's not a
> technical question, it's a liability question. Even if the work is
> fairly simple, an owner would be shooting themselves in the foot to
> have untrained people messing with the equipment. A contractor
> receives no benefit, and exposes themselves to substantially increased
> liability by touching other systems.
In the case of swamp coolers, the legs remove with a few screws. So,
it's easy to lay shingles underneath them and then replace the legs.
In addition, swamp cooler parts are extremely cheap and it's hard to
imagine any liability issues.
In the case of satellite antennas, especially the latest Ka/Ku antenna
from DirecTV, installation is highly technical and requires an
expensive meter. So, roofers are going to have to learn to coordinate
their work with a dish antenna technician in the future.
> Whether they were the owner's or the contractor's, the assumptions
> caused the trouble. The OP assumed one thing and the contractor
> assumed another. There's plenty of blame to go around.
Actually we both assumed the same thing. The contractor admitted it
was a huge mistake on the part of one of the workmen and apologized
profusely and he has now fixed everything.
> > Out in the west, it is very common (until recently) to have the AC and
> > heater or swamp cooler on the roof. It is also not only common, but
> > CODE to have the roofer lift the legs of the units and put the
> > shingles under them and then put some tar around the legs. This is the
> > normal and legal practice!
>
> A code violation is not "illegal". It's a code violation. I'm also
> passably proficient in the major codes, considering that I work with
> them daily, and know of no requirement that specifies in detail how
> flashing is to be installed with regards to rooftop structures.
> Please cite the code you are referring to.
>
> > To the OP: Is a 50 percent deposit even legal in your state? Where I
> > live a contractor can't take more than 10 percent for a deposit. Was
> > he even a licensed contractor?
>
> > Second, did it pass city inspection? He did pull a permit, right?
>
> The majority of the country does not require permits for reroofing
> work. The following is fairly typical:
>
> When Do I Need a Building Permit?
> Common Procedures that Require a Building Permit:
> Above & Below Ground Swimming Pools
> Oil & Gas Heating Units and Tanks
> Contractor Licensing
> Plumbing
> Decks & Patios
> Public Assembly
> Demolition of Structures
> Radio & Television Disk Antennas
> Fences
> Rental Permit
> Fireplaces & Chimneys
> Retaining Walls
> Hot Tubs
> Signs
> Large Tool Sheds
> Temporary Structure
> Lawn Sprinkler Systems
> Tennis Courts
> New Additions & Interior Alterations
> Tree Removal
> New Homes & Buildings
> Use Permit
>
> > Don't pay anything until the inspection and ask the inspector about
> > the cooler. You definitely got a bad job, it's just a matter of if it
> > was not done to code and he will have to fix it.
>
> Again, you're assuming a permit and inspections. If the roofer or OP
> had pulled a permit, and the work was indeed against the still-to-be-
> cited code, then the work would have been flagged, and the OP wouldn't
> be writing about the cooler's legs. It's probably safe to assume that
> no permit was pulled.
>
> > Whatever happens, given the obvious lack of attention to detail by
> > this guy, I would get a reputable roofer to come out and do an
> > inspection to see if he thinks there is anything that is going to
> > cause big problems. This shouldn't cost more than 100 bucks and is
> > well worth it after dealing with bozos like you did (I had a similar
> > situation and had to do the same thing).
>
> What exactly will that accomplish? The only time that an independent
> report would be of use is if the OP decided to sue and an
> unknowledgeable person, like a judge, needed an expert's report to
> hang their hat on. For the amount of money we're talking about, it's
> extremely unlikely that a lawsuit will come out of this.
>
> R
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap