tsbrewers said:

---

daveferg said:

---

Brew---how can the deck be OK when you start off saying you'd use 6x6 (which was my first thought as well)? I also see other places where they cut back on materials (like no posts on railings and no structure midway under the stringers. Those things make me want to take a careful look at how it's attached to the house and how deep/large those footers are, both of which are critical to the deck's integrity over the next few years. And no--- I wouldn't be as concerned if the deck height were a couple feet above grade.

---

It can be ok since there are millions of decks out there virtually identical to that one with very few failures. Probably none directly related to using a 4x4. Saying I would have gone with a 6x6 mean just that, if I was building it myself I would have gone with 6x6's. That doesn't mean 4x4's aren't just fine.

It is a spec house, built to "builders grade" He has to compete with every other house out there for sale. if he stuck another $500 on the deck for 6x6 posts and a few 4x4's on the rail, would he recoup that? How about if he adds 10 outlets in the garage instead of just 1? Will he get that $1000 back? If he gets that one person who cares about these things maybe, but he is severely limiting his prospective buyers.

Most people are going to notice an extra 200 sq. ft. for the same price instead of a few minor things like beefier posts on the deck.

Kinda like looking at a 150hp car and saying it "should" have 300 hp. It will be fine with 150 but 300 would be nicer. If you want 300 you need to be ready to pay for it.

---

I don't want to waste my time debating each of your statements one by one. I've seen the term "builders grade" referred to a low priced installed product that meets minimum FHA requirements, but to use that term to flat out cheat somebody by constructing a dangerous product like this deck that did not meet minimum construction guidelines or follow basic safety code for the sake of saving everyone upfront a few bucks is something totally different.

If the BI was competent this home should never be given an occupancy permit until the deck faults are corrected. Constructing a known shoddy product by a paid professional contractor that has lives dependent upon its sturdiness while falsely calling it "builders grade" would never satisfy me as a potential buyer or as a jurist.

--------------------
Any free advice given is worth price paid.

Post Extras:

BacsiBob said:

---

I would like to point out that IF the home inspector has concerns about the deck, he/she would be wise to inform the client by reporting something like this:

"I have concerns regarding the structural integrity of the elevated deck on the back of the house. I would strongly recommend having it evaluated by a licensed professional who is well versed in residential deck construction and local building requirements, if any."

To get more specific than this, unless the inspector is a licensed professional, is to risk liability if the inspector is wrong.

---

Post Extras:

Woodenfish said:

---

GHR said:

---

daveferg said:

---

Good luck with your inspection. Hope the deck checks out OK---or can be fixed.
___

GHR----Pictures lead to speculation? Yeah---like several of us noted its poor structure---of course I forgot. You're the guy who builds decks they way he wants to and then hangs max occupancy signs on them.

---

The fact that others do not see "poor structure" should indicate that the pictures are leading to speculation.

That you would have done things differently does not mean that what is present is not appropriate.

---

The deck's beam is sandwiched to the posts which against code.
The guardrail is only supported by 1-3/8" x 1-3/8" balusters which is against code.
The stair guardrail does not have a graspable handrail which is against code.
Post sizes are 4x4 minimum for decks six feet or less above the ground and 4x6 for decks over six feet above the ground. These appear undersized and against code.
Decks more than 30 inches above grade must resist lateral forces (wind and earthquake) with diagonal cross bracing. The current bracing is woefully inadequate.
The top of the footings should extend 6" above existing grade not flush with grade as shown.
There does not appear to have any anchoring on post to pier.
The guardrail and stair construction is horrible.
Are footings of proper size?
Is the ledger board properly secured to the rim joist?
Has it been flashed?

This is a great example of an unknowing homeowner putting their trust into the General Contractor and local Building Inspector to only find out later how completely incompetent the GC and the BI were in building the home.

The GC severely under built this deck and placed the lives of the family in jeopardy of the sake of profit. I would clearly wonder what other shortcuts were made?

---

I don't believe that any of the statements you make are correct.

Building codes allow either following prescriptive codes or performing engineering. Perhaps you could show your engineering math.

---

I just have to ask: Are you a licensed engineer?

--------------------
Economics is much harder when you use real money.

Edited by GHR (07/04/12 06:55 PM)

Post Extras:

fixtureman said:

---

Bravo tsbrewers I was thinking the same thing and as far as citing code where is this house located. I have been in many different states working on commercial jobs and the code differs from state to state. Just like in Canada has different codes as the US.

---

Post Extras: