• If this is your first time visiting our NACBI Community Forum, Please go to the READ ME FIRST section for information about registering and helpful tips to use this site.
    Members Only sections are restricted and will indicate "No Content" until you are approved as a memeber of NACBI and logged in to the messgae board.

Has EIMA been bought and paid to soften the standards?

Bill Warner

Administrator
Staff member
NACBI Member
Read the following inspection guidelines and commentary they have now posted...

EIFS Inspection Guidelines | EIMA

Some examples:

Inspection reports that identify existing details and conditions as "defective" because they deviate from current published manufacturers' guidelines can mislead the homeowner, real estate agent, or other parties into initiating unnecessary remedial work. This is especially true if there is positive evidence that the existing details are functioning properly.

An inspection should identify repairs that are necessary, effective and economical. Strict conformance to a manufacturer's published details does not answer the question: "Is a repair necessary, and will it be effective?"

Location and climate will influence the performance of a projecting surface. Residential trim protruding horizontally is acceptable if no damage has occurred to the EIFS surface.

On an existing project, the termination can occur closer to the roof or deck surfaces than indicated in published details, as long as the bottom edge of the EIF system satisfies the manufacturer's specifications.

Item Description: Termination Above Finished Grade
Function: A gap should be maintained between EIFS and the finished grade. The gap must be wide enough to allow access for visual inspection and treatment of the foundation for pest control.

Guidelines: Where access to the foundation is not required for visual inspection or treatment for pest control, the EIFS can remain in place.


And I especially love this regarding EIMA published details...

For new construction, EIMA details provide a helpful guide in designing the critical interfaces between various exterior building components. Alternate detailing is acceptable, as long as it provides the desired performance characteristics.
 

Adair Inspection

Well-Known Community Member
NACBI Member
Bill, YES, they have & they did it years ago, doc I have is 2009, blatantly ignoring the building codes & prescriptive manufacturer installation instructions.
Luckily their standards and the items you question are not the standards I behold to or utilize whenever I get to inspect EIFS.

IMO: It appeared they dumbed down & got into bed with moisture free warranty to sell more policies & the used shaq salesmen in an attempt to decrease the product stigma & move more houses for the sake of commission checks.

I still see & write up, even on new construction, improper, incompetent construction techniques & mgmt. that won't train the applicators & applicators that can't/won't read the instructions on almost every job I look at.
On most projects, not just EIFS, the applicators are still pointing fingers at the preceding other trades & just cover whatever they encounter regardless if they realize that wall system is destined for moisture damage failure.
 
Last edited:

Bill Warner

Administrator
Staff member
NACBI Member
I only found this as I had been referring to some of their technical standards in some of my report narratives. One of the links went dead and I started searching for for a new URL... was amazed at how wishy washy they had now worded their guidelines!!! Unbelievable!

Basically stating "this is what needs to be done... but feel free to deviate and we'll likely sign off on it too so long as it hasn't failed............. YET!"

"Yet" being the keyword in all their back-peddling

Suffice to say, they are no longer referenced in any of my report narratives.
 

Bill Warner

Administrator
Staff member
NACBI Member
Inspection reports that identify existing details and conditions as "defective" because they deviate from current published manufacturers' guidelines can mislead the homeowner, real estate agent, or other parties into initiating unnecessary remedial work. This is especially true if there is positive evidence that the existing details are functioning properly.

This one really irks me!
When there is visible "positive" evidence in the EIFS system that the existing details have NOT functioned properly... it's FAR too late for correcting the deviations from published guidelines. And the homeowner is in for a world of hurt...

Oddly (or not) this is reminiscent of a report on an EIFS home from a local "expert" called in by the realtor for a home I inspected a few years ago. He didn't even pull out a moisture meter... Just said, "Yeah the installation deviates from standard, but it's fine..." Then proceeded to dispute all my infrared documentation that contradicted his "observations".
 
Last edited:

Adair Inspection

Well-Known Community Member
NACBI Member
Unfortunately, "expert called in by realtors" is often double-speak for push the sale through regardless, and in conflict with my findings and reality as they attempt to provide alternate facts by pointing to the EIMA garbage.
I have a comment about this/them in all reports ;~))
EDI sets the standards for EIFS inspection
 

Dale Duffy

Administrator
Staff member
NACBI Member
Unfortunately, "expert called in by realtors" is often double-speak for push the sale through regardless, and in conflict with my findings and reality as they attempt to provide alternate facts by pointing to the EIMA garbage.
I have a comment about this/them in all reports ;~))
EDI sets the standards for EIFS inspection
Zacky, Badair.....(y)
 
Top