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.
Note that products such as EIFS and Dryvit are NOT the same materials or application techniques as older "conventional" stucco systems.
The big issue with EIFS and related materials is that they must be installed EXACTLY according to the manufacturer's instructions, not later modified incorrectly (for example, the "cable guy" leaves an unsealed hole), and carefully maintained to prevent subsequent water intrusion. The widespread problems with these materials reflects that fact that few homes are built ot maintained at this level of perfection.
In the last few years newer versions of such products have attempted to address these problem (fox example, by incorporating a drainage plane), but IMO we won't know for a decade or more whether these modifications will solve the problems under "real-world" conditions.
EIFS inspection is a specialized process, and EIFS inspectors are trained and certified to evaluate specific manufacturer's products. Evaluating these of these applications is an inspection nightmare: a tiny defect (a pencil-lead diameter hole or a hairline crack) can admit enough water to rot out a large section of wall, and the damage may not be visible at the exterior surface - the general technique is to use special moisture-meters to detect water *behind* the synthetic stucco were damage is apparent, where defects in installation and maintenance are noted, or in areas where problems are know to occur frequently.
Michael Thomas Paragon Home Inspection, LLC Chicago, IL mdt@paragoninspectsDOTcom
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.
As with any other kind of wiring.
If that were true, the NEC/CEC wouldn't permit soldering.
They _still_ do.
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.
I've worked on several K&T systems. I've written the Usenet FAQ on it.
formatting link
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.
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".
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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. ..........
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?
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.
Then I not only wouldn't insure it, as an owner, I'd get it fixed.
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com posted for all of us... I don't top post - see either inline or at bottom.
Again quote FACTS - not opinions. One of the other posters whom is an insurance agent stated basically "it depends" Insurance co's determine their own ratings and the FACT that some WILL insure it blows your OPINION out of the water.
Please note ALL your postings involve opinion and you never quote facts. When you are called on it or corrected you ignore or change the subject.
fact is many insurance compnies wouldnt cover K&T that you cant deny.
some appear to cover it, probably at higher rates.
think about this.....
what does homeowners coverge cost maybe 500 bucks ours is less and we have full replacement coverage
Have friends with home fires just smoke damage can cost 20 grand, that was my next door neighbor his car caught on fire in his driveway, caught a window on fire with brick home, 20 grand how many policies do you have to sell to make a profit?
insurance is oing all of us a favor, and while your asking me what type of wiring in YOUR HOME?
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.
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....
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.
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.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.