Whose lens is this?

In article 2011091713033694091-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
says...

On 2011-09-17 11:13:45 -0700, me said:

On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 20:55:04 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:03:15 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2011-09-16 13:33:24 -0700, Alan Browne
said:


http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/201...petaluma-home/

$4500

to

repair that hole!

Why do I think that lady is being scammed?
All that is needed is a single piece of roofing particle board (a sheet
plywood if you want to go somewhat up market) and a half dozen
shingles. Possibly 1-2 hours of labor. the whole job should run about
$350, and not more than $500.

...there is always duct tape.

Particle board should never be used as roof underlayment.

Might have meant OSB (Oriented Strand Board).

What the hell do I know? I have never been a carpenter, or roofer.

It is just that $4500 to repair that hole seems excessive enough for me
to learn how to make a DIY fix, or find somebody who is not trying to
gouge me.

I would imagine that up in Petaluma it would be possible to find
somebody with the requisite skills and less than criminal pricing
structure to do the job.

Presumably she has insurance and the insurance company wants the roof
returned to its original condition, not patched. That would mean
removing and replacing the full 4x8 sheet of decking and enough shingles
to permit the underlayment to be properly overlapped. Then there's
disposing of the scrap--there will be enough that you can't just look
both ways and throw it in the trash and a reputable contractor would
dispose of it lawfully anyway.

On 9/17/11 PDT 5:35 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
In article2011091713033694091-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
says...

On 2011-09-17 11:13:45 -0700, said:

On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 20:55:04 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:03:15 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2011-09-16 13:33:24 -0700, Alan Browne
said:


http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/201...petaluma-home/

$4500

to

repair that hole!

Why do I think that lady is being scammed?
All that is needed is a single piece of roofing particle board (a sheet
plywood if you want to go somewhat up market) and a half dozen
shingles. Possibly 1-2 hours of labor. the whole job should run about
$350, and not more than $500.

...there is always duct tape.

Particle board should never be used as roof underlayment.

Might have meant OSB (Oriented Strand Board).

What the hell do I know? I have never been a carpenter, or roofer.

It is just that $4500 to repair that hole seems excessive enough for me
to learn how to make a DIY fix, or find somebody who is not trying to
gouge me.

I would imagine that up in Petaluma it would be possible to find
somebody with the requisite skills and less than criminal pricing
structure to do the job.

Presumably she has insurance and the insurance company wants the roof
returned to its original condition, not patched. That would mean
removing and replacing the full 4x8 sheet of decking and enough shingles
to permit the underlayment to be properly overlapped. Then there's
disposing of the scrap--there will be enough that you can't just look
both ways and throw it in the trash and a reputable contractor would
dispose of it lawfully anyway.

The lens went through the eave of the roof only. Way excessive.

In article , says...

On 9/17/11 PDT 5:35 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
In article2011091713033694091-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
says...

On 2011-09-17 11:13:45 -0700, said:

On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 20:55:04 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:03:15 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2011-09-16 13:33:24 -0700, Alan Browne
said:


http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/201...petaluma-home/

$4500

to

repair that hole!

Why do I think that lady is being scammed?
All that is needed is a single piece of roofing particle board (a sheet
plywood if you want to go somewhat up market) and a half dozen
shingles. Possibly 1-2 hours of labor. the whole job should run about
$350, and not more than $500.

...there is always duct tape.

Particle board should never be used as roof underlayment.

Might have meant OSB (Oriented Strand Board).

What the hell do I know? I have never been a carpenter, or roofer.

It is just that $4500 to repair that hole seems excessive enough for me
to learn how to make a DIY fix, or find somebody who is not trying to
gouge me.

I would imagine that up in Petaluma it would be possible to find
somebody with the requisite skills and less than criminal pricing
structure to do the job.

Presumably she has insurance and the insurance company wants the roof
returned to its original condition, not patched. That would mean
removing and replacing the full 4x8 sheet of decking and enough shingles
to permit the underlayment to be properly overlapped. Then there's
disposing of the scrap--there will be enough that you can't just look
both ways and throw it in the trash and a reputable contractor would
dispose of it lawfully anyway.

The lens went through the eave of the roof only. Way excessive.

May seem excessive to you--will the insurance company and the building
inspector agree?

On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 20:54:39 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote:

On 9/17/11 PDT 5:35 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
In article2011091713033694091-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
says...

On 2011-09-17 11:13:45 -0700, said:

On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 20:55:04 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:03:15 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2011-09-16 13:33:24 -0700, Alan Browne
said:


http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/201...petaluma-home/

$4500

to

repair that hole!

Why do I think that lady is being scammed?
All that is needed is a single piece of roofing particle board (a sheet
plywood if you want to go somewhat up market) and a half dozen
shingles. Possibly 1-2 hours of labor. the whole job should run about
$350, and not more than $500.

...there is always duct tape.

Particle board should never be used as roof underlayment.

Might have meant OSB (Oriented Strand Board).

What the hell do I know? I have never been a carpenter, or roofer.

It is just that $4500 to repair that hole seems excessive enough for me
to learn how to make a DIY fix, or find somebody who is not trying to
gouge me.

I would imagine that up in Petaluma it would be possible to find
somebody with the requisite skills and less than criminal pricing
structure to do the job.

Presumably she has insurance and the insurance company wants the roof
returned to its original condition, not patched. That would mean
removing and replacing the full 4x8 sheet of decking and enough shingles
to permit the underlayment to be properly overlapped. Then there's
disposing of the scrap--there will be enough that you can't just look
both ways and throw it in the trash and a reputable contractor would
dispose of it lawfully anyway.

The lens went through the eave of the roof only. Way excessive.

The homeowner agreed to the charge. Either the homeowner was
extremely foolish and paid $4,500 for a small patch, or the homeowner
agreed to a repair that included more than the patch and made a good
decision.

How can any decide the charge is "way excessive" when we don't know
what the charge was for?

It's like reading that someone walked into a camera store to have
their sensor cleaned and the bill was $850.

Did the customer pay an excessive amount for the cleaning, or did the
customer buy something like a lens during the visit?


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 20:54:39 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote:

On 9/17/11 PDT 5:35 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
In article2011091713033694091-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
says...

On 2011-09-17 11:13:45 -0700, said:

On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 20:55:04 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:03:15 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2011-09-16 13:33:24 -0700, Alan Browne
said:


http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/201...petaluma-home/

$4500

to

repair that hole!

Why do I think that lady is being scammed?
All that is needed is a single piece of roofing particle board
(a sheet
plywood if you want to go somewhat up market) and a half dozen
shingles. Possibly 1-2 hours of labor. the whole job should run
about
$350, and not more than $500.

...there is always duct tape.

Particle board should never be used as roof underlayment.

Might have meant OSB (Oriented Strand Board).

What the hell do I know? I have never been a carpenter, or roofer.

It is just that $4500 to repair that hole seems excessive enough
for me
to learn how to make a DIY fix, or find somebody who is not trying
to
gouge me.

I would imagine that up in Petaluma it would be possible to find
somebody with the requisite skills and less than criminal pricing
structure to do the job.

Presumably she has insurance and the insurance company wants the
roof
returned to its original condition, not patched. That would mean
removing and replacing the full 4x8 sheet of decking and enough
shingles
to permit the underlayment to be properly overlapped. Then there's
disposing of the scrap--there will be enough that you can't just
look
both ways and throw it in the trash and a reputable contractor would
dispose of it lawfully anyway.

The lens went through the eave of the roof only. Way excessive.

The homeowner agreed to the charge. Either the homeowner was
extremely foolish and paid $4,500 for a small patch, or the homeowner
agreed to a repair that included more than the patch and made a good
decision.

How can any decide the charge is "way excessive" when we don't know
what the charge was for?

It's like reading that someone walked into a camera store to have
their sensor cleaned and the bill was $850.

Did the customer pay an excessive amount for the cleaning, or did the
customer buy something like a lens during the visit?



It's CA, I'm sure there was a $4k permit for the $500 repair.

Cheers

On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:34:59 -0400, Martin Riddle wrote:

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 20:54:39 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote:

On 9/17/11 PDT 5:35 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
In article2011091713033694091-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
says...

On 2011-09-17 11:13:45 -0700, said:

On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 20:55:04 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:03:15 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2011-09-16 13:33:24 -0700, Alan Browne
said:


http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/201...petaluma-home/

$4500

to

repair that hole!

Why do I think that lady is being scammed?
All that is needed is a single piece of roofing particle board
(a sheet
plywood if you want to go somewhat up market) and a half dozen
shingles. Possibly 1-2 hours of labor. the whole job should run
about
$350, and not more than $500.

...there is always duct tape.

Particle board should never be used as roof underlayment.

Might have meant OSB (Oriented Strand Board).

What the hell do I know? I have never been a carpenter, or roofer.

It is just that $4500 to repair that hole seems excessive enough
for me
to learn how to make a DIY fix, or find somebody who is not trying
to
gouge me.

I would imagine that up in Petaluma it would be possible to find
somebody with the requisite skills and less than criminal pricing
structure to do the job.

Presumably she has insurance and the insurance company wants the
roof
returned to its original condition, not patched. That would mean
removing and replacing the full 4x8 sheet of decking and enough
shingles
to permit the underlayment to be properly overlapped. Then there's
disposing of the scrap--there will be enough that you can't just
look
both ways and throw it in the trash and a reputable contractor would
dispose of it lawfully anyway.

The lens went through the eave of the roof only. Way excessive.

The homeowner agreed to the charge. Either the homeowner was
extremely foolish and paid $4,500 for a small patch, or the homeowner
agreed to a repair that included more than the patch and made a good
decision.

How can any decide the charge is "way excessive" when we don't know
what the charge was for?

It's like reading that someone walked into a camera store to have
their sensor cleaned and the bill was $850.

Did the customer pay an excessive amount for the cleaning, or did the
customer buy something like a lens during the visit?



It's CA, I'm sure there was a $4k permit for the $500 repair.

Has to be Earthquake Resistant, and also being in Petaluma
eggshell finish.

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
in.local...

Presumably she has insurance and the insurance company wants the roof
returned to its original condition, not patched. That would mean
removing and replacing the full 4x8 sheet of decking and enough shingles
to permit the underlayment to be properly overlapped. Then there's
disposing of the scrap--there will be enough that you can't just look
both ways and throw it in the trash and a reputable contractor would
dispose of it lawfully anyway.



In 2006, a tornado came through town. My 5000 square foot roof sustained
small damage spots all over it, perhaps 10% or so. The insurance company
said that the whole roof would have to be replaced.