Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Things could be worse ...

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
In the 19 coastal countries of Texas, a heinous form (no modifications allowed) from the Texas Department of Insurance (TDI) must be signed by a PE.  My engineers refuse to sign this form, even though projects in those counties cannot be insured without it.  It is better to be fired than to certify construction that is not based on full-time resident inspection.  SEAoT has been trying to get TDI to substantially improve, or to abandon, this form for the past 20 years.  Now you know why.

On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 7:37 AM, Richard Calvert <RichardC(--nospam--at)> wrote:

Wouldn’t the inspector only be responsible for verifying that the repair was done in accordance with the design?  


From: Gerard Madden, SE [mailto:gmse4603(--nospam--at)]
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 3:13 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject: Re: Things could be worse ...


Act of God exception clause? SE's shouldn't be warranty-ing a roof safety is the code level design, not avoid failures.

Hopefully it wasn't your firm Stan.


On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Stan Caldwell <stancaldwell(--nospam--at)> wrote:

Imagine that you were hired to inspect and certify a re-roofing job on a building that you did not design.  The reason for the re-roofing work was to repair damage caused by Hurricane Rita.  Then imagine that Hurricane Ike damaged the building again.  Now, imagine that you have just received a letter demanding a check for $3,091,985.18.  That actually happened to a structural engineer on July 24, 2009 in Texas.  The demand is from the Texas Windstorm Insurance Association.  Payment must be made within 25 days. 


Now then, things don't seem so bleak in your practice.  Do they?