|
Home > Archive > Home Repair forum > July 2006 > Is Knob-and-Tube *Always* Dangerous?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Is Knob-and-Tube *Always* Dangerous?
|
|
| pennsylady2002@yahoo.com 2006-07-25, 9:25 am |
| I'm sure this question has been posted and answered a thousand times
here, but a family member who routinely asks me to walk-through homes
she is interested in buying (because, as a walking Typhoid Mary of
Money Pits, I have hard-earned knowledge) has asked me to jump on a
particularly desirable (location, location, location) multi-unit this
AM.
One half of this duplex has knob-and-tube.
I have read conflicting estimates of the integrity and safety of
knob-and-tube on this group and other web sites. But I'm scheduled to
go through the home in two hours and thought I'd post and maybe get
some fresh insights.
>From the street, and as far as the exterior foundation goes, this home
is an absolute steal (new roof, great landscaping, has it all). My
family member needs a place to run to as the result of a divorce and
won't be able to take on both the mortgage and a complete rewire at the
time of sale; hence, my post.
Thank you as always for your responses.
| |
| Joseph Meehan 2006-07-25, 9:25 am |
| pennsylady2002@yahoo.com wrote:
> I'm sure this question has been posted and answered a thousand times
> here, but a family member who routinely asks me to walk-through homes
> she is interested in buying (because, as a walking Typhoid Mary of
> Money Pits, I have hard-earned knowledge) has asked me to jump on a
> particularly desirable (location, location, location) multi-unit this
> AM.
>
> One half of this duplex has knob-and-tube.
>
> I have read conflicting estimates of the integrity and safety of
> knob-and-tube on this group and other web sites. But I'm scheduled to
> go through the home in two hours and thought I'd post and maybe get
> some fresh insights.
>
> is an absolute steal (new roof, great landscaping, has it all). My
> family member needs a place to run to as the result of a divorce and
> won't be able to take on both the mortgage and a complete rewire at
> the time of sale; hence, my post.
>
> Thank you as always for your responses.
Knob and tube is not, by nature, dangerous. It happens to be a very
save system The real problem is it is no longer used and has not been used
for a very long time. Therefore it is not up to modern expectations, like
having a ground or being able to supply a good size room A/C unit.
You need to check with local codes, including those that may only apply
to rental property to determine if you need to do any replacement. Likely,
and logically, if you are doing work in an area and it is convenient to
replace the K&T at that time, you should. Don't mix it on the same circuit
for example.
Stick to code and you will be safe.
--
Joseph Meehan
Dia duit
| |
|
| knob and tube is ungrounded, as was lots of Romex installed in the 50's and
60's . In some places its unprotected and subject to mechanical damage. The
stuff is OLD, but in my experience, most of the K&T I've seen, has been in
excellent condition, unlike rubber covered conductors of BX cables from the
40's and 50's, which breaks down and crumbles from heat. I would ultimately
replace it, but I wouldn't feel in any hurry to do it yesterday
<pennsylady2002@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1153823724.229505.73400@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> I'm sure this question has been posted and answered a thousand times
> here, but a family member who routinely asks me to walk-through homes
> she is interested in buying (because, as a walking Typhoid Mary of
> Money Pits, I have hard-earned knowledge) has asked me to jump on a
> particularly desirable (location, location, location) multi-unit this
> AM.
>
> One half of this duplex has knob-and-tube.
>
> I have read conflicting estimates of the integrity and safety of
> knob-and-tube on this group and other web sites. But I'm scheduled to
> go through the home in two hours and thought I'd post and maybe get
> some fresh insights.
>
> is an absolute steal (new roof, great landscaping, has it all). My
> family member needs a place to run to as the result of a divorce and
> won't be able to take on both the mortgage and a complete rewire at the
> time of sale; hence, my post.
>
> Thank you as always for your responses.
>
| |
| hallerb@aol.com 2006-07-25, 9:25 am |
| probably CANT get homeowners or a mortage with K&T most insurance
wouldnt cover it as a fire hazard.
connections are soldered in the wall, without a box surrounding it.
unlike today all coinnections are in boxes.
after many years and heavy loads the solder weakens and the connection
can overheat and cause a fire, that happened to a buddy of mine
fortunately in his open basement cieling he smelled smoke and put it
out.
in a closed wall the house will go up in smoke.
have friends whos homeowners inspected their home and REQUIRED rewiring
for just this reason.
deduct cost of rewire from home sale price and for futher savings get a
home inspector they arent perfect but every trouble they find is money
in your pocket.
call your insurance agent and ask about K&T and please report back here
what they tell you...
K&T would be safe IF the connections had been made in BOXES but back
then no one thought of it
| |
| Pete C. 2006-07-25, 9:25 am |
| pennsylady2002@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> I'm sure this question has been posted and answered a thousand times
> here, but a family member who routinely asks me to walk-through homes
> she is interested in buying (because, as a walking Typhoid Mary of
> Money Pits, I have hard-earned knowledge) has asked me to jump on a
> particularly desirable (location, location, location) multi-unit this
> AM.
>
> One half of this duplex has knob-and-tube.
>
> I have read conflicting estimates of the integrity and safety of
> knob-and-tube on this group and other web sites. But I'm scheduled to
> go through the home in two hours and thought I'd post and maybe get
> some fresh insights.
>
> is an absolute steal (new roof, great landscaping, has it all). My
> family member needs a place to run to as the result of a divorce and
> won't be able to take on both the mortgage and a complete rewire at the
> time of sale; hence, my post.
>
> Thank you as always for your responses.
The deciding factor is not whether it is dangerous, which it rarely is
unless it's been messed with, but rather whether you can get insurance
for the place with K&T. Most insurance companies are absurdly paranoid
about K&T and indeed any electrical older than about 30-40yrs.
Pete C.
| |
|
|
Pete C. wrote:
> pennsylady2002@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> The deciding factor is not whether it is dangerous, which it rarely is
> unless it's been messed with, but rather whether you can get insurance
> for the place with K&T. Most insurance companies are absurdly paranoid
> about K&T and indeed any electrical older than about 30-40yrs.
>
> Pete C.
At risk of getting into tinfoilhatland, literally, I'd just point out
that the electrical fields from knob and tube are (I would guess) quite
a bit higher than modern wiring, even without metal shielding, due to
the conductors being further apart. The significant health effects, if
any, I leave to other posters to argue about. (I would also guess it's
not a significant risk compared to fire or not supplying a ground).
Which reminds me; a while ago it was posted here that GFIs don't need a
ground. Is that true? Could you eliminate the ungrounded risk by just
replacing the outlets with GFIs?
| |
| kv888831393ster@gmail.com 2006-07-25, 9:25 am |
| I'm working on a clients house that has K&T. It's a very large house
and the entire 2nd floor and part of the first is K&T and on one
breaker! These people were running an ac unit and 3 TVs plus all the
lights. The problem with replacing this stuff is that all the
connections are buried and hard to find. I've had to make large
inspection holes to make sure I've pulled out all of the connections.
I've also had a neighbor not quite completely close a hot water
radiator bleed vent. The dripping water from the second floor ran down
a major junction of mineral coated K&T in the kitchen. It started a
fire in the wall where there were 5 switches. The responding firemen
had to completely chop out the wall and part of the ceiling to make
sure the fire was out.
Richard
hallerb@aol.com wrote:
> probably CANT get homeowners or a mortage with K&T most insurance
> wouldnt cover it as a fire hazard.
>
> connections are soldered in the wall, without a box surrounding it.
> unlike today all coinnections are in boxes.
>
> after many years and heavy loads the solder weakens and the connection
> can overheat and cause a fire, that happened to a buddy of mine
> fortunately in his open basement cieling he smelled smoke and put it
> out.
>
> in a closed wall the house will go up in smoke.
>
> have friends whos homeowners inspected their home and REQUIRED rewiring
> for just this reason.
>
> deduct cost of rewire from home sale price and for futher savings get a
> home inspector they arent perfect but every trouble they find is money
> in your pocket.
>
> call your insurance agent and ask about K&T and please report back here
> what they tell you...
>
> K&T would be safe IF the connections had been made in BOXES but back
> then no one thought of it
| |
| Speedy Jim 2006-07-25, 9:25 am |
| Pete C. wrote:
> pennsylady2002@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
>
> The deciding factor is not whether it is dangerous, which it rarely is
> unless it's been messed with, but rather whether you can get insurance
> for the place with K&T. Most insurance companies are absurdly paranoid
> about K&T and indeed any electrical older than about 30-40yrs.
>
> Pete C.
Pete nailed it. Start with a call to Insur agent.
Jim
| |
| Tom Horne, Electrician 2006-07-25, 9:25 am |
| hallerb@aol.com wrote:
> after many years and heavy loads the solder weakens and the connection
> can overheat and cause a fire, that happened to a buddy of mine
> fortunately in his open basement cieling he smelled smoke and put it
> out.
The only way that the solder will fail on Knob and Tube wiring is if the
circuits were fused with improperly sized fuses. If the circuits are
protected with properly sized fuses K&T will last for decades.
--
Tom Horne
"This alternating current stuff is just a fad. It is much too dangerous
for general use." Thomas Alva Edison
| |
| hallerb@aol.com 2006-07-25, 9:25 am |
|
>
> The only way that the solder will fail on Knob and Tube wiring is if the
> circuits were fused with improperly sized fuses. If the circuits are
> protected with properly sized fuses K&T will last for decades.
> --
> Tom Horne
>
OBVIOUSLY you dont know enough about solder, over LONG times it wiskers
and detoriates. now K&T is likey 50 years old or more, and quality of
metals and solder wasnt great way back then.
I fix office machines for a living, at one time did tv and other
appliance repair. in that time every now and then would find a bad
solder joint, that had workewd forever. frequently in low power
circuits where it wasnt and couldnt be overloaded.
Insurance doesnt like K&T because it cost them too much in fire
losses,,,,,,,
otherwise they wouldnt care!!
you go right ahead thinking K&T is safe, all those insurancer companies
just dont know what they are talking about
| |
| nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu 2006-07-25, 1:25 pm |
| hallerb@aol.com <hallerb@aol.com> wrote:
>after many years and heavy loads the solder weakens and the connection
>can overheat and cause a fire...
No. Fuses and circuit breakers prevent that.
Nick
| |
| Phil Munro 2006-07-25, 1:25 pm |
| hallerb@aol.com wrote:
>
>
> OBVIOUSLY you dont know enough about solder, over LONG times it wiskers
> and detoriates. now K&T is likey 50 years old or more, and quality of
> metals and solder wasnt great way back then.
>
> I fix office machines for a living, at one time did tv and other
> appliance repair. in that time every now and then would find a bad
> solder joint, that had workewd forever. frequently in low power
> circuits where it wasnt and couldnt be overloaded.
>
> Insurance doesnt like K&T because it cost them too much in fire
> losses,,,,,,,
>
> otherwise they wouldnt care!!
>
> you go right ahead thinking K&T is safe, all those insurancer companies
> just dont know what they are talking about
>
Below are a couple of links to consider wrt knob & tube wiring.
Although my experience is limited, the times I have seen crumbling
wire insulation with K&T is where it joined ceiling light fixtures,
and that was because of the heat (over heating) due to the fixtures.
In some such cases it was possible to (properly) solder a replacement
extension onto such a wire and then use a sleeve to cover that, followed
by the installation of a junction box to hold the wire safely in place
and connect to the fixture.
Whenever possible I replace K&T, but when not reasonable to replace,
I would be sure the circuit is on a 15A max breaker. Usually
receptacles, which is where the greatest loads exist, and where a ground
is especially desirable, can be more easily rewired with romex.
http://www.waptac.org/sp.asp?id=7190
http://www.maine.gov/pfr/ins/hearing_2003-13680.htm
These links are especially interesting and deserve a full reading.
My comments are just my own opinions and ideas. --Phil
| |
|
| Since the days of knob-and-tube, a lot of experience has been gained from a
safety standpoint. Many changes have been made to the electrical code which
make things a whole lot safer. And the safety aspect means protection of
life and property.
Over the years there have been fires and people electrocuted for this or
that reason. Then the electrical codes have been changed to prevent these
things from happening in the future.
With that said, the safest thing to do would be to re-wire the house to the
latest electrical codes.
Also many years ago they did not have the electrical needs we have today. So
there is the daily pain in the you know what factor. Not enough outlets,
many rooms on one circuit and not enough capacity. Old outlets where you
need to jiggle the plug in the outlet to get it to work, etc.
Having all new grounded wiring and plenty of outlets/capacity can make
day-to-day living a whole lot more pleasant. It's nice to have outlets where
you need them and not need to jiggle the plug to get it to work.
| |
|
| pennsylady2002@yahoo.com wrote:
> I'm sure this question has been posted and answered a thousand times
> here, but a family member who routinely asks me to walk-through homes
> she is interested in buying (because, as a walking Typhoid Mary of
> Money Pits, I have hard-earned knowledge) has asked me to jump on a
> particularly desirable (location, location, location) multi-unit this
> AM.
>
> One half of this duplex has knob-and-tube.
>
> I have read conflicting estimates of the integrity and safety of
> knob-and-tube on this group and other web sites. But I'm scheduled to
> go through the home in two hours and thought I'd post and maybe get
> some fresh insights.
>
> is an absolute steal (new roof, great landscaping, has it all). My
> family member needs a place to run to as the result of a divorce and
> won't be able to take on both the mortgage and a complete rewire at the
> time of sale; hence, my post.
>
> Thank you as always for your responses.
>
No, its not always dangerous. As Joseph said, its not inherently dangerous.
Here are circumstances when it is dangerous.
- When a ground is needed by a device and its not available.
- when it has been extended or hacked onto by somone not knowing what
they are doing
- when the fuse has been "upgraded" to a larger one because it kept blowing
- Then the wire is overloaded
Remember - when it was installed there were no hair dryers, electric
curing irons, air conditioners, PCs, microwaves, etc.
It becomes unsafe when people try to add on more outlets to accommodate
these things.
| |
| spamTHISbrp@yahoo.com 2006-07-25, 1:25 pm |
|
Tom Horne, Electrician wrote:
> hallerb@aol.com wrote:
>
> The only way that the solder will fail on Knob and Tube wiring is if the
> circuits were fused with improperly sized fuses. If the circuits are
> protected with properly sized fuses K&T will last for decades.
> --
> Tom Horne
>
> "This alternating current stuff is just a fad. It is much too dangerous
> for general use." Thomas Alva Edison
I won't disagree, but will point out that it has been in place for
decades- at least 6 of 'em, if not more.
D
| |
| Choise76Smu@EhOhEll.Net 2006-07-25, 1:25 pm |
| kv888831393ster@gmail.com in
news:1153834892.149001.96350@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:
[color=darkred]
never seen that, maybe that's the older knob and tube. i've seen 50's stuff that was
connected properly in boxes with the short piece of "loom" thru box holes. (as well as i
recall)
i've also seen separate ground wire for old two-conductor romex (kitchens) that had twisted
and soldered connections. i guess if ground wire went into rare effect (lots of current)
accumulated debris in wall could light up.
older houses had no insulation, so if adding insulation, i think you'd have to replace wiring
or guess (!hahahaaaaaa) at how far to derate current for knob and tube.
| |
| MDT at Paragon Home Inspections, LLC 2006-07-25, 1:25 pm |
| One problem with K&T is that whatever the condition of the original
material, it's seldom properly connected to more modern wiring:
http://www.codecheck.com/images/CCWe18.gif
and every incorrect junction is a potential problem.
Another is that users may overload K&T circuits - a single K&T circuit
often serves potential loads that would be split between multiple
circuits in a more recenly installed system. In my area it's not
unusual to find a single K&T circuit powering all the lights and
receptacles in three or four bedrooms and a bath on a top floor, but
power demands have increased (no window ACs back then!) and users many
be tempted to "overfuse" such circuits in an attempt to supply
sufficient power to loads at multiple locations on a single circuit.
So depending on the situation, when you have electrician throughly
inspect a K&T installation and identify existing defects you will often
find it's also desirable to pull additional circuits to meet modern
demands - in which case it's likely not all that much more expensive
to bypass the K&T with new circuits entirely.
Michael Thomas
Paragon Home Inspection, LLC
mdt@paragoninspectsDOTcom
847-475-5668
..
| |
| hallerb@aol.com 2006-07-25, 1:25 pm |
| Insurance KNOWS its fire hazard rate is higher, and buying a preowned
home its possible others did unsafe changes to the wiring.
Things DONBT last forever and K&T is just another thing.........
solder can and does fail over time espically if anyone used acid flux
when making repairs, its great for plumbing but unsafe for electrical
wires.
if your defending K&T please state if your home has that wiring.....
thanks
| |
|
| hallerb@aol.com wrote:
> Insurance KNOWS its fire hazard rate is higher, and buying a preowned
> home its possible others did unsafe changes to the wiring.
>
> Things DONBT last forever and K&T is just another thing.........
>
> solder can and does fail over time espically if anyone used acid flux
> when making repairs, its great for plumbing but unsafe for electrical
> wires.
>
> if your defending K&T please state if your home has that wiring.....
> thanks
>
Hi, I'm not defending K&T and I do not own any property with it. I was
just pointing out what makes it unsafe. Realities of todays lifestyles
with everything electronic and AC in every room make it very likely that
K&T has been scabbed on to and over loaded. Thats what makes it unsafe.
If K&T were just used for a couple of overhead lights and wall socket
for a lamp and never was over loaded and the fuse was of a proper size,
and always has been, then I would not be concerned.
If, as I stated, it has been messed with, added on to, over loaded, a
larger fuse used, remodeled around, etc. I would not be comfortable with
it.
So, most likely its unsafe or someone will make it unsafe my replacing a
15A fuse with a 30A fuse, swapping an outlet for a grounded outlet
without hooking up the ground then running their window AC, hairdryer
and PC off of that outlet. Thats when it becomes unsafe.
| |
|
| On 25 Jul 2006 06:41:06 -0700, "z" <gzuckier@snail-mail.net> wrote:
>
>Pete C. wrote:
>
>At risk of getting into tinfoilhatland, literally, I'd just point out
>that the electrical fields from knob and tube are (I would guess) quite
>a bit higher than modern wiring, even without metal shielding, due to
>the conductors being further apart. The significant health effects, if
>any, I leave to other posters to argue about. (I would also guess it's
>not a significant risk compared to fire or not supplying a ground).
>
>Which reminds me; a while ago it was posted here that GFIs don't need a
>ground. Is that true? Could you eliminate the ungrounded risk by just
>replacing the outlets with GFIs?
No, you need the ground. That's an important part of the whole
system.
And you have the electric field problem exactly backwards. The
widely spaced conductors will carry about half the field strength of
normal wiring. Those two conductors in normal wiring are both
throwing off electric fields.
| |
|
|
<nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu> wrote in message
news:ea59up$4t5@acadia.ece.villanova.edu...
> hallerb@aol.com <hallerb@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
> No. Fuses and circuit breakers prevent that.
Fuses and breakers protect against overcurrent situations - not overheating due
to
deteriorating connections.
Bob
| |
| Goedjn 2006-07-25, 5:25 pm |
| On 25 Jul 2006 10:24:34 -0700, "hallerb@aol.com" <hallerb@aol.com>
wrote:
>Insurance KNOWS its fire hazard rate is higher, and buying a preowned
>home its possible others did unsafe changes to the wiring.
>
>Things DONBT last forever and K&T is just another thing.........
>
>solder can and does fail over time espically if anyone used acid flux
>when making repairs, its great for plumbing but unsafe for electrical
>wires.
>
>if your defending K&T please state if your home has that wiring.....
>thanks
Mine does. In an english-style loop around the attic,
feeding the attic lights, and drops to all the outlets
on the second floor.
It hasn't burnt down yet.
As long as you remember that you've got a
60 year old wiring system, and don't abuse
it, it should be fine. When you GET
the chance to replace it you should, but
it shouldn't be a deal-breaker on an otherwise
good house.
| |
| nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu 2006-07-25, 5:25 pm |
| Bob <bobnospam@gmail.com> wrote:
>Fuses and breakers protect against overcurrent situations - not overheating
>due to deteriorating connections.
Would you have any evidence that solder connections deteriorate over time,
if they are not overheated?
Nick
| |
| souperman@_______.com 2006-07-25, 5:25 pm |
| On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 07:01:00 -0400, "RBM" <rbm2(remove
this)@optonline.net> wrote:
>knob and tube is ungrounded, as was lots of Romex installed in the 50's and
>60's . In some places its unprotected and subject to mechanical damage. The
>stuff is OLD, but in my experience, most of the K&T I've seen, has been in
>excellent condition, unlike rubber covered conductors of BX cables from the
>40's and 50's, which breaks down and crumbles from heat. I would ultimately
>replace it, but I wouldn't feel in any hurry to do it yesterday
>
>
><pennsylady2002@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:1153823724.229505.73400@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>
I wish they still used K+T wiring. It was the safest method
available, except for those funky exposed scrrews on the turn
switches. All they need to do is put a cover over the switches and
add a 3rd wire for grounding.
| |
| Pete C. 2006-07-25, 5:25 pm |
| JimL wrote:
>
> On 25 Jul 2006 06:41:06 -0700, "z" <gzuckier@snail-mail.net> wrote:
>
>
> No, you need the ground. That's an important part of the whole
> system.
You *can* use GFCIs on circuits without grounds as a retrofit. They will
not provide the full protection that they do with the ground connection,
but they do provide some protection. The GFCIs come packaged with labels
that include a "No equipment ground" warning label for just such
applications. It is still far better to just rewire if at all possible.
>
> And you have the electric field problem exactly backwards. The
> widely spaced conductors will carry about half the field strength of
> normal wiring. Those two conductors in normal wiring are both
> throwing off electric fields.
Those two conductors are throwing off opposite fields that will cancel.
This is why clamp on amp probes (not the new hall effect type) have to
be clamped around just one of the conductors.
Pete C.
| |
| hallerb@aol.com 2006-07-25, 5:25 pm |
|
MDT at Paragon Home Inspections, LLC wrote:
> One problem with K&T is that whatever the condition of the original
> material, it's seldom properly connected to more modern wiring:
>
> http://www.codecheck.com/images/CCWe18.gif
>
> and every incorrect junction is a potential problem.
>
> Another is that users may overload K&T circuits - a single K&T circuit
> often serves potential loads that would be split between multiple
> circuits in a more recenly installed system. In my area it's not
> unusual to find a single K&T circuit powering all the lights and
> receptacles in three or four bedrooms and a bath on a top floor, but
> power demands have increased (no window ACs back then!) and users many
> be tempted to "overfuse" such circuits in an attempt to supply
> sufficient power to loads at multiple locations on a single circuit.
>
> So depending on the situation, when you have electrician throughly
> inspect a K&T installation and identify existing defects you will often
> find it's also desirable to pull additional circuits to meet modern
> demands - in which case it's likely not all that much more expensive
> to bypass the K&T with new circuits entirely.
>
> Michael Thomas
> Paragon Home Inspection, LLC
> mdt@paragoninspectsDOTcom
> 847-475-5668
>
> .
I agree with all of this but the most dangerous part are comnnections
buried in walls where they cant be inspected and may catch fire under a
long list of possible reasons.
insurance has good reasons for their rules...........
| |
|
|
<nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu> wrote in message
news:ea60f7$rgo@acadia.ece.villanova.edu...
> Bob <bobnospam@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Would you have any evidence that solder connections deteriorate over time,
> if they are not overheated?
No
Bob
| |
|
| Never heard of such a thing. All over the NE houses have K&T, and they all
have insurance. AFAIK, the NEC still recognizes K&T, so I can't imagine why
insurance companies would have any problem with it
<hallerb@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1153830507.001134.208250@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> probably CANT get homeowners or a mortage with K&T most insurance
> wouldnt cover it as a fire hazard.
>
> connections are soldered in the wall, without a box surrounding it.
> unlike today all coinnections are in boxes.
>
> after many years and heavy loads the solder weakens and the connection
> can overheat and cause a fire, that happened to a buddy of mine
> fortunately in his open basement cieling he smelled smoke and put it
> out.
>
> in a closed wall the house will go up in smoke.
>
> have friends whos homeowners inspected their home and REQUIRED rewiring
> for just this reason.
>
> deduct cost of rewire from home sale price and for futher savings get a
> home inspector they arent perfect but every trouble they find is money
> in your pocket.
>
> call your insurance agent and ask about K&T and please report back here
> what they tell you...
>
> K&T would be safe IF the connections had been made in BOXES but back
> then no one thought of it
>
| |
| Speedy Jim 2006-07-25, 8:25 pm |
| RBM wrote:
> Never heard of such a thing. All over the NE houses have K&T, and they all
> have insurance. AFAIK, the NEC still recognizes K&T, so I can't imagine why
> insurance companies would have any problem with it
>
<SNIP>
It's true, nonetheless.
This is one of many citations regarding it:
http://info.insure.com/home/knobtube.html
Jim
| |
|
|
"RBM" <rbm2(remove this)@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:ynxxg.941$gd7.331@fe11.lga...
> Never heard of such a thing. All over the NE houses have K&T, and they all
> have insurance. AFAIK, the NEC still recognizes K&T, so I can't imagine why
> insurance companies would have any problem with it
>
I've been hearing stories about K&T related cancellations for several years.
Bob
| |
| Jim Redelfs 2006-07-25, 8:25 pm |
| In article <1153848274.474470.74240@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"hallerb@aol.com" <hallerb@aol.com> wrote:
> if your defending K&T please state if your home has that wiring.....
I just returned from my daughter and son-in-law's "new" home in Davenport,
Iowa. Within the lathe-and-plaster walls on the two, finished floors, it is
ALL knob-and-tube wiring. It never occurred (until now) to ask if they had
trouble getting insurance. I assume they did NOT as they now have a nice
mortgage.
All exposed wiring in the basement has been replaced. When the house's
service panel was upgraded, the main and second-floor circuits (knob-and-tube)
were placed on 20-amp breakers. This was, and probably still is, compliant
with NEC.
Knob-and-tube wiring may not be very good but, in its original form, it is NOT
the hazard some claim.
To answer the Subject above, K&T is NOT always dangerous. People with their
over-sized fuses, pennies and half-assed taps ARE.
--
JR
| |
| Tekkie® 2006-07-25, 8:25 pm |
| hallerb@aol.com posted for all of us...
I don't top post - see either inline or at bottom.
> insurance has good reasons for their rules...........
>
Right, to keep shareholders happy.
--
Tekkie
| |
|
| I read what Jim sent, which makes sense for any potential fire hazard. Any
wiring in poor condition would be a risk for an insurance company
"Bob" <bobnospam@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4MCdnQW_IriWOlvZnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> "RBM" <rbm2(remove this)@optonline.net> wrote in message
> news:ynxxg.941$gd7.331@fe11.lga...
>
> I've been hearing stories about K&T related cancellations for several
> years.
>
> Bob
>
>
| |
| MDT at Paragon Home Inspections, LLC 2006-07-25, 8:25 pm |
| As it happens I've just been updating my list of issues that affect
underwriting in Chicago and Suburbs, based on conversations with local
agents. The most common issues are:
Roofs obviously near end of their useful lives.
Porches or stairs with missing or damaged railings.
Coverage of large areas with ivy or other similar plants (for example,
State Farm).
EIFS or Dryvit synthetic stucco over *frame* construction.
Frame buildings in close proximity to another structure (especially a
problem in Chicago).
Any fused (as oposed to circuit breaker) based systems, even if 100A in
good conditon.
Knob and Tube wiring
For some companies, *any* electrical service less than 100A (or
example, Hartford).
Generally, for pre-1900 construction some companies (for example,
Hartford) expect to see major updating of systems such as electrical
and HVAC.
If an applicant states that there has been recent updating some
companies (for example, Allstate) may request to review receipts for
the repairs, and expect that these will be from a "licensed
contractor".
Previous claims or inquiries discovered during a CLUE search,
especially for water damage.
| |
| Joshua Putnam 2006-07-25, 8:25 pm |
| Properly installed and maintained K&T is quite safe, though it would
be a good idea to install GFCI outlets (properly labeled "no
equipment ground").
The problem comes if it either wasn't a great installation in the
first place, or if it's been tampered with or damaged.
A good solder joint will last a century or longer, but a bad one can
get worse over time, e.g. corrosion from leftover flux, a cold joint
developing increasing resistance, etc. Depending on the age of the
house, the wiring may have been soldered using irons heated over a
fire, which made cold joints more likely since the iron didn't
maintain a constant temperature.
Many times you'll find amateurish additions to K&T systems, I've seen
Romex twisted on and wrapped in duct tape for added lights or
outlets.
Some homeowners have blown insulation over wiring that was fine in
open air, but gets too hot without air circulation.
My own house was almost entirely K&T when we bought it, mostly on one
breaker (and a Zinsco breaker at that), so the insurance inspection
was more detailed than usual, and the inspector asked about what
appliances were going to be used in which rooms so he could get a
better idea of whether the wiring would be safe as we were using it.
No trouble once it was inspected and approved, but not every
insurance company will accept K&T.
--
josh@phred.org is Joshua Putnam
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/>
Braze your own bicycle frames. See
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/build/build.html>
| |
| Joshua Putnam 2006-07-26, 3:25 am |
| In article <1153871558.613270.312030@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
mdtATparagoninspectsDOTcom@yahoo.com says...
> As it happens I've just been updating my list of issues that affect
> underwriting in Chicago and Suburbs, based on conversations with local
> agents.
As an insurance agent, I wish more home inspectors were aware of what
conditions can lead to insurance problems.
Insurance companies aren't just worried about gross deficiencies,
they're worried about anything that significantly increases the risk
of loss. A house can be fully code-compliant and structurally sound,
but still be very difficult to insure.
There's nothing more frustrating than telling a first-time home buyer
that their dream house doesn't qualify for standard insurance.
Almost inevitably, the first words out of their mouths are, "But it
passed inspection!"
--
josh@phred.org is Joshua Putnam
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/>
Updated Infrared Photography Gallery:
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/photo/ir.html>
| |
| hallerb@aol.com 2006-07-26, 3:25 am |
|
Tekkie=AE wrote:
> hallerb@aol.com posted for all of us...
> I don't top post - see either inline or at bottom.
>
> Right, to keep shareholders happy.
> --
> Tekkie
hey insurance wants to minimize payouts and make money, statistics show
K&T has more troubles and how many people really WANT a house fire?
Its risks injury and death, let alone the mental part of your home
burning, losing a place to live, and possesions.
We had fire victims here for over 7 months, the whole thing mnessed
them up
| |
|
| Phil Munro wrote:
> hallerb@aol.com wrote:
>
>
>
> Below are a couple of links to consider wrt knob & tube wiring.
> Although my experience is limited, the times I have seen crumbling
> wire insulation with K&T is where it joined ceiling light fixtures,
> and that was because of the heat (over heating) due to the fixtures.
>
> In some such cases it was possible to (properly) solder a replacement
> extension onto such a wire and then use a sleeve to cover that, followed
> by the installation of a junction box to hold the wire safely in place
> and connect to the fixture.
>
> Whenever possible I replace K&T, but when not reasonable to replace,
> I would be sure the circuit is on a 15A max breaker. Usually
> receptacles, which is where the greatest loads exist, and where a ground
> is especially desirable, can be more easily rewired with romex.
>
> http://www.waptac.org/sp.asp?id=7190
> http://www.maine.gov/pfr/ins/hearing_2003-13680.htm
>
> These links are especially interesting and deserve a full reading.
> My comments are just my own opinions and ideas. --Phil
Great links, probably not read by hallerb.
I agree that K&T is basically reliable. IMHO insurance denial for K&T
(and some other causes in this thread) is in fact redlining.
I have seen 2 failures of soldered joints. Both were bad when made. One
was K&T, one was BX in a metal box.
I have read, don't know if it is true, that K&T are still installed
where flooding is a problem because it dries out better.
bud--
| |
|
| Pete C. wrote:
>
>
> You *can* use GFCIs on circuits without grounds as a retrofit. They will
> not provide the full protection that they do with the ground connection,
> but they do provide some protection. The GFCIs come packaged with labels
> that include a "No equipment ground" warning label for just such
> applications. It is still far better to just rewire if at all possible.
>
Leakage to equipment connected to a ground wire may trip the GFCI, an
advantage. But the GFCI protection is not impaired. (Probably the same
as what you said.)
>
>
>
> Those two conductors are throwing off opposite fields that will cancel.
> This is why clamp on amp probes (not the new hall effect type) have to
> be clamped around just one of the conductors.
>
Restating, 2 conductors in close proximity, like Romex, have the
electric and magnetic field substantially cancelled. The strength of the
magnetic field is proportional to the size of the loop formed by the
wires. z was right. But tin-foil-hats do provide complete protection.
bud--
| |
| trader4@optonline.net 2006-07-26, 9:25 am |
|
Joshua Putnam wrote:
> Properly installed and maintained K&T is quite safe, though it would
> be a good idea to install GFCI outlets (properly labeled "no
> equipment ground").
>
> The problem comes if it either wasn't a great installation in the
> first place, or if it's been tampered with or damaged.
>
> A good solder joint will last a century or longer, but a bad one can
> get worse over time, e.g. corrosion from leftover flux, a cold joint
> developing increasing resistance, etc. Depending on the age of the
> house, the wiring may have been soldered using irons heated over a
> fire, which made cold joints more likely since the iron didn't
> maintain a constant temperature.
>
> Many times you'll find amateurish additions to K&T systems, I've seen
> Romex twisted on and wrapped in duct tape for added lights or
> outlets.
>
> Some homeowners have blown insulation over wiring that was fine in
> open air, but gets too hot without air circulation.
>
> My own house was almost entirely K&T when we bought it, mostly on one
> breaker (and a Zinsco breaker at that), so the insurance inspection
> was more detailed than usual, and the inspector asked about what
> appliances were going to be used in which rooms so he could get a
> better idea of whether the wiring would be safe as we were using it.
Now that sounds like a real dumb insurance company. I can understand
why insurance companies have issues with K&T and may choose not to
cover homes with it. But any insurance company that has inspectors
running around asking homeowners which appliances they are going to use
where, is surely stupid. Homeowners move appliances around all the
time. Also, someone doing anything from carpet cleaning to a
contractor doing home repairs can plug in various loads. Either the
wiring is safe with the fusing in place or it isn't.
> No trouble once it was inspected and approved, but not every
> insurance company will accept K&T.
>
> --
> josh@phred.org is Joshua Putnam
> <http://www.phred.org/~josh/>
> Braze your own bicycle frames. See
> <http://www.phred.org/~josh/build/build.html>
| |
| pennsylady2002@yahoo.com 2006-07-26, 9:25 am |
| MDT at Paragon Home Inspections, LLC wrote:
> As it happens I've just been updating my list of issues that affect
> underwriting in Chicago and Suburbs, based on conversations with local
> agents. The most common issues are:
>
[SNIP]
>
> Coverage of large areas with ivy or other similar plants (for example,
> State Farm).
Very interesting. Said family member also looked at another, quaint
hillside bungalow where some sort of foliage (still haven't identified
the genus and species) grew straight up to the side of the house). I
never thought of insurability when I walked through it, but I told
family member to demand that seller raze the entire hillside before a
sales agreement was even entered into. Man, but was this place cool.
High off the ground, over a two-car circa 1900 garage, in PA coal
country...but all hardwoood, with a new kitchen and bath. Kewl. I
could not tell whether the mold I detected was in the "un-attic-ed"
second floor, due to an old roof (BUT--no leak stains) or whether the
surplus vegetation, and how! was responsible for the moldy smell.
>
> EIFS or Dryvit synthetic stucco over *frame* construction.
Why would this be objectionable? As it happens, the home with the K&T
had unbelievable wide framing, a stone foundation and first floor, all
stucco-ed over. The sills on the leaking windows (and not all windows
were leaking) were wide enough for the fat lady at the opera to sing
on. I'd really appreciate hearing more about this point.
>
> Frame buildings in close proximity to another structure (especially a
> problem in Chicago).
Because of the unknown condition of the "proximate" frame home?
> Any fused (as oposed to circuit breaker) based systems, even if 100A in
> good conditon.
>
> Knob and Tube wiring
>
> For some companies, *any* electrical service less than 100A (or
> example, Hartford).
Tell me if I'm stupid for even thinking of this solution. It turns out
that the K&T home is being sold by the elderly owner because she's
remortgaged herself out of existence with a new roof. (Big roof.) She
said she'd "low ball" the sale to my family member IF said family
member allowed her to remain in the home and rent.
But because of the condition of the property, which I spent an hour
walking through yesterday, I thought buying the property for *any*
price was unwise. Family member persisted in wanting it, nevertheless
(location, location, location). I thought, if the seller were so
inclined, family member could 1) take over the home for the exact
amount of the elderly seller/occupant's refi, 2) offer to pay real
estate agent whatever commission he would have received from a
traditional sale at the ax-ing price, and 3) use the TON of bucks she'd
spend on a mortgage to rewire the home, thus getting herself the home,
accommodating an old woman in a time of need, and also compensating a
hard working agent.
Am I living in tinfoil hat dreamland? (Please give me time to adjust
the wire hanger, so I can receive your transmissions.)
> Previous claims or inquiries discovered during a CLUE search,
> especially for water damage.
I ax-ed real estate agent if seller would have any objection to home
inspector cutting at least a 2' x 2' piece of the soaked drywall under
a leaking window off to see if any K&T is buried in the wall. Agent
said he "didn't understand what I meant." And what is a "CLUE search?"
Everybody, this thread should be required reading. Many opposing
opinions; almost ALL thoughtful and very polite. Makes Usenet
worthwhile.
Tanks a lot!
| |
| trader4@optonline.net 2006-07-26, 9:25 am |
|
pennsylady2002@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Why would this be objectionable? As it happens, the home with the K&T
> had unbelievable wide framing, a stone foundation and first floor, all
> stucco-ed over. The sills on the leaking windows (and not all windows
> were leaking) were wide enough for the fat lady at the opera to sing
> on. I'd really appreciate hearing more about this point.
I think the issue here is there have been lots of problems with certain
types of stucco done over frame construction. The problems stem from
moisture trapped behind the stucco that leads to rapid rotting of the
wood framing. I've seen TV reports of homes that are less than 10
years old that have major damage. And you can't see it until it's too
late. There is a $2Mil+ home directly behind my house that is less
than 15 years old. Right now they have removed all the stucco and are
doing repair work, another victim.
I also was looking at a stucco home being sold recently where one of
the features was that it had an electronic moisture monitoring system
installed behind the stucco. I guess that way at least you know you
are screwed. lol
>
>
> Because of the unknown condition of the "proximate" frame home?
Yes and if one catchs fire, it's a higher risk than if there is
seperation.
> Tell me if I'm stupid for even thinking of this solution. It turns out
> that the K&T home is being sold by the elderly owner because she's
> remortgaged herself out of existence with a new roof. (Big roof.) She
> said she'd "low ball" the sale to my family member IF said family
> member allowed her to remain in the home and rent.
>
> But because of the condition of the property, which I spent an hour
> walking through yesterday, I thought buying the property for *any*
> price was unwise. Family member persisted in wanting it, nevertheless
> (location, location, location). I thought, if the seller were so
> inclined, family member could 1) take over the home for the exact
> amount of the elderly seller/occupant's refi, 2) offer to pay real
> estate agent whatever commission he would have received from a
> traditional sale at the ax-ing price, and 3) use the TON of bucks she'd
> spend on a mortgage to rewire the home, thus getting herself the home,
> accommodating an old woman in a time of need, and also compensating a
> hard working agent.
Why would anyone be stupid enough to sell a house based on a refi
amount as opposed to what it is actually worth? If you had a house
worth $400K, but refinanced an existing mortgage of $200k, would you
sell it for $200K? For the little old lady, a better solution may be a
reverse mortgage, which would allow her to get out of debt and continue
to live there, plus get an income stream.
>
> Am I living in tinfoil hat dreamland? (Please give me time to adjust
> the wire hanger, so I can receive your transmissions.)
>
>
> I ax-ed real estate agent if seller would have any objection to home
> inspector cutting at least a 2' x 2' piece of the soaked drywall under
> a leaking window off to see if any K&T is buried in the wall.
If I was buying a house with K&T that has obvious maintenance issues,
like this one apparently does, I would have the wiring replaced. What
good is a limited inspection of one area going to do?
| |
| pennsylady2002@yahoo.com 2006-07-26, 9:25 am |
| trader4@optonline.net wrote:
>
> I think the issue here is there have been lots of problems with certain
> types of stucco done over frame construction. The problems stem from
> moisture trapped behind the stucco that leads to rapid rotting of the
> wood framing. I've seen TV reports of homes that are less than 10
> years old that have major damage. And you can't see it until it's too
> late. There is a $2Mil+ home directly behind my house that is less
> than 15 years old. Right now they have removed all the stucco and are
> doing repair work, another victim.
>
> I also was looking at a stucco home being sold recently where one of
> the features was that it had an electronic moisture monitoring system
> installed behind the stucco. I guess that way at least you know you
> are screwed. lol
Holy Fee-holies. Am I EVER glad I posted here. I just got my
$8.95/month dial-up connection money's worth. See, I thought that
because the stucco was *generally* over an old stone foundation--and
I'm talking "stone" as in Fred FlintSTONE--there wouldn't necessarily
be anything to worry about. But now that you and the Paragon gent
mention it, the unnaturally wide-silled windows that leaked ALL were
set in this stucco, and the mold was tremengious.
Well, at least now I have a full alt.home.repair "inspection." Never
ever ever occurred to me that the asking price was as low as it was
because the frame construction--even if it's 2' x 200', rotted away
over the last two hundred or so years.
THANK Y-O-U.
| |
| bowgus 2006-07-26, 9:25 am |
| Knob and tube is not by nature dangerous. The problem comes when adding
outlets to it, or when using it as a clothes line, whatever, to hang
stuff from in the basement :-) I just had my old place rewired to bring
it up to code. Why ... it's now a requirement in order to get insurance
.... and to be honest I feel safer. The existing circuits were probably
at full capacity. I had had a new panel put in, and had put in a few
new circuits to the basement and 1st floor to ease that a bit, but the
time had come to have all the old wiring replaced. And since an
insurance company was involved, a certificate was required ... easier
to just hire an electrician to do the remaining work (in my case) and
to call in the inspector for that certificate.
Get some estimates ... it may not be *that* costly depending on what
all needs doing and the layout.
Having said that, the walls will likely end up with a few full holes
here and there for running the wiring ... and to be patched/painted. If
that's not a problem (diy), not much of an additional expense. Consider
patching/painting in that estimate. I still haven't finished all my
patching ... maybe next winter :-)
| |
| trbo20 2006-07-26, 9:25 am |
|
RBM (remove this) wrote:
> Never heard of such a thing. All over the NE houses have K&T, and they all
> have insurance. AFAIK, the NEC still recognizes K&T, so I can't imagine why
> insurance companies would have any problem with it
>
Three years ago, I was denied by State Farm and USAA, but Liberty
Mutual agreed to cover me with the condition that I get it all replaced
within 6 months. They did not require proof, or a follow-up
inspection. I'm guessing that if the place burned down due to an
electrical failure of any kind, they would simply deny the claim.
If you look at it a differently, Liberty Mutual said "Yeah, sure,
here's your policy. By the way, your electrical system is only covered
for 6 months."
I have since replaced it, but it was a slow process -- my system was
especially bad. Some instances included live wire stretched tightly
under copper pipes (supporting them), a lamp cord hardwired into the
circuit, fraying insulation, insulation that had chaffed off,
overloaded circuits, outlets with grounds that didn't connect, a
ceiling fan hanging by two wood screws and a piece of lath, etc.
When I look back on it, I can't believe the place didn't burst into
flames every morning. The problem with anyhing that's 60 years old is
that people with no idea of what they're doing have had 60 years to
screw with it.
| |
| Chris Lewis 2006-07-26, 9:25 am |
| According to hallerb@aol.com <hallerb@aol.com>:
> Insurance KNOWS its fire hazard rate is higher,
Some Insurance companies BELIEVE it to be higher. Insurance
companies do all sorts of strange things to avoid what they
_perceive_ to be a risk.
Unmolested K&T used within its limitations (eg: not overloading
it) is no more dangerous than any other kind of wiring, and
is in fact safer than some more recent types.
I'll take a solid K&T installation over 40's/50's romex/BX any day.
> and buying a preowned
> home its possible others did unsafe changes to the wiring.
As with any other kind of wiring.
> Things DONBT last forever and K&T is just another thing.........
>
> solder can and does fail over time
If that were true, the NEC/CEC wouldn't permit soldering.
They _still_ do.
> espically if anyone used acid flux when making repairs, its
> great for plumbing but unsafe for electrical wires.
Well, yeah, but virtually anybody doing repairs on soldered K&T
would be unlikely to be using their plumbing kit. To do anything
even approaching reasonable on wiring means using a high power
soldering iron or gun, not a torch, and if they have an iron, they
probably have rosin-core solder too.
> if your defending K&T please state if your home has that wiring.....
I've worked on several K&T systems. I've written the Usenet FAQ on
it. http://www.faqs.org/faqs/electrical...section-18.html
I've also discussed K&T renovation/modification with electrical
inspectors. Each of whom say it's perfectly safe if it's not
abused or mucked with.
Incidentally, Thomas Horne is a professional electrician
of considerable experience and knows of what he speaks.
In an otherwise solid installation, I'd never recommend ripping
out K&T simply because it's K&T. But if you're doing a renovation
with opportunity to replace it with stuff up to modern spec,
you might as well tear it out or abandon it.
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.
| |
| Chris Lewis 2006-07-26, 9:25 am |
| According to Pete C. <aux3.DOH.4@snet.net>:
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> You *can* use GFCIs on circuits without grounds as a retrofit. They will
> not provide the full protection that they do with the ground connection,
> but they do provide some protection. The GFCIs come packaged with labels
> that include a "No equipment ground" warning label for just such
> applications. It is still far better to just rewire if at all possible.
Perhaps some explanation is in order.
GFCIs on circuits without grounds is in fact NEC and CEC approved.
On balance, GFCIs probably provide _more_ protection than a mere
ground does.
GFCI's protect against electrocution and shocks. Breakers and fuses
protect against circuit overloads. Grounds will protect against
electrocution and shocks, but ONLY if the fault current is above
the breaker/fuse rating. A ground will _not_ protect you if you
touch the hot wire or any other condition if the fault current
isn't high enough.
On a GFCI protected circuit, a ground is of relatively little use.
But it's certainly nice to have, especially on circuits feeding
electronics, especially if you want your surge/spike protector to
work as well as possible.
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.
| |
| Chris Lewis 2006-07-26, 9:25 am |
| According to <souperman@_______.com>:
> I wish they still used K+T wiring. It was the safest method
> available, except for those funky exposed scrrews on the turn
> switches. All they need to do is put a cover over the switches and
> add a 3rd wire for grounding.
There are issues with insulation thickness, losing track of which
neutral corresponds to which hot, box size (just try to get a GFCI
into some of those old boxes), box entrance method ("loom" rather
than clamps) and layout/dearth of outlets etc.
Installation is also MUCH more time-consuming.
But yeah, that wire is remarkably tough and the workmanship
of initial install was almost always higher than current, cough,
cough, "standards".
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.
| |
| MDT at Paragon Home Inspections, LLC 2006-07-26, 9:25 am |
| Joshua Putnam wrote:
>
> As an insurance agent, I wish more home inspectors were aware of what
> conditions can lead to insurance problems.
In defense of home inspectors:
1) The "business" end of a real estate transaction is not their
responsibility, and HIs get a lot of flack (and occasionally, legal
problems) if they start giving advice on such matters.
2) Even if a HI feels it's within the scope of their responsibility to
comment on such matters, the insurance industry does not make it easy
to discover what underwriting standards apply to a given type of
structure in a given area, and the standards very considerably from
company to company.
So IMO it's primarily the responsibility of real estate agents and
lenders to educate buyers about these issues.
As for insurance agents, it appears to me that they often have an
inherent conflict of interest in such matters; what's good for their
customers - for example, awareness that even *just making inquires*
about coverage that end up in CLUE may result in increased premiums or
even loss of coverage - is not good for their employers or carriers.
One reason I'm updating my understanding of local underwriting
standards is that I'm putting together a presentation for real estate
agent and brokers on "10 Insurance Issues You Can Spot" in the hope
that this will assist them in identifying sales likely to hang up on
insurance issues well before they become a ugly surprise to everyone
involved. This is nice for my organization - I have the opportunity to
present my company's services to Realtors, and hopefully to do
something practical to reduce the mutual frustration of HIs and real
estate agents with each other's role - but why should I be doing
this, instead of the insurance industry?.
So IMO while an occasional individual HI choose may go "above and
beyond" state or Association standards of practice by spending a day
with the Yellow Pages attempting to understand underwriting standards
in their community, I think it's a bit unrealistic for insurance
agents to express surprise or disappointment that others don't -
probably most insurance agents could learn a good deal about housing
defects by taking to HIs, but don't feel this is within the scope of
their responsibilities either.
Michael Thomas
Paragon Home Inspection, LLC
Chicago, IL
mdt@paragoninspectsDOTcom
847-475-5668
| |
| T Shadow 2006-07-26, 1:25 pm |
| "bowgus" <bowgus@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:1153915809.620312.246330@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> Knob and tube is not by nature dangerous. The problem comes when adding
> outlets to it, or when using it as a clothes line, whatever, to hang
> stuff from in the basement :-) I just had my old place rewired to bring
> it up to code. Why ... it's now a requirement in order to get insurance
> ... and to be honest I feel safer. The existing circuits were probably
> at full capacity. I had had a new panel put in, and had put in a few
> new circuits to the basement and 1st floor to ease that a bit, but the
> time had come to have all the old wiring replaced. And since an
> insurance company was involved, a certificate was required ... easier
> to just hire an electrician to do the remaining work (in my case) and
> to call in the inspector for that certificate.
>
I think your onto the real problem now. When I bought this house only 3 of
the four 110v fused outlets were being used. I ran a line from the
empty(freezer) outlet to the kitchen as a temporary fix.
When I got a new entrance panel in and started replacing the wiring found
that almost all of the wall outlets, and the furnace, were on the same
circuit. The old entrance panel was on the back porch. The wiring on this
circuit wrapped all the way around the house and ended about 10' from the
entrance panel. The last outlet was where we had the coffeemaker and
toaster. The refrigerator had been near the end too, until I added the line.
The old wiring is 16 gauge! Probably 50-60' of it.
| |
|
|
JimL wrote:
>
> No, you need the ground. That's an important part of the whole
> system.
That's what I would assume. I couldn't figure out how a GFI could work
without some sort of point of reference. But everybody said....
>
> And you have the electric field problem exactly backwards. The
> widely spaced conductors will carry about half the field strength of
> normal wiring. Those two conductors in normal wiring are both
> throwing off electric fields.
Uh, of opposite polarity, so as you get back from them past maybe 10X
the separation between them, the net field is zero? The same idea
behind twisted pair signal wiring, in reverse.
| |
| Chris Lewis 2006-07-26, 1:25 pm |
| According to z <gzuckier@snail-mail.net>:
> JimL wrote:
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> That's what I would assume. I couldn't figure out how a GFI could work
> without some sort of point of reference. But everybody said....
You don't need the ground for a GFCI to operate. Really. You merely
need to route a little current from the line hot to the load neutral
(or load hot to line neutral), and pop! No ground necessary.
By "system", JimL could be referring to the entire "system of wiring",
where grounds obviously do increase safety. But a GFCI _will_ work
without a ground. That's why NEC/CEC _encourages_ their use in
retrofits if you're not intending to rewire.
[color=darkred]
> Uh, of opposite polarity, so as you get back from them past maybe 10X
> the separation between them, the net field is zero?
Right.
Field strength of romex running current is considerably less than
hay-wired K&T, because the fields are of opposite polarity, and if
the wires are adjacent, as in Romex, they cancel out.
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.
| |
| spamTHISbrp@yahoo.com 2006-07-26, 1:25 pm |
|
z wrote:
> That's what I would assume. I couldn't figure out how a GFI could work
> without some sort of point of reference. But everybody said....
A GFCI only looks at the hot lead and the neutral lead.
If the current in the neutral isn't exactly the same as (but opposite
in direction to) the hot lead current, the breaker opens.
Calling it a ground-fault is a little misleading, since it doesn't look
at the 'ground', but it does look for a circuit that has faulted TO
ground (earth ground, not the ground lead).
Dave
| |
|
|
spamTHISbrp@yahoo.com wrote:
> z wrote:
>
> A GFCI only looks at the hot lead and the neutral lead.
> If the current in the neutral isn't exactly the same as (but opposite
> in direction to) the hot lead current, the breaker opens.
Light begins to dawn. Voltage domain may need third point as reference
(maybe?) , but current domain obviously doesn't, as with magnetic
fields, clamp on ammeters, etc. mentioned upthread. GFCI doesn't care
about voltage, it's comparing current. duh.
| |
| Tekkie® 2006-07-26, 8:25 pm |
| hallerb@aol.com posted for all of us...
I don't top post - see either inline or at bottom.
> statistics show
> K&T has more troubles
>
Quote these statistics - include the source
--
Tekkie
| |
| Joshua Putnam 2006-07-27, 3:25 am |
| In article <1153904523.263055.321680@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>,
trader4@optonline.net says...
>
> Joshua Putnam wrote:
>
>
> Now that sounds like a real dumb insurance company. I can understand
> why insurance companies have issues with K&T and may choose not to
> cover homes with it. But any insurance company that has inspectors
> running around asking homeowners which appliances they are going to use
> where, is surely stupid. Homeowners move appliances around all the
> time.
Most homeowners use their kitchen appliances in the kitchen, not the
bedroom or the bath, so it does make sense to ask what kitchen
appliances a family uses. If we used a big microwave or other high-
draw plug-in appliance, that would pose more of a risk of overloading
a shared circuit than if we had no microwave.
Similarly, people who own high-wattage hair dryers tend to plug them
in. People who don't, don't.
> Also, someone doing anything from carpet cleaning to a
> contractor doing home repairs can plug in various loads.
Good points -- until we rewired, contractors were only allowed to use
two outlets in the house, and one outdoors, all 20A grounded circuits
on separate breakers.
> Either the
> wiring is safe with the fusing in place or it isn't.
Well, since we had an old Zinsco breaker box, probably *no* wiring
would have been completely safe with the fusing in place.
Some insurance companies that accept higher-risk properties charge
them all the highest-risk rate, others attempt to differentiate among
levels of increased risk, which requires a more detailed evaluation
of the home and how it would be used. The policy we had is available
for either owner-occupied or rental homes, but some of the conditions
that are acceptable for an owner-occupied home are not acceptable for
a rental.
--
josh@phred.org is Joshua Putnam
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/>
Updated Infrared Photography Books List:
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/photo/irbooks.html>
| |
| Joshua Putnam 2006-07-27, 3:25 am |
| In article <1153923639.071179.49900@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
mdtATparagoninspectsDOTcom@yahoo.com says...
> As for insurance agents, it appears to me that they often have an
> inherent conflict of interest in such matters; what's good for their
> customers - for example, awareness that even *just making inquires*
> about coverage that end up in CLUE may result in increased premiums or
> even loss of coverage - is not good for their employers or carriers.
For me, that actually works out well -- while some companies report
zero-paid-out inquiries to CLUE, the companies I work with don't
surcharge for them or deny coverage because of them. So I've picked
up some good customers who were turned down by other companies.
> One reason I'm updating my understanding of local underwriting
> standards is that I'm putting together a presentation for real estate
> agent and brokers on "10 Insurance Issues You Can Spot" in the hope
> that this will assist them in identifying sales likely to hang up on
> insurance issues well before they become a ugly surprise to everyone
> involved. This is nice for my organization - I have the opportunity to
> present my company's services to Realtors, and hopefully to do
> something practical to reduce the mutual frustration of HIs and real
> estate agents with each other's role - but why should I be doing
> this, instead of the insurance industry?.
Good question. I have done group discussions with Realtors on
insurance underwriting concerns, and they've always been very
receptive to the information, and they refer buyers to me when the
buyers have insurance questions.
It's good business for me, and it helps them avoid insurance
surprises at closing. I expect it should work well for you, too.
On the subject of CLUE reports, almost any time I'm in front of a
group of realtors or loan officers, I offer to reimburse the first
person who goes on-line to order their own CLUE report as a
demonstration of how it's done. More than half the time, that person
finds something they didn't expect -- maybe a claim they had
forgotten about, or a prior claim on their house, or an inquiry that
was mis-reported as a claim. That almost always gets half the group
ordering their own CLUE reports and asking about what they find.
Makes it much more personal and memorable for them.
--
josh@phred.org is Joshua Putnam
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/>
Braze your own bicycle frames. See
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/build/build.html>
| |
|
|
"Tekkie®" <Tekkie@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:TMidnUAn87NRjFXZnZ2dnUVZ_oSdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> hallerb@aol.com posted for all of us...
> I don't top post - see either inline or at bottom.
>
> Quote these statistics - include the source
I'm sure that the insurance companies are just considering the age of K&T wiring
when the consider it for insurance purposes. If K&T is used, it is pretty darn
old.
Since it is so old, it has probably been messed with. ..........
Bob
| |
| trader4@optonline.net 2006-07-27, 9:25 am |
|
Joshua Putnam wrote:
> In article <1153904523.263055.321680@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>,
> trader4@optonline.net says...
>
>
> Most homeowners use their kitchen appliances in the kitchen, not the
> bedroom or the bath, so it does make sense to ask what kitchen
> appliances a family uses. If we used a big microwave or other high-
> draw plug-in appliance, that would pose more of a risk of overloading
> a shared circuit than if we had no microwave.
>
Sure it makes sense. Like 2 years later someone won't buy a
microwave and plug it in where you didn't have one when the inspector
looked? Or buy a freezer and put it in the basement? Or your kids
won't plug a hair dryer in God knows where? Or add a window air
conditioner?
> Similarly, people who own high-wattage hair dryers tend to plug them
> in. People who don't, don't.
Yeah, right, that's a good way to determine if a place is safe to
insure. Try to figure out where they or a guest might plug in a hair
dryer.
>
>
> Good points -- until we rewired, contractors were only allowed to use
> two outlets in the house, and one outdoors, all 20A grounded circuits
> on separate breakers.
>
>
> Well, since we had an old Zinsco breaker box, probably *no* wiring
> would have been completely safe with the fusing in place.
Then I not only wouldn't insure it, as an owner, I'd get it fixed.
| |
| hallerb@aol.com 2006-07-27, 9:25 am |
|
Tekkie=AE wrote:
> hallerb@aol.com posted for all of us...
> I don't top post - see either inline or at bottom.
>
> Quote these statistics - include the source
> --
> Tekkie
if it wasnt a problem insurane wouldnt care...
this does everyone a good service since the home that burns might be
one you are visiting.
the poster who mentioned blown in insulation made a excellent point
thats a bad combo that can lead to overheating.
middle of the night once I turned on a bedroom light and got a shower
of sparks on bed, geez did I wake up fast.
bad wire insulation in light socket.
I replaced every single fixture like that! not worth the risk, since at
the time they were about 45 years old.
| |
|
| >
>Those two conductors are throwing off opposite fields that will cancel.
>This is why clamp on amp probes (not the new hall effect type) have to
>be clamped around just one of the conductors.
>
>Pete C.
Sorry Pete, you are full of it.
Maybe if the conductors were twisted, you would have cancellation,
but otherwise there is no measurable cancellation.
| |
| Chris Lewis 2006-07-27, 1:25 pm |
| According to JimL <me@privacy.net>:
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> Sorry Pete, you are full of it.
> Maybe if the conductors were twisted, you would have cancellation,
> but otherwise there is no measurable cancellation.
Of course there's cancellation. The EM fields are opposite in polarity,
and immediately adjacent to each other in romex. That means that they
cancel.
"Maybe if twisted..."? What do you think twisted pair is for?
Twisted pair accentuates the effect. But simply paralleled conductors
are almost as good.
It's K&T which has higher fields because the conductors aren't (usually)
parallel, and (also usually) _much_ further apart.
Standard "clamp-ammeters" etc need to be applied to just one conductor.
Otherewise, they give highly misleading results.
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.
| |
| Nick Pine 2006-07-27, 1:25 pm |
| JimL <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>Maybe if the conductors were twisted, you would have cancellation,
>but otherwise there is no measurable cancellation.
Would you have any evidence for this article of faith?
Nick
| |
| hallerb@aol.com 2006-07-27, 5:25 pm |
| one day soon ALL conductors will be required to be inside metalic
conduit, power lines will all be migrated to underground too,
appliances will be shelded and service cords will get braid ground
shielding like coax has.
theres a high core;lation between expoosure to electrical feeds and
cancer. this will be the next asbestos.......
| |
| George E. Cawthon 2006-07-28, 3:32 am |
| hallerb@aol.com wrote:
> one day soon ALL conductors will be required to be inside metalic
> conduit, power lines will all be migrated to underground too,
> appliances will be shelded and service cords will get braid ground
> shielding like coax has.
>
> theres a high core;lation between expoosure to electrical feeds and
> cancer. this will be the next asbestos.......
>
Bull! there is no correlation. Real studies
don't even find a correlation with people living
near or under high tension lines.
You probably also believe that cell phones cause
brain tumors. Course even if they did, smashing
into the guy in front of you as you drive along
lost in your conversation would be a lot more
dangerous.
| |
| hallerb@aol.com 2006-07-28, 9:25 am |
|
George E. Cawthon wrote:
> hallerb@aol.com wrote:
>
> Bull! there is no correlation. Real studies
> don't even find a correlation with people living
> near or under high tension lines.
>
> You probably also believe that cell phones cause
> brain tumors. Course even if they did, smashing
> into the guy in front of you as you drive along
> lost in your conversation would be a lot more
> dangerous.
Mixed studies but wheres theres smoke theres fire have a friend who
works for a cell phone company he believes geadsets are the future
getting antennas away from brains...
look at all the things once believed safe....
smoking, asbestos, outdoor wood, DDT, agent orange, and a long list of
others....
| |
|
| On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 16:37:14 -0000, clewis@nortelnetworks.com (Chris
Lewis) wrote:
>According to JimL <me@privacy.net>:
>
>
>
>
>Of course there's cancellation. The EM fields are opposite in polarity,
>and immediately adjacent to each other in romex. That means that they
>cancel.
>
>"Maybe if twisted..."? What do you think twisted pair is for?
>
>Twisted pair accentuates the effect. But simply paralleled conductors
>are almost as good.
>
>It's K&T which has higher fields because the conductors aren't (usually)
>parallel, and (also usually) _much_ further apart.
>
>Standard "clamp-ammeters" etc need to be applied to just one conductor.
>Otherewise, they give highly misleading results.
No, there is no cancellation unless you twist the pair and then the
reduction is only minimal..
You have to use shielding to make a 'quiet' room.
..
| |
|
|
JimL wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 16:37:14 -0000, clewis@nortelnetworks.com (Chris
> Lewis) wrote:
>
>
> No, there is no cancellation unless you twist the pair and then the
> reduction is only minimal..
> You have to use shielding to make a 'quiet' room.
??? Same deal as having a loudspeaker driver just hanging free instead
of in a box. Opposite phase from the back cancels out the front unless
you're really close.
| |
| pawlowsk002@gannon.edu 2006-07-28, 1:25 pm |
| pennsylady2002@yahoo.com wrote:
> I have read conflicting estimates of the integrity and safety of
> knob-and-tube on this group and other web sites. But I'm scheduled to
> go through the home in two hours and thought I'd post and maybe get
> some fresh insights.
>
> is an absolute steal (new roof, great landscaping, has it all). My
> family member needs a place to run to as the result of a divorce and
> won't be able to take on both the mortgage and a complete rewire at the
> time of sale; hence, my post.
PL2002:
In a word, no. However, there are many variable factors and you need
to
hire a competent electrician who knows K & T to look the wiring over.
Involve the insurance company no more than necessary. Those bastards
are already insuring millions of miles of the stuff, in houses that
were
'rewired' by replacing the visible stuff and heavily loaded circuits
(kitchen
etc.) with modern wiring, maybe even the whole 1st floor which is easy
to
do from the basement, but leaving the inaccessible K & T to feed
ceiling
lights and general lighting outlets. What they don't know won't hurt
'em,
and they know it. Their prohibition on K & T is as asinine as their
dislike
of fuse boxes; I'd much rather have a nice 60A fuse box feeding K & T
in good order than an obsolete FPE 100A circuit breaker box feeding
rusty BX cable or old-school ungrounded NM without a solder joint or
wire nut in the place...but what do you think the IC would want, hmm?
I would ten times rather have K & T with nice, soldered, splices in the
cool open air, covered in molded rubber tape and friction tape, than
early ungrounded NM jammed 6 cables at a time into 3 1/2" round
metal boxes, twisted together and insulated with friction tape or
bandage
tape or whatever else the 1940s DIYer had laying around. Ick.
Now, that early NM was tough stuff when new -- very well protected
by rubber, cambric, fiber wrapping, and its braided jacket -- and its
copper wire is beautifully soft and workable compared with the modern
stuff, but its insulation actually seems less durable than whatever
it was (gutta percha?) that the earlier K & T had.
Modifications are usually the problem. Properly installed K&T with
correctly soldered joints and suitable fixtures, and additions made
with
other methods done following all the rules for K&T is safe. Often,
though,
you find K & T buried in insulation: not good, cool air can't reach it,
and
water leaks can saturate the insulation leaving a niiiice current path.
K & T in insulation is not a total write-off, but I don't like it, and
you must
take special care not to overload it. I suggest, actually, using it
well below
its design load, since it has no air circulating around it. One
all-too-common
evil is where NM was attached by wrapping the wire around the
stripped K & T with one layer of tape, a perfect recipe for a poor
connection
and heating.
Advice: Hire that electrician. Have the heavily loaded circuits
(kitchen,
bath, outlets for window ac or elec. heaters) upgraded one by one.
Treat the old K & T as it was meant to be treated: carefully. Use it
for
lighting and light loads, and it will serve you well. And let the
insurance
co. do the burning.
Cordially yours:
Gerard P.
| |
| Chris Lewis 2006-07-28, 1:25 pm |
| According to George E. Cawthon <GeorgeC-Boise@worldnet.att.net>:
> hallerb@aol.com wrote:
>
> Bull! there is no correlation. Real studies
> don't even find a correlation with people living
> near or under high tension lines.
There have been a few studies that have shown _some_
vague correlation with HT lines. However, as some
of these researchers point out, HT line corridors
are _also_ dosed with herbicides where toxicity
is far better understood and that's the much more
likely _real_ culprit than EM fields.
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.
| |
| Chris Lewis 2006-07-28, 1:25 pm |
| According to JimL <me@privacy.net>:
> No, there is no cancellation unless you twist the pair and then the
> reduction is only minimal..
The EM fields are opposite direction and overlap. Why would they _not_
cancel?
Not completely, of course, because the fields aren't perfectly
coaxial. But more than a few <wire separation>s away, pretty good.
May I suggest you take a course in electronics?
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.
| |
| Tom Horne, Electrician 2006-07-28, 5:25 pm |
| hallerb@aol.com wrote:
> one day soon ALL conductors will be required to be inside metalic
> conduit, power lines will all be migrated to underground too,
> appliances will be shelded and service cords will get braid ground
> shielding like coax has.
>
> theres a high core;lation between expoosure to electrical feeds and
> cancer. this will be the next asbestos.......
>
Then please explain why research done for the International Brotherhood
of Electrical Workers (IBEW) did not show any higher rate of cancer
among outside wiremen who spend their entire working day immersed in
very strong magnetic fields?
--
Tom Horne
"This alternating current stuff is just a fad. It is much too dangerous
for general use." Thomas Alva Edison
| |
|
|
Chris Lewis wrote:
> GFCIs on circuits without grounds is in fact NEC and CEC approved.
Now you tell me, after I had to sneak around at night running ground
wires all over the basement of my apartment building from the waterpipe
clamp at one end to the GFCIs I installed in my first floor knob and
tube wired apartment.
What else do you guys know that you aren't telling me?
| |
| George E. Cawthon 2006-07-28, 5:25 pm |
| hallerb@aol.com wrote:
> George E. Cawthon wrote:
>
> Mixed studies but wheres theres smoke theres fire have a friend who
> works for a cell phone company he believes geadsets are the future
> getting antennas away from brains...
Yes mixed studies, just scientific ones and ones
based on emotion. No fire, no smoke except that
produced by lawyers and quacks.
>
> look at all the things once believed safe....
>
> smoking, asbestos, outdoor wood, DDT, agent orange, and a long list of
> others....
>
Poor examples, anyone smoking for the first time
knows it isn't good for you (what do you think all
that coughing is about?); asbestos wasn't
considered safe, just not desperately dangerous
(which it isn't except for that mined from one
specific area, and mainly dangerous only to the
miners); outdoor wood? (what kind of wood isn't
outdoor wood and how dangerous is it except for
falling on you; DDT isn't that bad for humans, it
was banned because it is dangerous to bird
reproduction and indiscriminate use was bad for
the environment; agent orange was always bad, just
some people (military, government) said it wasn't
to decrease liability; and on an on.
Your main premise is not bad--we learn that stuff
is dangerous to us after a period of time. Maybe
you should have mentioned red dye#1--used in early
margarine and causes cancer. But electrical
fields have been around quite a while and studied
thoroughly.
| |
| hallerb@aol.com 2006-07-28, 5:25 pm |
| iF INSURANCE required k&t removal and the homeowner cheats by just
replacing the exposed wiring leaving K&T thru the less accessible areas
and a fire occurs expect insurance to disown you...........
one of the troubles with K&T is that you cant easily examine the sloder
joints since they are buried in the walls....
wiuth no boxes
| |
| zxcvbob 2006-07-29, 9:25 am |
| Chris Lewis wrote:
> According to hallerb@aol.com <hallerb@aol.com>:
>
> Some Insurance companies BELIEVE it to be higher. Insurance
> companies do all sorts of strange things to avoid what they
> _perceive_ to be a risk.
>
> Unmolested K&T used within its limitations (eg: not overloading
> it) is no more dangerous than any other kind of wiring, and
> is in fact safer than some more recent types.
>
> I'll take a solid K&T installation over 40's/50's romex/BX any day.
>
The answer to the original question is of course they are not always
dangerous -- like Chris said.
Insurance companies don't deal with *always*. That's the key. In some
parts of the country they may be familiar with it (like the NE) and
insure it (perhaps with a special rider, like the $20 per year I pay
extra for having a woodburning stove.) In other places, it's very
unusual, and unusual is bad. If you have K&T, they're not interested in
finding out if yours is safe or not, they just go by the averages. If
there's not enough data points for a meaningful average (like maybe K&T
in the Midwest or Gulf Coast?), they won't touch it.
Bob
| |
| Thomas D. Horne, FF EMT 2006-07-29, 8:25 pm |
| hallerb@aol.com wrote:
> iF INSURANCE required k&t removal and the homeowner cheats by just
> replacing the exposed wiring leaving K&T threw the less accessible areas
> and a fire occurs expect insurance to disown you...........
>
This is true only if the knob and tube wiring was the direct cause of
the loss. An insurance contract is a "contract of utmost good faith."
Once you collect a premium you must pay any covered loss. Information
that was concealed from the insurer only voids the contract if it
concealed the cause of the loss.
> one of the troubles with K&T is that you cant easily examine the solder
> joints since they are buried in the walls....
>
> with no boxes
>
--
Tom Horne
Well we aren't no thin blue heroes and yet we aren't no blackguards to.
We're just working men and woman most remarkable like you.
| |
|
| |