One of the common misconceptions about foundation work oversight is the illusion that the permitting process ensures the proper work is being done. Nothing could be further from the truth. Foundation repair salespeople often say things like, “Don’t worry, when we pull foundation repair permits, we give it to our engineer for him to review in order for him to seal it per city requirements. At that time, he’ll check everything and make sure that it’s all good.”
This is blatantly false. Engineers can potentially lose their license if they seal repairs using data that was not collected by them or by someone under their direct control. This practice is commonly referred to as rubber stamping.
When someone is a bona fide employee of the engineer, they are considered under the engineer’s direct control, and the engineer can then use the data gathered by that employee. A salesperson who works for a foundation repair company is not a bona fide employee of the engineer in a separate company, and therefore, the engineer cannot rely on that data.
If the engineer requests that his employee go back and gather additional information, or that the information be gathered in a certain way, and that person is not a bona fide employee, then they could choose not to fulfill the request… or do it their own way instead of following the engineer’s instructions. We’ve already established that most salespeople are independent personality types and not typical rule followers. See my blog…
What the Current Permitting Process Checks For
When jurisdictions require foundation repair permits for foundation repair work, almost always the only requirement to pull permits is that there is a sealed calculation for the spacing of the piles. This calculation has two components:
- To ensure that the gravity loads are not too much for the piles
- To confirm that the footing and stem wall between the piles do not span so far that they fail in deflection between them (drooping), see illustration below.
Almost always, it comes down to the second calculation of deflection.
What Foundation Repair Permits Do Not Check for
What the current process almost never requires:
- Any evaluation of the current conditions of the home or the soils
- Any investigation into the causes of potential failure
- Any analysis to understand the reasons behind specific signs of stress
- Any requirement that repair recommendations are based on proper analysis
- Any comparison of the problem’s severity against established engineering allowables
What this means is that, under the current requirements, $80,000 worth of piles could be placed entirely on the wrong side of the home. There could be too many piles, not enough, or piles that aren’t needed at all—and the current process will not correct for any of these shortfalls. It’s entirely possible that the repairs being performed are for the wrong problem altogether.
An Example
I recall a homeowner in the mountainous area of Arizona who had a stem wall that was never solid grouted. (That’s when the hollow cells of the block are filled with a cement mix of sand and gravel to surround and strengthen the reinforcing bars inside the block.) This condition left the stem wall very weak and unstable. Over time, it moved away from the house, leaving just a couple of inches of contact under the framing. See illustration below.
The homeowner called a foundation repair company. The salesman came out and told her that by underpinning the problem area, the wall would rotate back into place during lifting for a price of approximately $27,000. Of course, when the work was completed, the wall did not rotate back. When the company requested the final payment, the homeowner refused, since the original problem hadn’t been improved at all. When she brought this to the salesman’s attention, he told her it would require an additional $27,000 to completely rebuild it!
In this particular case, a permit was pulled, and that permit was sealed by an engineer I happen to know personally. When I asked him about this particular project, his response was that the problem with the deficient stem wall was never disclosed to him. Just a piering plan that he did a spacing calc for.
This case vividly illustrates the issue. The original problem was not understood properly by the foundation repair salesman, and the required data was not properly disclosed to the engineer. The permitting process completely missed the actual problem and failed to recognize that the proposed solution didn’t even come close to addressing it.
This isn’t unusual. This is the way the foundation repair permitting process works all across North America.
Foundation Repair Engineers Don’t Do the Front End Analysis
As mentioned in my last blog, most foundation repair engineers don’t perform the analysis on the front end. They simply provide spacing calculations on the back end—which is more of a structural process—and completely miss the soil analysis and the soil–foundation interface analysis. See my blog here for more…
What Can We Do to Fix This Process?
The problem with engineers providing this service is that they charge around $3,000, compared to the “free” analysis offered by foundation repair contractors. For all the issues with foundation-commissioned salespeople, see my blog here. The reason engineering services are so expensive is that engineers often feel they must visit the site in person, which racks up their relatively costly time.
Instead, I propose training and certifying home inspectors and establishing standardized reporting to improve clarity and understanding. Inspectors can gather the necessary data under the oversight of the engineer and provide it to them. The registered design professional can then analyze, characterize, and design solutions if needed. They can also help the homeowner through procurement, special inspections, and final sign-off, as detailed in my blog here.
So the next time someone tries to claim that the permitting process provides real oversight for foundation repairs, do not buy into it. It does nothing of the kind.
I am an architect in North Central Texas, DFW, and residential foundation for standard builder houses are lacking. I am not even sure developers and builders even are required to have a geotechnical report done. The most used foundation in this area is a post-tension, slab on grade. Due to the expansive soil in this area this type of foundation after extensive soil treatment can still move from 1 to 5 inches (that is what I have seen) Typically, a self-supported slab on void forms, or a pier and beam foundation are much better. However, they cost more so builders don’t use them. It ends up costing the homeowner later when the foundation has to repaired.