Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We recently bought a 1960s house and of course had everything inspected. Consequently, we have discovered a number of issues that it seems like an inspector should have at least mentioned. One of the things that has us concerned is that while investigating a skylight leak (not mentioned in the inspection), we opened up the attic hatch to look around since there is wet ceiling sheetrock involved. There was a thick layer of the white fluffy insulation but underneath was a layer of small iridescent pellets. Doing web research, I have found this to be vermiculite most likely contaminated with asbestos. Should I be concerned with this as long as we don't have to disturb it? Would that need to be disclosed when we sell someday? Any advice about this type of insulation is appreciated as I imagine there are a lot of scammers out there who will "remediate" for a hefty price.
Asbestos is pretty much ONLY dangerous if it's "friable" and floating around in the air so you breathe it in. Then, you'd likely have to breathe it in for a few years, before you'd get cancer 20 or more years later.
In other words, as long as it's undisturbed, there's no reason for any major concern. Vermiculite has been used for insulating houses for well over 100 years, so you'd be amazed how many houses still have it. You can go to Home Depot and buy some right now.
To my knowledge, it does NOT have to be disclosed by a seller. However, IF you ever have to go into the attic and do any extensive work, you'd do well to suit up, and wear a breathing mask. Of course that's smart anyway, even if you didn't have to worry about breathing in asbestos. Could be pests/bats, anything up there you wouldn't want to breathe in.
The advice from the Wisconsin Department of Health Services is solid --
Homeowners may wish to consider the following points:
Quote:
First, due to the physical characteristics of vermiculite and where it may be installed, the potential for contamination of the air throughout your home may be low.
Second, if the insulation will not be disturbed and is not contaminating the home environment (for example, it’s sealed behind tight walls, floors, or isolated in an unfinished attic, which is vented outside) it may be best to leave it alone. Furthermore, signs should be posted inside the attic saying "Cancer Hazard: Insulation contains asbestos, do not disturb or create dust." Posting signs will ensure that electricians, plumbers and others doing work on your home will be notified of the potential for exposure and can take necessary steps to protect themselves.
Last, if home renovations involve removal of walls or other areas where vermiculite insulation is located, extra precaution is necessary and removal by a trained and certified professional prior to renovation may be warranted.
If you do decide to have professional removal / abatement there is fund that can help defray the cost -- FAQs
My decision would likely be guided by several factors including the likelihood of renovation / expansion of the home. It would be also important to determine if there are any areas of the insulated space that have air-exchange issues with the attic space -- that can be tricky as the standard methods of weather-sealing would "disturb" the vermiculite which may result in friable asbestos fibers being made airborne. Similarly even doing a standard air infiltration test could force friable fibers into the habitable portion of the home...
A proper remediation of friable asbestos is NOT A SCAM, but it does require a firm with workers who know what they are doing so they do put themselves, the homeowners, or neighbors at risk. An improper remediation could very well make the situation MUCH WORSE.
There are all kinds of "home inspectors" that do not take things like continuing education seriously and they may not be aware of home many homes might have vermiculite containing friable asbestos in them. OTOH some inspectors do "cross the line" and over hype the potential risks of any thing they discover and end up as "fearmongers". I have no idea how big a deal this may become in the future...
We recently bought a 1960s house and of course had everything inspected. Consequently, we have discovered a number of issues that it seems like an inspector should have at least mentioned. One of the things that has us concerned is that while investigating a skylight leak (not mentioned in the inspection), we opened up the attic hatch to look around since there is wet ceiling sheetrock involved. There was a thick layer of the white fluffy insulation but underneath was a layer of small iridescent pellets. Doing web research, I have found this to be vermiculite most likely contaminated with asbestos. Should I be concerned with this as long as we don't have to disturb it? Would that need to be disclosed when we sell someday? Any advice about this type of insulation is appreciated as I imagine there are a lot of scammers out there who will "remediate" for a hefty price.
The only definitive way to know if it has asbestos is to submit a sample to a lab for testing. Testing is not expensive compared to concerns you might have. Also retaining the test results can help you later if it is not identified as asbestos containing material (ACM) and you experience this when selling the house. It is always the better part of discretion to disclose you have vermiculite insulation but also it was tested and not found to be ACM (if it was not). You can also offer up the report as part of your disclosure. Testing it yourself also helps from getting scammed in its removal if not necessary.
Whether the Inspector should have caught it or not is not completely clear with the small amount of information known. There will be plenty of posters who will either claim Inspectors are dumb or go overboard and scare the Bejeesus out of you. Those same ones typically have no middle ground opinion as they generally despise all Inspectors usually for no valid reason. You appear to possibly be located in Texas and if you would like to discuss this my contact information is in my profile. I'll be happy to help in any way I can.
To be clear, it is not that I think inspectors AS A GROUP are "dumb" but having seen MANY who shake their heads, cluck their tongues, and whistle "whoa boy" as they poke and prod at who knows what it is pretty clear that such tactics DO NOT instill confidence in potential home buyers. Similarly even well meaning inspectors that drop some 200+ page report off for buyers that has no context as to what is "no big deal" vs what could potentially be a very costly issue do their clients and the whole "profession" a massive disservice.
I've had lots of good experiences with inspectors too. The best inspectors do take pride in themselves and learn about potential new issues through continuing education. Such inspectors also go to great lengths to explain to clients the limits of any inspection as well what sorts of issues are common among all homes of similar age and such. The OP sadly does not seem to have had that kind of inspector..
When it comes vermiculite used for household insulation the WHOLE STORY is that there ONLY one company that EVER marketed any product for that purpose. That firm was based in Libby Montana and the material was marketed as Zonolite. The firm was sold to WR Grace and they eventually sought bankruptcy protection due to the asbestos issues with the product.
Asbestos "testing" is not like lead paint testing where you can quickly see a reaction that tells you that lead is present. Asbestos fibers have to be identified under a microscope and if the sample sent to the lab is not flagged by the microscopists as containing friable fibers that says NOTHING about all the rest of the material that is up in your attic that very likely might have come from a different part of the Libby mine that had a higher probability of having asbestos fibers. It is much more like getting a big bag of gravel from a potential diamond mine and if gravel in one bag is all clear there is no guarantee the next bag does not have a some whopper of gem in it... For that reason testing is NOT really going the help the OP and very likely could incorrectly give them a false sense of safety. What is recommended is that the OP treat the material, in the directive from the Wisconsin DHS, as essentially a pollutant that SHOULD NOT BE DISTURBED.
I would further warn that the policies of this forum are such that folks should NOT solicit business via any "private messages" and anyone so ethically challenged would be the last person I would trust to guide be regarding anything that could potentially create a terrible toxic could throughout one's home...
Regarding home inspectors, it is easy not to feel confidence in their work. We bought our last house "as is" with no inspection 20 years ago. Consequently over the years, we knew every flaw it had and corrected many of them over time. When we sold it last fall, the buyers inspector produced a laughable report highlighting very minor issues and completely overlooking things that should have been obvious. I guess I won't worry about the vermiculite but still think either our realtor or inspector should have mentioned that houses of this era might have that type of insulation. Not something the average buyer would know about.
Regarding home inspectors, it is easy not to feel confidence in their work. We bought our last house "as is" with no inspection 20 years ago. Consequently over the years, we knew every flaw it had and corrected many of them over time. When we sold it last fall, the buyers inspector produced a laughable report highlighting very minor issues and completely overlooking things that should have been obvious. I guess I won't worry about the vermiculite but still think either our realtor or inspector should have mentioned that houses of this era might have that type of insulation. Not something the average buyer would know about.
Out here you can take a sample to the lab and have it tested for $50. I'm sure you have something similar here.
Could you see the vermiculite below the blown in fluffy stuff or would the inspector have had to dig underneath the blown in insulation to see it? I ask because inspectors won't disturb blown in insulation as it negatively impacts the R-value. So there is always a risk when they can't see the attic space well.
We recently bought a 1960s house and of course had everything inspected. Consequently, we have discovered a number of issues that it seems like an inspector should have at least mentioned. One of the things that has us concerned is that while investigating a skylight leak (not mentioned in the inspection), we opened up the attic hatch to look around since there is wet ceiling sheetrock involved. There was a thick layer of the white fluffy insulation but underneath was a layer of small iridescent pellets. Doing web research, I have found this to be vermiculite most likely contaminated with asbestos. Should I be concerned with this as long as we don't have to disturb it? Would that need to be disclosed when we sell someday? Any advice about this type of insulation is appreciated as I imagine there are a lot of scammers out there who will "remediate" for a hefty price.
Quote:
Originally Posted by orngkat
Regarding home inspectors, it is easy not to feel confidence in their work. We bought our last house "as is" with no inspection 20 years ago. Consequently over the years, we knew every flaw it had and corrected many of them over time. When we sold it last fall, the buyers inspector produced a laughable report highlighting very minor issues and completely overlooking things that should have been obvious. I guess I won't worry about the vermiculite but still think either our realtor or inspector should have mentioned that houses of this era might have that type of insulation. Not something the average buyer would know about.
I have assisted many CityData posters with their inspection related issues both here in Texas and around the country. It is part of my licensing law to do so regardless of what any other poster wishes to state with defaming posts. It appears from your previous posts that the house you recently sold (second quote) is located here in Texas and the one you recently bought is in Colorado. So we will start with the Colorado issue.
By estimates at least 30% of the vermiculite used here was mined from another location and was not tainted with asbestos. The age of a house is not an indicator that asbestos containing materials are present. According to your most there was a thick layer of newer insulation that was covering over the vermiculite and even you could not see it without moving the thicker layer away. No intelligent inspector would consider disrupting/disturbing insulation unless they were definitely sure that something is or would be expected to be underneath. Disrupting/disturbing the insulation on a house neither they or you own is now a problem for the homeowner. There are ways to check if there is a possible hidden issue but that is typically performed near the access platform since the Inspector SHOULD NOT trek through a heavily insulated attic. If the previous owner added the newer insulation to encapsulate the vermiculite then they might also have removed vermiculite from the accessible points around the access platform and the Inspector then would not be able to determine if further checks were needed.
Your Colorado issues sounds more like a seller failing to disclose the presence of vermiculite insulation. From what I see of the Colorado disclosure requirements sellers are required to disclose asbestos. Were you provide a disclosure form and did it not have the proper annotations for possible asbestos materials in place? As for your RE Agent or Inspector notifying you before any inspection that the house is from an era when vermiculite was being used that is quite a curious statement. Would you not buy the house and back out of the deal before an inspection ever took place? It serves no useful purpose to make you overly excited about a condition, any condition, based on the age of the home without first verifying the negative condition was even present.
Now to the Texas home you sold and the lack of confidence in Inspectors. Yes there is no doubt we have Inspectors that should not be out there. Unfortunately that's a byproduct of the licensing laws we have. However you provided a general statement of "laughable items" and "things that should have been obvious". What would help viewers here is a list of examples from both categories. You might be talking of items that are "laughable" but required reporting according to our laws. For the "obvious" items they might have been items outside of the minimal required reporting as dictated by our mandated Standards of Practice. They might also have been items that the buyer agreed and contracted not to inspect. Also did you disclose the obvious items when selling?
To help you understand the "laughable items" this is just one of the requirements in our mandated SOP.
Quote:
Interior walls, ceilings, floors, and doors.
The inspector shall:
r
report as Deficient:
deficiencies in the condition and performance of doors and hardware;
r
r
As you can see a binding door handle set, even one that does open fully but with extra effort, is a mandatory reported item. Obviously it is not a structural issue, won't cause damage to anything else but itself, and even with replacement is a relatively inexpensive fix. Yet the Inspector is required to report it. The only way around that is for the Inspector to exclude all things like this in their contract. Unfortunately the wording to do it is very vague and can easily be abused to include more important items. Also in this example you would have to consider if that particular handle set is even still available so it can be replaced. That simple $20 handle set might well cost $400 to buy new handles for all doors to ensure they match if that's what the buyer prefers.
It's important for consumers to do 2 things regardless of where in the country they are. First is to read their contract and understand what you are to get from your Inspector. For your Colorado issue any contract you might have signed may completely exclude even inspecting for asbestos containing materials (ACM). The second thing is to understand any requirements your State places on Inspectors, if any exist. Those requirements themselves might also well exclude even inspecting for the presence of ACM. If the consumer protects themselves from the beginning they stand a much less likely chance of being taken advantage of.
Location: Removing a snake out of the neighbor's washing machine
3,095 posts, read 2,039,080 times
Reputation: 2305
While starting to create a new thread on this topic, City Data steered me toward this existing thread, so I'll ask my question here:
I'm seeing, on TV and in person, more people(including contractors) batting their roof rafters in addition to the attic deck,
in attics not intended for occupancy.
Is this the new trend? I've been, and am still a believer in, batting between and across only the studs of the attic deck,
and being careful to leave half to one inch clearing at the edges, where roof rafter meets studs, for unoccupied attics.
Am I still correct, or has opinion on this changed?
While starting to create a new thread on this topic, City Data steered me toward this existing thread, so I'll ask my question here:
I'm seeing, on TV and in person, more people(including contractors) batting their roof rafters in addition to the attic deck,
in attics not intended for occupancy.
Is this the new trend? I've been, and am still a believer in, batting between and across only the studs of the attic deck,
and being careful to leave half to one inch clearing at the edges, where roof rafter meets studs, for unoccupied attics.
Am I still correct, or has opinion on this changed?
Does the insulation have brown kraft paper on it?
If so, are they covering it with sheetrock, or just leaving it exposed?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
