Vapor From Foam Insulation Doesn't Last

[Guest guest]

Vapor From Foam Insulation Doesn't Last

By BARRY STONE, Special to The Times

Question: The insulation within our walls is made with urea

formaldehyde foam. We're concerned about the safety implications of this

material when we decide to sell the house. What is our obligation?

Disclosure? Removal? Abatement of some kind?

Answer: Your only obligation regarding urea formaldehyde insulation is

disclosure to buyers. Neither removal nor abatement is required.

Furthermore, the health implications of old foam insulation are unlikely to

be significant. After 20 years of curing time, vapor emissions from the

material are probably negligible.

During the 1970s, foam insulation was used to upgrade the energy

efficiency of many homes, yours included. Then, during the 1980s, it joined

the ranks of asbestos and radon gas as an indoor environmental health

concern.

But unlike asbestos and radon, urea formaldehyde foam improves with

age: It contains a finite amount of formaldehyde vapor, which dissipates and

diminishes with the passage of time.

If you'd prefer to go the extra mile, as it relates to disclosure, find

an environmental testing company in your area and have them check the air in

your home for formaldehyde vapor. If little or none is present, their report

can be used to reassure, rather than alarm, future buyers.

When Seller Damages Home During Escrow

Q: I just closed escrow on a house, and two days after moving in, I

discovered soaked carpeting in the living room near the wall that divides

the living room from the kitchen. On the other side of this wall is the

water connection for the refrigerator. This problem wasn't disclosed during

my home inspection because it wasn't happening at that time. It appears that

the sellers neglected to completely turn off the water valve when they

disconnected their refrigerator. So now I'm stuck with the mess, wet carpet,

stained wall and who knows what else. Are the sellers liable for repair of

these damages?

A: Questions of legal liability are more appropriate for an attorney

than a home inspector. However, on the basis of simple fairness and equity,

one would expect an assumption of responsibility for damages arising from

negligence.

In this case, you purchased a home with the understanding that the wall

and floor surfaces were free of moisture and related damage. Now, because of

human error, conditions are contrary to your expectations. Hopefully, the

damages are minimal and the affected areas will be in satisfactory condition

after having dried. The extent of damage may depend largely on the duration

of wetness and whether you have a wood floor or a concrete slab.

If corrective work is actually needed, accountability on the part of

the sellers will depend largely on whether you can get them to respond.

There is always Small Claims Court, but hopefully no significant repairs

will be needed.

* * *

If you have questions or comments, contact Barry Stone through his Web

site at http://www.housedetective.com.

Distributed by Access Media Group.