HOME
HOME
HOME
HOME
HOME
HOME
SERVICES
INSPECTION REPORTS
SELLER AVOIDED RUINOUS LOSS: A Seller hired me because a Home Inspection Report said her basement walls were collapsing. The Buyer's engineer said she had to put reinforcing rods and concrete inside the walls. She would have to cut, patch and paint a lot of walls. It cost more than she would keep from the sale. If she didn't sell, she would have to disclose this Report and engineering recommendation to the next Buyer.
I proved the Inspection Report was inaccurate, and the Engineer was inappropriate. The walls were built in a sloppy way. Lower layers of blocks sloped into the basement, other layers sloped outward. It was as if the builder noticed a mistaken layout by the mason, and corrected the situation by tilting the remaining courses outward. This adjustment made the the basement the right size for the house. There were no signs of wall movement. The Buyers refused to pay the agreed price, the Seller returned the deposit and took the house off the market.
It turned out that the Buyer was related to the Realtor, who found a way to use a certain home inspector and structural engineer. It might have been an unethical conflict of interest, and perhaps an attempt to defraud the Seller. My inspection, analysis and measurements saved the home owner from going to the unnecessary expense of rebuilding basement walls, or selling at a reduced price. The attached Report and sketch proved the walls were not collapsing.
PRE-SETTLEMENT INSPECTION REVIEW
SAVED HOME OWNER UNNECESSARILY REBUILDING BASEMENT WALLS
Marc Pevar
1435 Fresno Road
Wilmington, DE, 19803
Email:mpevar@marcpevar.com
610-470-0093
**********
****************
****************
****************, **
Dear Ms. B***********:
On ***********, you engaged me to inspect your home and to report to you in connection with certain concerns Mr. K******** and Mr. H********** in the Home Inspection Report dated ******** (“HIR”), and in the Structural Evaluation (“SE”), dated ***********.
The HIR, pg. 2 states: “Major Defect. Some cracks and water penetration noted. There were some horizontal cracks and bowing and the entire structural condition should be evaluated by a structural contractor or engineer and all needed repairs should be made.”
On 28 MAR, I inspected the exterior building walls, basement and garage immediately after hours of heavy rain. I saw no standing water anywhere around the house, including at the front and rear left downspouts. Inside the garage and basement, I saw no signs of current, recent or fresh liquid water infiltration. I neither saw nor felt any liquid water or wet or damp concrete block or mortar in the basement or garage. All cracks in the wall were dry. Very few of the cracks have any efflorescence at them.
Based on the lack of evidence to the contrary, I submit that the existing grading diverts most surface water and downspout water away from the garage and basement walls. No water entered the basement or garage during or after the heavy rains on 28 MAR.
The three exterior basement walls and one garage wall each have limited areas of dry, powdery efflorescence. Efflorescence is a kind of mineral deposit left behind by moisture that wicks out of the block. Efflorescence can form after a new block wall dries out after it is exposed to rain or is washed with a hose or scrubbed with mild hydrochloric acid.
Efflorescence can also form above French drain gaps between the basement floor slab and block walls. This can happen when moisture that is under the floor slab evaporates into the relatively dryer air in that gap. Additionally, the bottom course of block acts as a wick, absorbing liquid water from the French drain gaps. Moisture can condense inside the block and form liquid water that dissolves minerals in the block. The condensed moisture can later evaporate into the relatively drier basement air, leaving the formerly dissolved minerals on the outer surface of the block. This is how efflorescence forms on block.
Any water that enters the block can cause efflorescence. The water can come from below the floor slab, from leaking pipes, from downspout run-off that enters the wall at or below the finish grade outside, from leaking lawn hoses, etc.
The HIR accurately notes that: “Some cracks and water penetration noted.” Water penetration noted,” combined with “some cracks,” can imply to some readers that the inspector saw water, or signs of water, entering the basement through cracks. However, the HIR does not report observing liquid or dripping or flowing water, or observing damp areas of wet efflorescence.
If water had entered the basement for many years through the cracks that were observed, then there would be efflorescence along those cracks. Instead, there is no efflorescence along most wall cracks, except at the front and rear corners that are opposite the two downspouts. This evidence suggests that in the past some roof water entered the walls in those corner areas. Additionally, during or immediately after heavy rain, there would be liquid water and dark staining along the cracks if they leaked. I inspected the walls immediately after a heavy rain and saw no signs of liquid water on the walls.
Based on the lack of evidence of active water infiltration, I submit that little if any water is now entering the basement through the block or the wall cracks.
The HIR, pg. 2 also states: “There were some horizontal cracks and bowing and the entire structural condition should be evaluated by a structural contractor or engineer and all needed repairs should be made.”
The HIR does not state that repairs are needed. The Home Inspector recommended that a structural engineer should investigate the: “... horizontal cracks and bowing...” as well as the “... entire structural condition...” and then recommend whether any repairs are needed. The Buyers hired a structural engineer who produced the Structural Evaluation (“SE”).
I inspected and found that there are some horizontal and vertical cracks and step cracking that varies from hairline to 1/16” thick. ( See Photos #8, #9 and #10). This was the widest crack I found. I submit that such cracking is typical for 40+ year-old block basement walls, and does not indicate that the walls are failing.
A bowing or bulged wall that is deformed by external pressures or similar forces, typically has a very visible pattern of cracks that vary from 1/4” to 1/2” or even wider. This kind of deformation typically causes mortar to fall onto the floor, with the greatest deformation being half way up the wall and away from corners. There is no such pattern of deformation in these basement walls, and there is no separating or falling mortar. Additionally, walls only move in response to changes in loads or changes in foundation support.
A typical change in the weight against the wall comes from trapped subsurface water that adds weight to the exterior soil, pressing against the wall, making it move at its weakest points. I saw no evidence of ponding water on the surface on the day of heavy rain, so it is questionable that there are any fluctuating pressures on the walls outside of the basement. Another common cause of deformation, is if a foundation becomes undermined, breaks, sags, and then subsides under the wall, especially where heavy point loads bear on the wall. There is no evidence of any downward motion like this. There is no pattern of mortar joint openings that would indicate such deformation. The existence of some hairline and 1/16” wide cracks does not suggest that any of the walls are deformed.
The SE lacks drawings, photographs, moisture meter findings mapped on drawings (to show wet block, suggestive of saturated soil pressing against a bulging wall), dimensional measurements to identify locations where the block walls vary from being vertical, or any evidence or specific claims that there is recent, current or active motion of the block walls.
The SE states that: “... the front, left & rear basement walls as well as the garage rear foundation wall are structurally compromised needing reinforcement.” This statement is a conclusion, not an observation. Valid conclusions are supported by measurable evidence. The SE contains no evidence to support any conclusion about the structural integrity of the walls. The SE does not detail how the building design is “compromising” the basement walls.
The SE recommendations #1 and #2 are reasonable and effective remedies to stabilize a block wall that is failing because of horizontal exterior pressures, or shifting interior horizontal joist loads. However, as I have noted above, there is no evidence that these block walls are failing, or that they are being subjected to horizontal exterior pressures or shifting interior horizontal joist loads.
Additionally, I first inspected by using a 4’ long mason’s level to check whether the block walls were vertical, plumb or at least laid up in a single plane. I found that the front, gable and rear walls are not laid up in single planes. Instead, the upper 3 to 4 courses, mostly above grade with no dirt pressing against those courses (see photographs #1, #2, #3 and #4 showing how far the concrete block extends above the exterior grade), are laid up in one vertical plane, whereas the lower coursing is laid up in a different vertical plane. In many places, there is no crack at the point where the two planes diverge. The divergence is such that the lower part of the wall appears to be tilted into the basement, and that the upper part of the wall appears to be tilted outward.
I could not help but also notice that in many places, block are not aligned in any particular plane, and rather stick out or are recessed back from adjoining block that were set above and below them (see photographs #5, #6 and #7).
I submit that if the wall cracked and then bowed after it was built, then there should be 1/4” or wider open cracks on the inside of the basement wall along the horizontal line where the wall broke. Instead of wide cracks where the wall angle changes, there are very few cracks that are even hairline cracks where courses of block are out of line with those above and below them. All of the horizontal cracks in that region range from hairline to 1/16” wide.
In some areas, it is as if the mason who built the wall found an error in his string-line or other method of vertical control when the wall was 3 to 4 courses below reaching the design height of the wall. The lower wall was mistakenly built tilting slightly into the basement. When the mason found the error, he tilted the final course outward, so the top of the wall would be the correct design dimension.
The evidence for this explanation for why there are two distinct planes for the walls, is the lack of more than hairline cracks where the vertical plane changes. The wall did not fracture or break. Instead, the mason redirected the upper courses intentionally to make the finished wall the desired length and width.
Additionally, “bowing” suggests that the basement wall surface is bulging into the basement, a condition that is typically caused by pressure of ground water. Bowing typically involves cracks of 1/4” to 1/2” in the mortar of each course of block. The cracks appear as individual blocks rotate around their vertical axis, opening a crack on the inside of the basement, and remaining tight on the outside of the basement. When a block wall is bowed, then If measured for lateral displacement, there is a very visible pattern showing no displacement at the very top and very bottom of the wall, then progressively more and more displacement of each course of block, up and down to the middle of the wall. The net result can be vertical curved appearance, with measurable lateral displacement half way up the height of the wall. I observed no such pattern of lateral displacement, no bulging or bowing.
The RE submits no evidence of “bowing,” of structural compromise, or of recent or ongoing structural failure. Hairline cracks are typical in most 40+ year-old block walls, and are not of themselves a cause of concern that the walls are failing. The evidence that I observed suggest that the walls were built out of plumb part way up from the foundation, and then were redirected so the final coursing ended up with the top of the walls at the correct exterior dimensions.
I submit that the grading and the walls are functioning to keep water out, and to support the structure, and that no remediation is needed because the walls are performing their intended function. There is no evidence that the walls are moving laterally, but there is evidence that the walls were originally built out of plumb. There is no evidence that the walls are failing or are otherwise structurally compromised.
Respectfully,
Marc Pevar
Attached:
Photographs #1 through #10 cited above
Resumes: “Construction Litigation Support,”
Drawing dated ****** regarding observations at **********
DRAWING DETAILS and COMMENTS:
What follows explains how to interpret the attached drawing, as well as the methodology used to take the measurements at 3 locations along each of the 3 of the walls that the structural engineer questioned.
The Plan View is draw at 1/8”: 1’ and shows 3 locations on each of the 3 walls that the HIR stated were bowed. At each of the 9 locations where I measured the plumbness of the block wall, I hung a masons plumb bob from a new or existing nail in a ceiling joist, using a braided nylon masons line to support the plumb bob. I marked the concrete slab beneath the point of the plumb bob, using a framer’s pencil. The nails and the pencil marks on the floor remain in place so anyone can check my accuracy. Using a stainless steel ruler (visible in Photograph #10), I measured the distance between the top of certain blocks and the edge of the line closest to the block. I took such measurements at the top of the 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 10thand 11thblock course.
I transferred this information onto three elevations, one for each of the 3 walls. Each elevation has a dotted line that cross it, indicating the approximate existing external grade. Each location where I measured is uniquely named and labeled on the drawing. Above each location, I wrote the sequence of measurements. For example, “A1” is the first location where I measured on Elevation A, the front wall. The distance between the top of the blocks, measured from successive coursing was as follows:
Course 2, 6” between the top of the block and the closest face of the string line.
Course 4, 6”
Course 6, 6”
Course 8, 6”
Course 9, 6-1/4”
Course 10, 6-1/4”
Course 11, 6-1/4”
There are no hairline cracks or step cracking in this region, which indicates that the wall was built this way. Additionally, I used my 4’ masons’ level and found that the bottom 8 courses are perfectly plumb. However, above this, if the level is rested against the top three courses, those courses are in one plane, a different plane from the lower 8 courses. When I held the level tight to the upper 3 courses, I saw a gap of more than one inch between the end of the level and the block wall. Yet, the lower part of the wall, where dirt press against the wall, is totally plumb, shows no signs of any cracking, no movement, and no bowing. This location was the first that I observed on my initial visit, and suggested to me that the masons intentionally changed the vertical alignment of courses #9, #10 and #11 to insure that the wood bearing plate, the anchor bolts and the total dimension of the house would meet the plan requirements.
On the drawing, I noted above A1 that its delta (change) from bottom to the height of the external grade, was zero. In this connection, the delta to the top of the wall was 1/4”. At all other locations where I took measurements, I showed the delta to finish grade:
A1 = 0, A2 = 1/4”, A3 = 1/8”
B1 = 1/2”, B2 = 1/4”, B3 = 1/4”
C1 = 1/4”, C2 = 3/8” and C3 = 0 to 1/16”
Note A2 and A3, which are only 16” apart, yet A2’s delta is 1/4” and A3’s delta is 1/8.” In this connection, A2 is beside the front porch, whereas A3 is behind the front porch and a little closer to the corner of walls A and B. Corners are typically the most stable part of any wall.
In this connection, consider the 1/2” delta at B1, which is the largest I measured. There is a near absence of cracking at these locations, suggesting that all of these irregularities were built into the original wall by the mason. The last place I would expect to see bowing in a wall is at the corner. The greatest delta is at B1, only 5-1/2” from the corner! Yet B1 is the least likely measured location for there to be any movement at all.
At B1, the coursing moves progressively more and more into the basement as measured from the bottom to the top. It is as if the mason was making corrections, perhaps because of initial layout issues on the footing. Whatever the reason, the delta is caused by workmanship, and not because of failure of the wall.
Consider also B2, where 4 of the deltas are identical, and only the top two courses move toward the inside of the basement, although they are totally above finish grade and there is no soil pressure against those block. In plain language, these measurement show irregular workmanship, including blocks set in and out from the courses above and below.
Despite the irregular workmanship, which is de minimus, the walls are stable, and do not show evidence of structurally significant movement. The imperfections do not rise to a concern for the structural stability of the walls and no repairs are needed because the walls are not broken, and show no signs of failure to perform their required structural function.
In connection with the two inspectors’ concerns, I believe they are reasonable, if they, as I, started by using a mason’s level, and stopped their investigation at that point. I was concerned when I first measured at A1 and thought the wall was built in two radically different planes. After all, a horizontal delta of more than an inch, just in the 3’ extension of my 4’ mason’s level, is a major concern, if extrapolated to the the floor, where the delta would measure 3” or 4.”
It was only by careful measurements and study that is reflected in the attached drawing, that it became clear that the issue is irregular workmanship of walls that at the end of the day are not bowed or broken, so there is nothing to repair in them.
Marc Pevar
BASEMENT MEASUREMENTS AND DRAWING ARE ATTACHED BELOW
