wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 20:32:26 -0500, Steve Barker
wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 11:11:28 -0700, David Nebenzahl
wrote:

On 9/11/2009 10:48 AM dpb spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

...
But yes, the previous poster's shrieks of alarm are unwarranted.
Indeed...

But, it's his personal vendetta it appears despite chastisement and
demonstration that he's simply just generally wrong on numerous previous
occasions as well...
Plus he's one of the few posters here with the annoying habit of never
quoting previous replies (small point, but not in his favor).

I will say that I think exercising due caution when doing electrical
work is important. I cringe when I see the numerous news reports of
houses burning down, just wondering whether it was an electrical fire
that was responsible. I don't *ever* want to be the cause of such a fire.

But that doesn't mean one has to be a total Cassandra about it either ...

My younger brother's old house (old crappy farm house) burned down due
to an electrical fault. The house had a LOT of K&T wiring - but it
wasn't K&T that caused the fire. The old "shack" had a sagging summer
kitchen - and the ROMEX wire going from the main house to the addition
had a "shear failure" due to movement between the 2 parts of the
building. The wires rubbed through the insulation enough to cause heat
without blowing the breaker/fuse. (Think it was the stove cable).

Anyway, it got him a new house.

WOW! you mean he actually was able to insure it?? HELLOOOOO Bob
buddy, this guy got insurance on a K&T wired house!!!! HELLO???
The house burned down 15 years ago last week.
Long before the insurance companies became "extremely risk adverse"

i doubt it was from the wiring unless it was improperly fused. (or not
fused at all) I've seen that.

s

bob haller wrote:
On Sep 11, 9:29�pm, Steve Barker wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 13:27:52 -0500, Steve Barker
wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 11, 12:34?am, Steve Barker wrote:
bob haller wrote:
does the clients homeowners insurance know they have K&T?
The home really needs a complete rewire bringing up to current code
once you muck with this a future fire can see you on the hook for
damages and insurtance company can go after you.........
K&T is very obsolete and what of attic insulation? as you said you
cant imbed K&T in insulation and the roof is the largest loss of heat
in a home......
you say client, are you doing repairs there?
their insurance, like mine, probably couldn't care less.
GUARANTEED they will if theres a fire. you having been the last to
work on the wiring will be on the hook. are you insured? liability if
theres a fire? are you a registered electrician?
besides TODAY most insurance companies wouldnt take on new customers
with K&T
BULL****. �pure and simple bull****. �Bob buddy, we've been down this
road before in this group about K&T wiring and your Bull**** theories
about insurance. �I even ASKED my *new* insurance agent about this exact
thing, and he said "we could care less". �He also told me they're not
concerned as to who worked on the wiring last, cause I told him I do all
my own work. �So, why not just drop the bull**** insurance thing about
this type of wiring. �There's absolutely NO documented evidence about
K&T wiring causing fires, there's absolutely NO documented evidence
about K&T wiring being covered with insulation being any more dangerous
than if not covered, AND there's absolutely NO documentation to
substantiate your bull**** claim that insurance companies will not
insure a house with K&T wiring. �Why don't you just get off it? �Did
your mom whip you with K&T wiring, or what? �What is your big ****ing
deal anyway?
s
I beg to differ with you.
There is not an insurance company doing business in Ontario Canada
that will write new business on a house with
1) K&T wiring
or
2) aluminum wiring without electrical inspection proving either
compatible (coalr) devices or properly installed copper pigtails
ANd very few that will write new business on houses with
1) Cast iron �waste stack
or
�2) Galvanized water pipes.
Or non UL listed wood burning stoves or fireplaces
My daughter is assistant operations manager of a relatively large
general insurance brokerage (agency) here in Kitchener/Waterloo and
placing insurance on these types of properties is getting EXTREMELY
difficult.
So, what you're telling me is that a guy goes and buys a 80 yo house
from the original family (never rewired) �and he flat cannot buy
insurance without a complete rewire??? � Sounds like reason #459 not to
live in canada if that's the case.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

actually common in the US. just check with state farm, they will nt
insure a new customer with K&T

you cant sell a home if new owner cant get homeowners insurance

reason #295 not to use state farm.

But yes, the previous poster's shrieks of alarm are unwarranted. Properly
done K&T wiring in good condition (as the wiring in this particular house
is) is no less safe than modren wiring methods.

Heck, if anything, it is safer.

It takes a lot of care to initially install K&T wiring as compared to just
slapping down some romex and putting in a few staples. K&T doesn't depend
upon the insulation of the individual conductors to prevent a short. The
knobs and tubes are made of a ceramic.

K&T wiring doesn't have a separate ground conductor and until GFCIs became
available, that increased the risk of shock from appliances and in wet
areas.

Powering a section of K&T from a GRCI breaker creates a very safe situation.

On 9/12/2009 8:25 PM John Gilmer spake thus:

Powering a section of K&T from a GRCI breaker creates a very safe situation.

I think you meant to type "GFCI", no? I don't think my client wants to
pay for them fancy newfangled GRCI breakers ...


--
Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism

On Sep 13, 12:04�am, David Nebenzahl

I think you meant to type "GFCI", no? I don't think my client wants to
pay for them fancy newfangled GRCI breakers ...


Yeah why bother installing something that saves lives, bet they want
to save bucks on their new vehicle by deleting safety belts? and why
not remove and sell off the air bags too.

hey wonder what the courts would say if dave here did some remodeling
in kitchen or bath and didnt install GFCIs.

later a hairdryer drops in the tub and a child dies.

happy go lucky dave losses everything he owns.........

would he be criminally liable? but he did save the custmer a few
bucks....

I service machines for a living and have seen lots of safety hazards.

I REFUSE to work on a machine that has a gross safety hazard unless
the customer approves my correcting that safety issue as part of the
service....

what other things are installed so long ago without being replaced for
newer safer items. please name some I am interested?

Around here K&T has no boxes unless they were added at a later date.

the wires are soldered on and buried in walls where connections cant
be seen

if the solder joint detoriates for whatever reason it can overheat and
since its not in a box cause a fire..

plus K&T homes are lucky to have one outlet per room, which leads to
lots of trip hazards, idiots puttng extension cords under carpets and
overloaded circuits most K&T homes have very few seperate circuits.

lack of grounds is a biggie for me. a ungrounded but GFCI outlet can
cause computer troubles

BULL****. pure and simple bull****. Bob buddy, we've been down this road
before in this group about K&T wiring and your Bull**** theories about
insurance. I even ASKED my *new* insurance agent about this exact thing,
and he said "we could care less". '


The key, IMO, it that you get your insurance from an independent agent
rather than applying directly to a company.

The agent will spread his clients around several companies and, thus, spread
the risk. An insurance company may be willing to have a few K&T homes on
its rolls but it doesn't want to ensure every house in some antique town.

Our agent never asked about wiring. The insurance company is licensed to
do business in the state (VA) and, thus, we can rely upon getting paid if
the house burns down. We don't worry and the insurance company doesn't
have excessive risk in one town.

The only difficulty we had with the insurace was because we got a LOT of
house for not much money (repro.) The carrier sent someone by to see with
his own eyes that the house was as big as we claimed. Our insurance will
pay "replacement" value so they don't want to be set up.

When a company sells a policy through an agent, it is in part using the
agent to screen clients. When they sell direct they don't get that
protection and they may not be willing to write on any but plain vanilla
type properties in sub-divisions.

In article ,
Steve Barker wrote:

i doubt it was from the wiring unless it was improperly fused.

I can't remember offhand; how many amps is a penny good for?

In article ,
"John Gilmer" wrote:

An insurance company may be willing to have a few K&T homes on
its rolls but it doesn't want to insure every house in some antique town.

Can't say for sure about K & T, but in general, "doesn't want to"
"is forbidden by law from." Insurance companies can insure x number of
homes in New Orleans from hurricanes, y number of homes from tornadoes
in Kansas, and z number of homes from earthquakes in Los Angeles, but
they are forbidden to insure x+y+z number of homes for the same hazard.

On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 17:48:10 -0700 (PDT), bob haller
wrote:

On Sep 11, 9:29?pm, Steve Barker wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 13:27:52 -0500, Steve Barker
wrote:

bob haller wrote:
On Sep 11, 12:34?am, Steve Barker wrote:
bob haller wrote:
does the clients homeowners insurance know they have K&T?
The home really needs a complete rewire bringing up to current code
once you muck with this a future fire can see you on the hook for
damages and insurtance company can go after you.........
K&T is very obsolete and what of attic insulation? as you said you
cant imbed K&T in insulation and the roof is the largest loss of heat
in a home......
you say client, are you doing repairs there?
their insurance, like mine, probably couldn't care less.
GUARANTEED they will if theres a fire. you having been the last to
work on the wiring will be on the hook. are you insured? liability if
theres a fire? are you a registered electrician?

besides TODAY most insurance companies wouldnt take on new customers
with K&T
BULL****. ?pure and simple bull****. ?Bob buddy, we've been down this
road before in this group about K&T wiring and your Bull**** theories
about insurance. ?I even ASKED my *new* insurance agent about this exact
thing, and he said "we could care less". ?He also told me they're not
concerned as to who worked on the wiring last, cause I told him I do all
my own work. ?So, why not just drop the bull**** insurance thing about
this type of wiring. ?There's absolutely NO documented evidence about
K&T wiring causing fires, there's absolutely NO documented evidence
about K&T wiring being covered with insulation being any more dangerous
than if not covered, AND there's absolutely NO documentation to
substantiate your bull**** claim that insurance companies will not
insure a house with K&T wiring. ?Why don't you just get off it? ?Did
your mom whip you with K&T wiring, or what? ?What is your big ****ing
deal anyway?

s
I beg to differ with you.
There is not an insurance company doing business in Ontario Canada
that will write new business on a house with
1) K&T wiring
or
2) aluminum wiring without electrical inspection proving either
compatible (coalr) devices or properly installed copper pigtails

ANd very few that will write new business on houses with
1) Cast iron ?waste stack

or
?2) Galvanized water pipes.

Or non UL listed wood burning stoves or fireplaces

My daughter is assistant operations manager of a relatively large
general insurance brokerage (agency) here in Kitchener/Waterloo and
placing insurance on these types of properties is getting EXTREMELY
difficult.

So, what you're telling me is that a guy goes and buys a 80 yo house
from the original family (never rewired) ?and he flat cannot buy
insurance without a complete rewire??? ? Sounds like reason #459 not to
live in canada if that's the case.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

actually common in the US. just check with state farm, they will nt
insure a new customer with K&T

you cant sell a home if new owner cant get homeowners insurance


Unless you sell it cheap enough that he can pay cash, and he's willing
to take the risk of total loss and live without insurance.

From what I hear there is a LOT of that in many areas of the good old
USA. An old shack that wouldn't be worth a year's insurance if you
COULD get it, built on a flood plain or insecure base that no company
would ever insure, and not even an AMERICAN bank would write a
mortgage on.

Lots in the outback of appalachia and the Ozarks, and in the lowlands
of Georgia etc.

On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 19:52:00 -0500, Steve Barker
wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 20:32:26 -0500, Steve Barker
wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 11:11:28 -0700, David Nebenzahl
wrote:

On 9/11/2009 10:48 AM dpb spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

...
But yes, the previous poster's shrieks of alarm are unwarranted.
Indeed...

But, it's his personal vendetta it appears despite chastisement and
demonstration that he's simply just generally wrong on numerous previous
occasions as well...
Plus he's one of the few posters here with the annoying habit of never
quoting previous replies (small point, but not in his favor).

I will say that I think exercising due caution when doing electrical
work is important. I cringe when I see the numerous news reports of
houses burning down, just wondering whether it was an electrical fire
that was responsible. I don't *ever* want to be the cause of such a fire.

But that doesn't mean one has to be a total Cassandra about it either ...

My younger brother's old house (old crappy farm house) burned down due
to an electrical fault. The house had a LOT of K&T wiring - but it
wasn't K&T that caused the fire. The old "shack" had a sagging summer
kitchen - and the ROMEX wire going from the main house to the addition
had a "shear failure" due to movement between the 2 parts of the
building. The wires rubbed through the insulation enough to cause heat
without blowing the breaker/fuse. (Think it was the stove cable).

Anyway, it got him a new house.

WOW! you mean he actually was able to insure it?? HELLOOOOO Bob
buddy, this guy got insurance on a K&T wired house!!!! HELLO???
The house burned down 15 years ago last week.
Long before the insurance companies became "extremely risk adverse"

i doubt it was from the wiring unless it was improperly fused. (or not
fused at all) I've seen that.

s
It WAS from wiring, and the short where the wire was damaged was not a
good enough connection to draw enough power to trip the overcurrent
protection on the stove wire. 15 amps on a 220 circuit is3200 watts -
and that is a LOT of heat to be created in a small area. Definitely
enough to start a tinder-dry timber structure on fire. It takes 50
amps to blow the circuit protection on a range receptacle circuit.
That's over 12000 watts.of concentrated heat.

On Sep 13, 1:42�pm, wrote:
On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 17:48:10 -0700 (PDT), bob haller
wrote:





On Sep 11, 9:29?pm, Steve Barker wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 13:27:52 -0500, Steve Barker
wrote:

bob haller wrote:
On Sep 11, 12:34?am, Steve Barker wrote:
bob haller wrote:
does the clients homeowners insurance know they have K&T?
The home really needs a complete rewire bringing up to current code
once you muck with this a future fire can see you on the hook for
damages and insurtance company can go after you.........
K&T is very obsolete and what of attic insulation? as you said you
cant imbed K&T in insulation and the roof is the largest loss of heat
in a home......
you say client, are you doing repairs there?
their insurance, like mine, probably couldn't care less.
GUARANTEED they will if theres a fire. you having been the last to
work on the wiring will be on the hook. are you insured? liability if
theres a fire? are you a registered electrician?

besides TODAY most insurance companies wouldnt take on new customers
with K&T
BULL****. ?pure and simple bull****. ?Bob buddy, we've been down this
road before in this group about K&T wiring and your Bull**** theories
about insurance. ?I even ASKED my *new* insurance agent about this exact
thing, and he said "we could care less". ?He also told me they're not
concerned as to who worked on the wiring last, cause I told him I do all
my own work. ?So, why not just drop the bull**** insurance thing about
this type of wiring. ?There's absolutely NO documented evidence about
K&T wiring causing fires, there's absolutely NO documented evidence
about K&T wiring being covered with insulation being any more dangerous
than if not covered, AND there's absolutely NO documentation to
substantiate your bull**** claim that insurance companies will not
insure a house with K&T wiring. ?Why don't you just get off it? ?Did
your mom whip you with K&T wiring, or what? ?What is your big ****ing
deal anyway?

s
I beg to differ with you.
There is not an insurance company doing business in Ontario Canada
that will write new business on a house with
1) K&T wiring
or
2) aluminum wiring without electrical inspection proving either
compatible (coalr) devices or properly installed copper pigtails

ANd very few that will write new business on houses with
1) Cast iron ?waste stack

or
?2) Galvanized water pipes.

Or non UL listed wood burning stoves or fireplaces

My daughter is assistant operations manager of a relatively large
general insurance brokerage (agency) here in Kitchener/Waterloo and
placing insurance on these types of properties is getting EXTREMELY
difficult.

So, what you're telling me is that a guy goes and buys a 80 yo house
from the original family (never rewired) ?and he flat cannot buy
insurance without a complete rewire??? ? Sounds like reason #459 not to
live in canada if that's the case.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

actually common in the US. just check with state farm, they will nt
insure a new customer with K&T

you cant sell a home if new owner cant get homeowners insurance

Unless you sell it cheap enough that he can pay cash, and he's willing
to take the risk of total loss and live without insurance.

From what I hear there is a LOT of that in many areas of the good old
USA. An old shack that wouldn't be worth a year's insurance if you
COULD get it, built on a flood plain or insecure base that no company
would ever insure, and not even an AMERICAN bank would write a
mortgage on.

Lots in the outback of appalachia and the Ozarks, and in the lowlands
of Georgia etc.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

add detroit to the low priced homes are the median price of all homes
sold in detroit now down to about $12,500... down from 90 grand a few
years ago.

If you have a worthless home then why buy insurance? but to get a LOAN
you MUST HAVE INSURANCE.

and in any case once the OP mucks with the wiring, espically if he
isnt a registered electrician he is on the hook if theres a fire., let
alone the horror of possibly causing someones death, espically a child!

On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 13:57:05 -0700 (PDT), bob haller
wrote:

On Sep 13, 1:42?pm, wrote:
On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 17:48:10 -0700 (PDT), bob haller
wrote:





On Sep 11, 9:29?pm, Steve Barker wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 13:27:52 -0500, Steve Barker
wrote:

bob haller wrote:
On Sep 11, 12:34?am, Steve Barker wrote:
bob haller wrote:
does the clients homeowners insurance know they have K&T?
The home really needs a complete rewire bringing up to current code
once you muck with this a future fire can see you on the hook for
damages and insurtance company can go after you.........
K&T is very obsolete and what of attic insulation? as you said you
cant imbed K&T in insulation and the roof is the largest loss of heat
in a home......
you say client, are you doing repairs there?
their insurance, like mine, probably couldn't care less.
GUARANTEED they will if theres a fire. you having been the last to
work on the wiring will be on the hook. are you insured? liability if
theres a fire? are you a registered electrician?

besides TODAY most insurance companies wouldnt take on new customers
with K&T
BULL****. ?pure and simple bull****. ?Bob buddy, we've been down this
road before in this group about K&T wiring and your Bull**** theories
about insurance. ?I even ASKED my *new* insurance agent about this exact
thing, and he said "we could care less". ?He also told me they're not
concerned as to who worked on the wiring last, cause I told him I do all
my own work. ?So, why not just drop the bull**** insurance thing about
this type of wiring. ?There's absolutely NO documented evidence about
K&T wiring causing fires, there's absolutely NO documented evidence
about K&T wiring being covered with insulation being any more dangerous
than if not covered, AND there's absolutely NO documentation to
substantiate your bull**** claim that insurance companies will not
insure a house with K&T wiring. ?Why don't you just get off it? ?Did
your mom whip you with K&T wiring, or what? ?What is your big ****ing
deal anyway?

s
I beg to differ with you.
There is not an insurance company doing business in Ontario Canada
that will write new business on a house with
1) K&T wiring
or
2) aluminum wiring without electrical inspection proving either
compatible (coalr) devices or properly installed copper pigtails

ANd very few that will write new business on houses with
1) Cast iron ?waste stack

or
?2) Galvanized water pipes.

Or non UL listed wood burning stoves or fireplaces

My daughter is assistant operations manager of a relatively large
general insurance brokerage (agency) here in Kitchener/Waterloo and
placing insurance on these types of properties is getting EXTREMELY
difficult.

So, what you're telling me is that a guy goes and buys a 80 yo house
from the original family (never rewired) ?and he flat cannot buy
insurance without a complete rewire??? ? Sounds like reason #459 not to
live in canada if that's the case.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

actually common in the US. just check with state farm, they will nt
insure a new customer with K&T

you cant sell a home if new owner cant get homeowners insurance

Unless you sell it cheap enough that he can pay cash, and he's willing
to take the risk of total loss and live without insurance.

From what I hear there is a LOT of that in many areas of the good old
USA. An old shack that wouldn't be worth a year's insurance if you
COULD get it, built on a flood plain or insecure base that no company
would ever insure, and not even an AMERICAN bank would write a
mortgage on.

Lots in the outback of appalachia and the Ozarks, and in the lowlands
of Georgia etc.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

add detroit to the low priced homes are the median price of all homes
sold in detroit now down to about $12,500... down from 90 grand a few
years ago.

If you have a worthless home then why buy insurance? but to get a LOAN
you MUST HAVE INSURANCE.

and in any case once the OP mucks with the wiring, espically if he
isnt a registered electrician he is on the hook if theres a fire., let
alone the horror of possibly causing someones death, espically a child!


What's the average lifespan in the Detroit ghettos? A few
electrocutions won't change it much.

That said, there is NO EXCUSE for shoddy or substandard work. Which
does not necessarily mean every shack needs to be up to code.

But it DOES need to be safe.

What's the average lifespan in the Detroit ghettos? A few
electrocutions won't change it much.

That said, there is NO EXCUSE for shoddy or substandard work. Which
does not necessarily mean every shack needs to be up to code.

But it DOES need to be safe.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

does the OP description sound SAFE???

paste from his first post

Have a client with a house built in the '20s, originally knob and
tube
wired but (partly) converted to more modren wiring methods. Basement
ceiling is exposed and where the majority of the house wiring is.
Lots
of strange, non-standard and some clearly improper wiring exists
the
"flying" splices between K&T wiring and NM or armored cable (no
junction
box), and one place where someone just ran a single insulated wire
(THHN
or whatever) as a neutral from one place to another. Plus exposed K&T
runs going everywhere, one right next to the hot-water shutoff valve.

bob haller wrote:
On Sep 13, 12:04�am, David Nebenzahl
I think you meant to type "GFCI", no? I don't think my client wants to
pay for them fancy newfangled GRCI breakers ...


Yeah why bother installing something that saves lives, bet they want
to save bucks on their new vehicle by deleting safety belts? and why
not remove and sell off the air bags too.

Maybe if you learned to read you could figure out what John and Dave said.

if the solder joint detoriates for whatever reason it can overheat and
since its not in a box cause a fire..

Another item you have been challenged on in the past. In years of doing
service work I never saw a solder joint that "deteriorated". I saw 2
that failed that were "cold joints" when they were made. One was K&T.

Anecdotal evidence (clare's younger brother) proves the real hazard is
Romex. I am confident you will now demand removal of all the hazardous
Romex wiring out there.

It is certainly as strong as your anecdotal evidence.


Or has an insurance company come up with actual casualty data?

--
bud--

Roger Shoaf wrote:
"David Nebenzahl" wrote in message
s.com...

I already did that, and I thought I posted that here. When I cut the
single wire, all the lights in the front of the house--living room and
front porch--went out. No outlets, just lights. So I know what's on that
circuit. I just don't know exactly where neutral wire for that circuit
comes out. But since it'll all be replaced by NM anyhow, doesn't really
matter. I was hoping someone could comment authoritatively on that
anomaly (the single-wire feeds), but I guess not.


To trace the mystery wire get one of those AC circuit tester pen gizmos. If
I recall these will sniff out an active circuit under the plaster. So what
you do is kill all circuits except the mystery one and trace the wire runs.


I might disconnect the neutral at the source to allow also tracing the
neutral with a "gizmo". Or swap the hot and neutral to trace the neutral
separately. (Only to be done if you know what you are doing.)

A tracer for identifying breakers might have enough range to trace
buried wires. It can identify the neutral at the panel.

You might be able to use a phone "fox and hound" tracer on disconnected
wiring. (Also only if you know what you are doing.)

--
bud--

On Sep 14, 1:17�am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 13, 12:04 am, David Nebenzahl
I think you meant to type "GFCI", no? I don't think my client wants to
pay for them fancy newfangled GRCI breakers ...

Yeah why bother installing something that saves lives, bet they want
to save bucks on their new vehicle by deleting safety belts? and why
not remove and sell off the air bags too.

Maybe if you learned to read you could figure out what John and Dave said..

if the solder joint detoriates for whatever reason it can overheat and
since its not in a box cause a fire..

Another item you have been challenged on in the past. In years of doing
service work I never saw a solder joint that "deteriorated". I saw 2
that failed that were "cold joints" when they were made. One was K&T.

Anecdotal evidence (clare's younger brother) proves the real hazard is
Romex. I am confident you will now demand removal of all the hazardous
Romex wiring out there.

It is certainly as strong as your anecdotal evidence.

Or has an insurance company come up with actual casualty data?

--
bud--

K&T typically has one outlet per room, necessitating lots of extension
cords. beyond the unsafe stuff the OP admitted on post one and ii
pasted, do you still think K&T is safe and effective?

90 year old anything is elderly, all sorts of wierd stuff happens when
something is that old.

how many roofs has a 100 year old home had? how many plumbing
upgrades?

how many vehicles have you had in a lifetime?

nothing lasts forever despite how much you protest

bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 1:17�am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 13, 12:04 am, David Nebenzahl
I think you meant to type "GFCI", no? I don't think my client wants to
pay for them fancy newfangled GRCI breakers ...
Yeah why bother installing something that saves lives, bet they want
to save bucks on their new vehicle by deleting safety belts? and why
not remove and sell off the air bags too.
Maybe if you learned to read you could figure out what John and Dave said.

if the solder joint detoriates for whatever reason it can overheat and
since its not in a box cause a fire..
Another item you have been challenged on in the past. In years of doing
service work I never saw a solder joint that "deteriorated". I saw 2
that failed that were "cold joints" when they were made. One was K&T.

Anecdotal evidence (clare's younger brother) proves the real hazard is
Romex. I am confident you will now demand removal of all the hazardous
Romex wiring out there.

It is certainly as strong as your anecdotal evidence.

Or has an insurance company come up with actual casualty data?

--
bud--

K&T typically has one outlet per room, necessitating lots of extension
cords. beyond the unsafe stuff the OP admitted on post one and ii
pasted, do you still think K&T is safe and effective?

The number of outlets in a room has nothing to do with whether K&T is
safe. My house, originally wired with rigid pipe, had one or two outlets
per room when it was built.

The anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare) clearly indicates Romex is
unsafe.

nothing lasts forever despite how much you protest

Still missing - the insurance casualty data that shows K&T is unsafe. An
insurance company did not present any such data in one of the links that
was posted.

The only links that have been posted do not support your crusade against
K&T.

I believe the electricians in this newsgroup do not agree with you.

--
bud--

I thought them GRCI (pronounced "gerky") breakers only
approved in GReat Britain?

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"David Nebenzahl" wrote in message
s.com...
On 9/12/2009 8:25 PM John Gilmer spake thus:

Powering a section of K&T from a GRCI breaker creates a
very safe situation.

I think you meant to type "GFCI", no? I don't think my
client wants to
pay for them fancy newfangled GRCI breakers ...

copper, 506, zinc clad, about 295.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"Smitty Two" wrote in message
news In article ,
Steve Barker wrote:

i doubt it was from the wiring unless it was improperly
fused.

I can't remember offhand; how many amps is a penny good for?

On Sep 14, 10:25�am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 1:17 am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 13, 12:04 am, David Nebenzahl
I think you meant to type "GFCI", no? I don't think my client wants to
pay for them fancy newfangled GRCI breakers ...
Yeah why bother installing something that saves lives, bet they want
to save bucks on their new vehicle by deleting safety belts? and why
not remove and sell off the air bags too.
Maybe if you learned to read you could figure out what John and Dave said.

if the solder joint detoriates for whatever reason it can overheat and
since its not in a box cause a fire..
Another item you have been challenged on in the past. In years of doing
service work I never saw a solder joint that "deteriorated". I saw 2
that failed that were "cold joints" when they were made. One was K&T.

Anecdotal evidence (clare's younger brother) proves the real hazard is
Romex. I am confident you will now demand removal of all the hazardous
Romex wiring out there.

It is certainly as strong as your anecdotal evidence.

Or has an insurance company come up with actual casualty data?

--
bud--

K&T typically has one outlet per room, necessitating lots of extension
cords. beyond the unsafe stuff the OP admitted on post one and ii
pasted, do you still think K&T is safe and effective?

The number of outlets in a room has nothing to do with whether K&T is
safe. My house, originally wired with rigid pipe, had one or two outlets
per room when it was built.

The anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare) clearly indicates Romex is
unsafe.

nothing lasts forever despite how much you protest

Still missing - the insurance casualty data that shows K&T is unsafe. An
insurance company did not present any such data in one of the links that
was posted.

The only links that have been posted do not support your crusade against
K&T.

I believe the electricians in this newsgroup do not agree with you.

--
bud--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

yeah sure obsolete wiring thats been hacked repaired admitted by OP in
post number one so old the insulation is falling off, no GFCIs, no arc
fault breakers, no grounds, with lots of extension cords run around.

Yep totally safe and effective, heck its so great it should be the
standard.

all those required NEC safety codes are totally unnecessary, and state
farm is out to lunch refusing to insure homes with K&T/

heck high steps with no railings, its just a scam to sell
railings.....

those defending K&T are just attempting to defend their refusal to
upgrade their homes.......

...

John Gilmer wrote:
BULL****. pure and simple bull****. Bob buddy, we've been down this road
before in this group about K&T wiring and your Bull**** theories about
insurance. I even ASKED my *new* insurance agent about this exact thing,
and he said "we could care less". '


The key, IMO, it that you get your insurance from an independent agent
rather than applying directly to a company.

The agent will spread his clients around several companies and, thus, spread
the risk. An insurance company may be willing to have a few K&T homes on
its rolls but it doesn't want to ensure every house in some antique town.

Our agent never asked about wiring. The insurance company is licensed to
do business in the state (VA) and, thus, we can rely upon getting paid if
the house burns down. We don't worry and the insurance company doesn't
have excessive risk in one town.

The only difficulty we had with the insurace was because we got a LOT of
house for not much money (repro.) The carrier sent someone by to see with
his own eyes that the house was as big as we claimed. Our insurance will
pay "replacement" value so they don't want to be set up.

When a company sells a policy through an agent, it is in part using the
agent to screen clients. When they sell direct they don't get that
protection and they may not be willing to write on any but plain vanilla
type properties in sub-divisions.


My agent is a one company man. And he represents that company 100%.
So that blows that theory out i guess.

s

Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
Steve Barker wrote:

i doubt it was from the wiring unless it was improperly fused.

I can't remember offhand; how many amps is a penny good for?

all of 'em.

LOL!

steve

bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 10:25�am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 1:17 am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 13, 12:04 am, David Nebenzahl
I think you meant to type "GFCI", no? I don't think my client wants to
pay for them fancy newfangled GRCI breakers ...
Yeah why bother installing something that saves lives, bet they want
to save bucks on their new vehicle by deleting safety belts? and why
not remove and sell off the air bags too.
Maybe if you learned to read you could figure out what John and Dave said.
if the solder joint detoriates for whatever reason it can overheat and
since its not in a box cause a fire..
Another item you have been challenged on in the past. In years of doing
service work I never saw a solder joint that "deteriorated". I saw 2
that failed that were "cold joints" when they were made. One was K&T.
Anecdotal evidence (clare's younger brother) proves the real hazard is
Romex. I am confident you will now demand removal of all the hazardous
Romex wiring out there.
It is certainly as strong as your anecdotal evidence.
Or has an insurance company come up with actual casualty data?
--
bud--
K&T typically has one outlet per room, necessitating lots of extension
cords. beyond the unsafe stuff the OP admitted on post one and ii
pasted, do you still think K&T is safe and effective?

The number of outlets in a room has nothing to do with whether K&T is
safe. My house, originally wired with rigid pipe, had one or two outlets
per room when it was built.

The anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare) clearly indicates Romex is
unsafe.

nothing lasts forever despite how much you protest
Still missing - the insurance casualty data that shows K&T is unsafe. An
insurance company did not present any such data in one of the links that
was posted.

The only links that have been posted do not support your crusade against
K&T.

I believe the electricians in this newsgroup do not agree with you.


all those required NEC safety codes are totally unnecessary,

The NEC still has a section on K&T. Among the limited applications is
reconnecting in a rewire. Why is it still there?

and state
farm is out to lunch refusing to insure homes with K&T/

In Minnesota, State Farm put a surcharge on houses that did not have the
service replaced in some time period (don't remember what it was). They
were reversed by the state insurance regulator. I remember there was no
insurance casualty data that supported the surcharge.

In one of the links provided, an insurance company that was challenged
"provided no justification for its position".

As I have said, K&T is probably the latest redlining technique.

those defending K&T are just attempting to defend their refusal to
upgrade their homes.......

The house I live in has never had K&T.

The links provided do not support your fetish.

I don't remember anyone else who did either. Why don't you get any
support???

Still no insurance casualty information that shows K&T is a problem.

--
bud--

On Sep 15, 11:30�am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 10:25 am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 1:17 am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 13, 12:04 am, David Nebenzahl
I think you meant to type "GFCI", no? I don't think my client wants to
pay for them fancy newfangled GRCI breakers ...
Yeah why bother installing something that saves lives, bet they want
to save bucks on their new vehicle by deleting safety belts? and why
not remove and sell off the air bags too.
Maybe if you learned to read you could figure out what John and Dave said.
if the solder joint detoriates for whatever reason it can overheat and
since its not in a box cause a fire..
Another item you have been challenged on in the past. In years of doing
service work I never saw a solder joint that "deteriorated". I saw 2
that failed that were "cold joints" when they were made. One was K&T..
Anecdotal evidence (clare's younger brother) proves the real hazard is
Romex. I am confident you will now demand removal of all the hazardous
Romex wiring out there.
It is certainly as strong as your anecdotal evidence.
Or has an insurance company come up with actual casualty data?
--
bud--
K&T typically has one outlet per room, necessitating lots of extension
cords. beyond the unsafe stuff the OP admitted on post one and ii
pasted, do you still think K&T is safe and effective?

The number of outlets in a room has nothing to do with whether K&T is
safe. My house, originally wired with rigid pipe, had one or two outlets
per room when it was built.

The anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare) clearly indicates Romex is
unsafe.

nothing lasts forever despite how much you protest
Still missing - the insurance casualty data that shows K&T is unsafe. An
insurance company did not present any such data in one of the links that
was posted.

The only links that have been posted do not support your crusade against
K&T.

I believe the electricians in this newsgroup do not agree with you.

all those required NEC safety codes are totally unnecessary,

The NEC still has a section on K&T. Among the limited applications is
reconnecting in a rewire. Why is it still there?

and state
farm is out to lunch refusing to insure homes with K&T/

In Minnesota, State Farm put a surcharge on houses that did not have the
service replaced in some time period (don't remember what it was). They
were reversed by the state insurance regulator. I remember there was no
insurance casualty data that supported the surcharge.

In one of the links provided, an insurance company that was challenged
"provided no justification for its position".

As I have said, K&T is probably the latest redlining technique.

those defending K&T are just attempting to defend their refusal to
upgrade their homes.......

The house I live in has never had K&T.

The links provided do not support your fetish.

I don't remember anyone else who did either. Why don't you get any
support???

Still no insurance casualty information that shows K&T is a problem.

--
bud--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

google knob and tube wiring home fire insurance. endless reports of
not being able to get homeowners insurance. and that insulation
shouldnt be used around K&T wiring.

with todays energy costs who doesnt want insulation?

On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 10:30:44 -0500, bud--
wrote:

bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 10:25?am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 1:17 am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 13, 12:04 am, David Nebenzahl
I think you meant to type "GFCI", no? I don't think my client wants to
pay for them fancy newfangled GRCI breakers ...
Yeah why bother installing something that saves lives, bet they want
to save bucks on their new vehicle by deleting safety belts? and why
not remove and sell off the air bags too.
Maybe if you learned to read you could figure out what John and Dave said.
if the solder joint detoriates for whatever reason it can overheat and
since its not in a box cause a fire..
Another item you have been challenged on in the past. In years of doing
service work I never saw a solder joint that "deteriorated". I saw 2
that failed that were "cold joints" when they were made. One was K&T.
Anecdotal evidence (clare's younger brother) proves the real hazard is
Romex. I am confident you will now demand removal of all the hazardous
Romex wiring out there.
It is certainly as strong as your anecdotal evidence.
Or has an insurance company come up with actual casualty data?
--
bud--
K&T typically has one outlet per room, necessitating lots of extension
cords. beyond the unsafe stuff the OP admitted on post one and ii
pasted, do you still think K&T is safe and effective?

The number of outlets in a room has nothing to do with whether K&T is
safe. My house, originally wired with rigid pipe, had one or two outlets
per room when it was built.

The anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare) clearly indicates Romex is
unsafe.

nothing lasts forever despite how much you protest
Still missing - the insurance casualty data that shows K&T is unsafe. An
insurance company did not present any such data in one of the links that
was posted.

The only links that have been posted do not support your crusade against
K&T.

I believe the electricians in this newsgroup do not agree with you.


all those required NEC safety codes are totally unnecessary,

The NEC still has a section on K&T. Among the limited applications is
reconnecting in a rewire. Why is it still there?

and state
farm is out to lunch refusing to insure homes with K&T/

In Minnesota, State Farm put a surcharge on houses that did not have the
service replaced in some time period (don't remember what it was). They
were reversed by the state insurance regulator. I remember there was no
insurance casualty data that supported the surcharge.

In one of the links provided, an insurance company that was challenged
"provided no justification for its position".

As I have said, K&T is probably the latest redlining technique.

those defending K&T are just attempting to defend their refusal to
upgrade their homes.......

The house I live in has never had K&T.

The links provided do not support your fetish.

I don't remember anyone else who did either. Why don't you get any
support???

Still no insurance casualty information that shows K&T is a problem.
It's not casualties, it's property loss they are woried about.
The vast majority of houses with K&T are under wired, so a lot of
extension cords, and often overfused to allow use of all the stuff
everyone wants to use. Remenber, many houses had only 2 or 3 fuses
originally. Even 6 15 amp circuits is inadequate for most homeowners
today.

bob haller wrote:
On Sep 15, 11:30�am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 10:25 am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 1:17 am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 13, 12:04 am, David Nebenzahl
I think you meant to type "GFCI", no? I don't think my client wants to
pay for them fancy newfangled GRCI breakers ...
Yeah why bother installing something that saves lives, bet they want
to save bucks on their new vehicle by deleting safety belts? and why
not remove and sell off the air bags too.
Maybe if you learned to read you could figure out what John and Dave said.
if the solder joint detoriates for whatever reason it can overheat and
since its not in a box cause a fire..
Another item you have been challenged on in the past. In years of doing
service work I never saw a solder joint that "deteriorated". I saw 2
that failed that were "cold joints" when they were made. One was K&T.
Anecdotal evidence (clare's younger brother) proves the real hazard is
Romex. I am confident you will now demand removal of all the hazardous
Romex wiring out there.
It is certainly as strong as your anecdotal evidence.
Or has an insurance company come up with actual casualty data?
--
bud--
K&T typically has one outlet per room, necessitating lots of extension
cords. beyond the unsafe stuff the OP admitted on post one and ii
pasted, do you still think K&T is safe and effective?
The number of outlets in a room has nothing to do with whether K&T is
safe. My house, originally wired with rigid pipe, had one or two outlets
per room when it was built.
The anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare) clearly indicates Romex is
unsafe.
nothing lasts forever despite how much you protest
Still missing - the insurance casualty data that shows K&T is unsafe. An
insurance company did not present any such data in one of the links that
was posted.
The only links that have been posted do not support your crusade against
K&T.
I believe the electricians in this newsgroup do not agree with you.
all those required NEC safety codes are totally unnecessary,
The NEC still has a section on K&T. Among the limited applications is
reconnecting in a rewire. Why is it still there?

and state
farm is out to lunch refusing to insure homes with K&T/
In Minnesota, State Farm put a surcharge on houses that did not have the
service replaced in some time period (don't remember what it was). They
were reversed by the state insurance regulator. I remember there was no
insurance casualty data that supported the surcharge.

In one of the links provided, an insurance company that was challenged
"provided no justification for its position".

As I have said, K&T is probably the latest redlining technique.

those defending K&T are just attempting to defend their refusal to
upgrade their homes.......
The house I live in has never had K&T.

The links provided do not support your fetish.

I don't remember anyone else who did either. Why don't you get any
support???

Still no insurance casualty information that shows K&T is a problem.

--
bud---


Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You really aren't smart enough to get rid of this garbage?


google knob and tube wiring home fire insurance. endless reports of
not being able to get homeowners insurance. and that insulation
shouldnt be used around K&T wiring.

with todays energy costs who doesnt want insulation?

Perhaps you missed:
http://www.waptac.org/sp.asp?id=7190
"is a report to the Illinois Department of Commerce and Community
Affairs on adding building insulation around existing K&T wiring. No
record of hazard was found in the large number of K&T installations that
had insulation added around them. (Larry Seekon, whose comments are
quoted, was head electrical inspector in Minneapolis.)"

--
bud--

On Sep 16, 1:21�pm, wrote:
On Sep 16, 11:26�am, bud-- wrote:





bud-- wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 10:30:44 -0500, bud--
wrote:

bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 10:25?am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 1:17 am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 13, 12:04 am, David Nebenzahl
I think you meant to type "GFCI", no? I don't think my client
wants to
pay for them fancy newfangled GRCI breakers ...
Yeah why bother installing something that saves lives, bet they
want
to save bucks on their new vehicle by deleting safety belts? and
why
not remove and sell off the air bags too.
Maybe if you learned to read you could figure out what John and
Dave said.
if the solder joint detoriates for whatever reason it can
overheat and
since its not in a box cause a fire..
Another item you have been challenged on in the past. In years of
doing
service work I never saw a solder joint that "deteriorated". I saw 2
that failed that were "cold joints" when they were made. One was
K&T.
Anecdotal evidence (clare's younger brother) proves the real
hazard is
Romex. I am confident you will now demand removal of all the
hazardous
Romex wiring out there.
It is certainly as strong as your anecdotal evidence.
Or has an insurance company come up with actual casualty data?
--
bud--
K&T typically has one outlet per room, necessitating lots of
extension
cords. beyond the unsafe stuff the OP admitted on post one and ii
pasted, do you still think K&T is safe and effective?
The number of outlets in a room has nothing to do with whether K&T is
safe. My house, originally wired with rigid pipe, had one or two
outlets
per room when it was built.

The anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare) clearly indicates
Romex is
unsafe.

nothing lasts forever despite how much you protest
Still missing - the insurance casualty data that shows K&T is
unsafe. An
insurance company did not present any such data in one of the links
that
was posted.

The only links that have been posted do not support your crusade
against
K&T.

I believe the electricians in this newsgroup do not agree with you.

all those required NEC safety codes are totally unnecessary,
The NEC still has a section on K&T. Among the limited applications is
reconnecting in a rewire. Why is it still there?

and state
farm is out to lunch refusing to insure homes with K&T/
In Minnesota, State Farm put a surcharge on houses that did not have
the service replaced in some time period (don't remember what it
was). They were reversed by the state insurance regulator. I remember
there was no insurance casualty data that supported the surcharge.

In one of the links provided, an insurance company that was
challenged "provided no justification for its position".

As I have said, K&T is probably the latest redlining technique.

those defending K&T are just attempting to defend their refusal to
upgrade their homes.......
The house I live in has never had K&T.

The links provided do not support your fetish.

I don't remember anyone else who did either. Why don't you get any
support???

Still no insurance casualty information that shows K&T is a problem..

�It's not casualties, it's property loss they are woried about.

I understand insurance casualty to be insurance loss information.

The vast majority of houses with K&T are under wired, so a lot of
extension cords, and often overfused to allow use of all the stuff
everyone wants to use. Remenber, many houses had only 2 or 3 fuses
originally. Even 6 15 amp circuits is inadequate for most homeowners
today.

Then maybe insurance companies could evaluate if houses had "adequate"
outlets and circuits.

As I wrote before, my house was wired with rigid pipe and originally had
maybe 1 or 2 outlets per room.

I still believe K&T denials are just redlining.

And to repeat from one of the 2 links in this thread, the report from a
state insurance regulator on a challenge to insurance denial, the
insurance company "provided no justification for its position that knob
and tube wiring per se automatically provides grounds for nonrenewal".

--
bud--

That's from ONE case that went to trial. � Maybe the insurance company
just decided that it wasn't worth the cost to go do the collection of
data, make that data to the standards that a court would require,
provide all the necessary expert witness testimony instead of just
paying the $100K or whatever the judgement would be.

The notion that insurance companies just go around "redlining" for no
reason is silly. � They have their factors which affect how much they
may or may not pay out depending on multiple factors. � Personally, I
would not want to insure a 100 year old house with hacked up knob and
tube as described in the original post. � I guess I'd guiltu of
"redlining", whatever exactly that term means. �Insurance companies
are in the business of making money. �Denying to take policy when
there is not substantial increased risk makes no sense. � �Google
"knob tube wiring insurance" and you will find plenty of hits
concerning problems.

I guess the next step is for Obama to nationalize the home insurance
markets because some people with K&T can' get insurance and the evil
insurance companies are "redlining."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

everyone wants low rates, but the added risks from super old homes,
K&T wiring, bad roofs. cracked uneven sidewalks, all of these are
outward indicators of a poorly maintained home.

when all is said and done the added claims MUST be covered by higher
insurance rates. who voluneers to pay more?

if you google this topic you will find many reports of cant get
homeowners insurance.

makes selling home near impossible.

On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 10:26:39 -0500, bud--
wrote:

bud-- wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 10:30:44 -0500, bud--
wrote:

bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 10:25?am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 1:17 am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 13, 12:04 am, David Nebenzahl
I think you meant to type "GFCI", no? I don't think my client
wants to
pay for them fancy newfangled GRCI breakers ...
Yeah why bother installing something that saves lives, bet they
want
to save bucks on their new vehicle by deleting safety belts? and
why
not remove and sell off the air bags too.
Maybe if you learned to read you could figure out what John and
Dave said.
if the solder joint detoriates for whatever reason it can
overheat and
since its not in a box cause a fire..
Another item you have been challenged on in the past. In years of
doing
service work I never saw a solder joint that "deteriorated". I saw 2
that failed that were "cold joints" when they were made. One was
K&T.
Anecdotal evidence (clare's younger brother) proves the real
hazard is
Romex. I am confident you will now demand removal of all the
hazardous
Romex wiring out there.
It is certainly as strong as your anecdotal evidence.
Or has an insurance company come up with actual casualty data?
--
bud--
K&T typically has one outlet per room, necessitating lots of
extension
cords. beyond the unsafe stuff the OP admitted on post one and ii
pasted, do you still think K&T is safe and effective?
The number of outlets in a room has nothing to do with whether K&T is
safe. My house, originally wired with rigid pipe, had one or two
outlets
per room when it was built.

The anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare) clearly indicates
Romex is
unsafe.

nothing lasts forever despite how much you protest
Still missing - the insurance casualty data that shows K&T is
unsafe. An
insurance company did not present any such data in one of the links
that
was posted.

The only links that have been posted do not support your crusade
against
K&T.

I believe the electricians in this newsgroup do not agree with you.

all those required NEC safety codes are totally unnecessary,
The NEC still has a section on K&T. Among the limited applications is
reconnecting in a rewire. Why is it still there?

and state
farm is out to lunch refusing to insure homes with K&T/
In Minnesota, State Farm put a surcharge on houses that did not have
the service replaced in some time period (don't remember what it
was). They were reversed by the state insurance regulator. I remember
there was no insurance casualty data that supported the surcharge.

In one of the links provided, an insurance company that was
challenged "provided no justification for its position".

As I have said, K&T is probably the latest redlining technique.

those defending K&T are just attempting to defend their refusal to
upgrade their homes.......
The house I live in has never had K&T.

The links provided do not support your fetish.

I don't remember anyone else who did either. Why don't you get any
support???

Still no insurance casualty information that shows K&T is a problem.

It's not casualties, it's property loss they are woried about.

I understand insurance casualty to be insurance loss information.

The vast majority of houses with K&T are under wired, so a lot of
extension cords, and often overfused to allow use of all the stuff
everyone wants to use. Remenber, many houses had only 2 or 3 fuses
originally. Even 6 15 amp circuits is inadequate for most homeowners
today.

Then maybe insurance companies could evaluate if houses had "adequate"
outlets and circuits.

As I wrote before, my house was wired with rigid pipe and originally had
maybe 1 or 2 outlets per room.

I still believe K&T denials are just redlining.


And to repeat from one of the 2 links in this thread, the report from a
state insurance regulator on a challenge to insurance denial, the
insurance company "provided no justification for its position that knob
and tube wiring per se automatically provides grounds for nonrenewal".


It is NOT grounds for non-renewal - and insurance is NOT being
cancelled because you have K&T, even here in Ontario. They ARE,
however, refusing to write new business on houses with K&T - and no
regulator can force them to write that new business.

On Sep 16, 10:05�pm, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 10:26:39 -0500, bud--
wrote:





bud-- wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 10:30:44 -0500, bud--
wrote:

bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 10:25?am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 1:17 am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 13, 12:04 am, David Nebenzahl
I think you meant to type "GFCI", no? I don't think my client
wants to
pay for them fancy newfangled GRCI breakers ...
Yeah why bother installing something that saves lives, bet they
want
to save bucks on their new vehicle by deleting safety belts? and
why
not remove and sell off the air bags too.
Maybe if you learned to read you could figure out what John and
Dave said.
if the solder joint detoriates for whatever reason it can
overheat and
since its not in a box cause a fire..
Another item you have been challenged on in the past. In years of
doing
service work I never saw a solder joint that "deteriorated". I saw 2
that failed that were "cold joints" when they were made. One was
K&T.
Anecdotal evidence (clare's younger brother) proves the real
hazard is
Romex. I am confident you will now demand removal of all the
hazardous
Romex wiring out there.
It is certainly as strong as your anecdotal evidence.
Or has an insurance company come up with actual casualty data?
--
bud--
K&T typically has one outlet per room, necessitating lots of
extension
cords. beyond the unsafe stuff the OP admitted on post one and ii
pasted, do you still think K&T is safe and effective?
The number of outlets in a room has nothing to do with whether K&T is
safe. My house, originally wired with rigid pipe, had one or two
outlets
per room when it was built.

The anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare) clearly indicates
Romex is
unsafe.

nothing lasts forever despite how much you protest
Still missing - the insurance casualty data that shows K&T is
unsafe. An
insurance company did not present any such data in one of the links
that
was posted.

The only links that have been posted do not support your crusade
against
K&T.

I believe the electricians in this newsgroup do not agree with you..

all those required NEC safety codes are totally unnecessary,
The NEC still has a section on K&T. Among the limited applications is
reconnecting in a rewire. Why is it still there?

and state
farm is out to lunch refusing to insure homes with K&T/
In Minnesota, State Farm put a surcharge on houses that did not have
the service replaced in some time period (don't remember what it
was). They were reversed by the state insurance regulator. I remember
there was no insurance casualty data that supported the surcharge.

In one of the links provided, an insurance company that was
challenged "provided no justification for its position".

As I have said, K&T is probably the latest redlining technique.

those defending K&T are just attempting to defend their refusal to
upgrade their homes.......
The house I live in has never had K&T.

The links provided do not support your fetish.

I don't remember anyone else who did either. Why don't you get any
support???

Still no insurance casualty information that shows K&T is a problem.

�It's not casualties, it's property loss they are woried about.

wrote:
On Sep 16, 11:26 am, bud-- wrote:
bud-- wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 10:30:44 -0500, bud--
wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 10:25?am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 14, 1:17 am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 13, 12:04 am, David Nebenzahl
I think you meant to type "GFCI", no? I don't think my client
wants to
pay for them fancy newfangled GRCI breakers ...
Yeah why bother installing something that saves lives, bet they
want
to save bucks on their new vehicle by deleting safety belts? and
why
not remove and sell off the air bags too.
Maybe if you learned to read you could figure out what John and
Dave said.
if the solder joint detoriates for whatever reason it can
overheat and
since its not in a box cause a fire..
Another item you have been challenged on in the past. In years of
doing
service work I never saw a solder joint that "deteriorated". I saw 2
that failed that were "cold joints" when they were made. One was
K&T.
Anecdotal evidence (clare's younger brother) proves the real
hazard is
Romex. I am confident you will now demand removal of all the
hazardous
Romex wiring out there.
It is certainly as strong as your anecdotal evidence.
Or has an insurance company come up with actual casualty data?
--
bud--
K&T typically has one outlet per room, necessitating lots of
extension
cords. beyond the unsafe stuff the OP admitted on post one and ii
pasted, do you still think K&T is safe and effective?
The number of outlets in a room has nothing to do with whether K&T is
safe. My house, originally wired with rigid pipe, had one or two
outlets
per room when it was built.
The anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare) clearly indicates
Romex is
unsafe.
nothing lasts forever despite how much you protest
Still missing - the insurance casualty data that shows K&T is
unsafe. An
insurance company did not present any such data in one of the links
that
was posted.
The only links that have been posted do not support your crusade
against
K&T.
I believe the electricians in this newsgroup do not agree with you.
all those required NEC safety codes are totally unnecessary,
The NEC still has a section on K&T. Among the limited applications is
reconnecting in a rewire. Why is it still there?
and state
farm is out to lunch refusing to insure homes with K&T/
In Minnesota, State Farm put a surcharge on houses that did not have
the service replaced in some time period (don't remember what it
was). They were reversed by the state insurance regulator. I remember
there was no insurance casualty data that supported the surcharge.
In one of the links provided, an insurance company that was
challenged "provided no justification for its position".
As I have said, K&T is probably the latest redlining technique.
those defending K&T are just attempting to defend their refusal to
upgrade their homes.......
The house I live in has never had K&T.
The links provided do not support your fetish.
I don't remember anyone else who did either. Why don't you get any
support???
Still no insurance casualty information that shows K&T is a problem.

It's not casualties, it's property loss they are woried about.

I understand insurance casualty to be insurance loss information.

The vast majority of houses with K&T are under wired, so a lot of
extension cords, and often overfused to allow use of all the stuff
everyone wants to use. Remenber, many houses had only 2 or 3 fuses
originally. Even 6 15 amp circuits is inadequate for most homeowners
today.

Then maybe insurance companies could evaluate if houses had "adequate"
outlets and circuits.
As I wrote before, my house was wired with rigid pipe and originally had
maybe 1 or 2 outlets per room.
I still believe K&T denials are just redlining.

And to repeat from one of the 2 links in this thread, the report from a
state insurance regulator on a challenge to insurance denial, the
insurance company "provided no justification for its position that knob
and tube wiring per se automatically provides grounds for nonrenewal".

--
bud--

That's from ONE case that went to trial. Maybe the insurance company
just decided that it wasn't worth the cost to go do the collection of
data, make that data to the standards that a court would require,
provide all the necessary expert witness testimony instead of just
paying the $100K or whatever the judgement would be.

It was a hearing before the Maine insurance regulator, not a trial. It
resulted in an order to provide insurance because the insurance company
"provided no justification for its position".
As I said, Minnesota ordered State Farm(?) to drop a surcharge for
services that had not been recently upgraded.

And you are saying that insurance companies should base their rates and
policies on someone's opinion, not casualty (or loss if you prefer)
data? I guess insurance companies could fire the people that analyze
data. I think women have more accident, so they get higher rates.

The notion that insurance companies just go around "redlining" for no
reason is silly.

The notion that insurance companies have gone around "redlining"
neighborhoods is well documented. The neighborhood are likely to have
old houses. Old houses may have K&T. They also tended to have a black
population (maybe coincidence?)

They have their factors which affect how much they
may or may not pay out depending on multiple factors.

Like casualty [loss] data?

Personally, I
would not want to insure a 100 year old house with hacked up knob and
tube as described in the original post.

Personally I wouldn't want to insure my kid's house (when he bought it)
with hacked up Romex and other wiring.

Hacked up, along with not many outlets, is a separate issue.

IMHO K&T is safer than the early Romex (which also did not have a ground).

And what about the early 60 degree rated Romex that is buried in
insulation? Twice the heat, wires in close proximity?

Maybe insurance companies could look at the condition of the wiring?
They could at least look at casualty data. No indication yet that they did.

I guess I'd guiltu of
"redlining", whatever exactly that term means.

It was (maybe metaphorically) drawing a "red line" on a map and not
insuring houses in that area. I believe it is illegal in many (all?)
states, so insurance companies may use other means to accomplish the
same thing.

Insurance companies
are in the business of making money. Denying to take policy when
there is not substantial increased risk makes no sense.

Which goes back to the same question - what is the evidence there is
increased risk? Still missing.

Anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare's younger brother) proves Romex
is hazardous.

--
bud--

On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:31:07 -0500, bud--
wrote:


The notion that insurance companies just go around "redlining" for no
reason is silly.

The notion that insurance companies have gone around "redlining"
neighborhoods is well documented. The neighborhood are likely to have
old houses. Old houses may have K&T. They also tended to have a black
population (maybe coincidence?)


Likely have a very high loss ratio in the neighbourhood.

They have their factors which affect how much they
may or may not pay out depending on multiple factors.

Like casualty [loss] data?

Personally, I
would not want to insure a 100 year old house with hacked up knob and
tube as described in the original post.

Personally I wouldn't want to insure my kid's house (when he bought it)
with hacked up Romex and other wiring.

Hacked up, along with not many outlets, is a separate issue.

IMHO K&T is safer than the early Romex (which also did not have a ground).

And what about the early 60 degree rated Romex that is buried in
insulation? Twice the heat, wires in close proximity?

Maybe insurance companies could look at the condition of the wiring?
They could at least look at casualty data. No indication yet that they did.

I guess I'd guiltu of
"redlining", whatever exactly that term means.

It was (maybe metaphorically) drawing a "red line" on a map and not
insuring houses in that area. I believe it is illegal in many (all?)
states, so insurance companies may use other means to accomplish the
same thing.

Insurance companies
are in the business of making money. Denying to take policy when
there is not substantial increased risk makes no sense.

Which goes back to the same question - what is the evidence there is
increased risk? Still missing.

Anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare's younger brother) proves Romex
is hazardous.


You are being STUPID.

The romex was not the hazard. The house was. And the installation of
the Romex.
This house was so far off kilter if you dropped anything CLOSE to
round on the floor it would head for one corner, all by itself. The
"addition" that held the kitchen was on a separate foundation, not
tied to the main foundation, and the cable in question went through a
drilled hole that went throgh framework on both the main house and the
addition. Settling over time had "sheared" the cable between the two
timbers. When the insulation finally gave way, it turned into a hot
spot.

Granted, with K&T the two wires could never have touched.

The house was a disaster from the day he bought it - but it was all he
could afford with a bit of land attached (20 acres IIRC) and room to
park his rig, and turn it around.
The barn wasn't much to look at either, but they lived in it and a
small trailer while the new house was put up.
He's my "red-neck trucker" kid brother.

wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:31:07 -0500, bud--
wrote:


The notion that insurance companies just go around "redlining" for no
reason is silly.
The notion that insurance companies have gone around "redlining"
neighborhoods is well documented. The neighborhood are likely to have
old houses. Old houses may have K&T. They also tended to have a black
population (maybe coincidence?)


Likely have a very high loss ratio in the neighbourhood.
They have their factors which affect how much they
may or may not pay out depending on multiple factors.
Like casualty [loss] data?

Personally, I
would not want to insure a 100 year old house with hacked up knob and
tube as described in the original post.
Personally I wouldn't want to insure my kid's house (when he bought it)
with hacked up Romex and other wiring.

Hacked up, along with not many outlets, is a separate issue.

IMHO K&T is safer than the early Romex (which also did not have a ground).

And what about the early 60 degree rated Romex that is buried in
insulation? Twice the heat, wires in close proximity?

Maybe insurance companies could look at the condition of the wiring?
They could at least look at casualty data. No indication yet that they did.

I guess I'd guiltu of
"redlining", whatever exactly that term means.
It was (maybe metaphorically) drawing a "red line" on a map and not
insuring houses in that area. I believe it is illegal in many (all?)
states, so insurance companies may use other means to accomplish the
same thing.

Insurance companies
are in the business of making money. Denying to take policy when
there is not substantial increased risk makes no sense.
Which goes back to the same question - what is the evidence there is
increased risk? Still missing.

Anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare's younger brother) proves Romex
is hazardous.


You are being STUPID.

The romex was not the hazard. The house was. And the installation of
the Romex.

The hazard is anecdotal proofs, which this thread seems to be full of.

--
bud--

On Sep 19, 2:42�am, bud-- wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:31:07 -0500, bud--
wrote:

The notion that insurance companies just go around "redlining" for no
reason is silly. �
The notion that insurance companies have gone around "redlining"
neighborhoods is well documented. The neighborhood are likely to have
old houses. Old houses may have K&T. They also tended to have a black
population (maybe coincidence?)

Likely have a very high loss ratio in the neighbourhood.
They have their factors which affect how much they
may or may not pay out depending on multiple factors. �
Like casualty [loss] data?

Personally, I
would not want to insure a 100 year old house with hacked up knob and
tube as described in the original post. �
Personally I wouldn't want to insure my kid's house (when he bought it)
with hacked up Romex and other wiring.

Hacked up, along with not many outlets, is a separate issue.

IMHO K&T is safer than the early Romex (which also did not have a ground).

And what about the early 60 degree rated Romex that is buried in
insulation? Twice the heat, wires in close proximity?

Maybe insurance companies could look at the condition of the wiring?
They could at least look at casualty data. No indication yet that they did.

I guess I'd guiltu of
"redlining", whatever exactly that term means. �
It was (maybe metaphorically) drawing a "red line" on a map and not
insuring houses in that area. I believe it is illegal in many (all?)
states, so insurance companies may use other means to accomplish the
same thing.

Insurance companies
are in the business of making money. �Denying to take policy when
there is not substantial increased risk makes no sense.
Which goes back to the same question - what is the evidence there is
increased risk? �Still missing.

Anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare's younger brother) proves Romex
is hazardous.

You are being STUPID.

The romex was not the hazard. The house was. And the installation of
the Romex.

The hazard is anecdotal proofs, which this thread seems to be full of.

--
bud--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

the proof the OPs wiring is a hazard is found in his first post. he
admitted its been hack repaired and altered. the perfect combo for a
home fire

since the OP is working for a client he will be on the hook if theres
a fire, even years later.

bob haller wrote:
On Sep 19, 2:42�am, bud-- wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:31:07 -0500, bud--
wrote:
The notion that insurance companies just go around "redlining" for no
reason is silly. �
The notion that insurance companies have gone around "redlining"
neighborhoods is well documented. The neighborhood are likely to have
old houses. Old houses may have K&T. They also tended to have a black
population (maybe coincidence?)
Likely have a very high loss ratio in the neighbourhood.
They have their factors which affect how much they
may or may not pay out depending on multiple factors. �
Like casualty [loss] data?
Personally, I
would not want to insure a 100 year old house with hacked up knob and
tube as described in the original post. �
Personally I wouldn't want to insure my kid's house (when he bought it)
with hacked up Romex and other wiring.
Hacked up, along with not many outlets, is a separate issue.
IMHO K&T is safer than the early Romex (which also did not have a ground).
And what about the early 60 degree rated Romex that is buried in
insulation? Twice the heat, wires in close proximity?
Maybe insurance companies could look at the condition of the wiring?
They could at least look at casualty data. No indication yet that they did.
I guess I'd guiltu of
"redlining", whatever exactly that term means. �
It was (maybe metaphorically) drawing a "red line" on a map and not
insuring houses in that area. I believe it is illegal in many (all?)
states, so insurance companies may use other means to accomplish the
same thing.
Insurance companies
are in the business of making money. �Denying to take policy when
there is not substantial increased risk makes no sense.
Which goes back to the same question - what is the evidence there is
increased risk? �Still missing.
Anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare's younger brother) proves Romex
is hazardous.
You are being STUPID.
The romex was not the hazard. The house was. And the installation of
the Romex.
The hazard is anecdotal proofs, which this thread seems to be full of.

--
bud--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

the proof the OPs wiring is a hazard is found in his first post. he
admitted its been hack repaired and altered. the perfect combo for a
home fire

since the OP is working for a client he will be on the hook if theres
a fire, even years later.

Whatever the condition from the OP, that is not a reflection on K&T in
general, as you want to claim.

Still missing - evidence that K&T is an intrinsic hazard. Or that it is
more of a problem than, for example, early 2 wire Romex.

--
bud--

On Sep 20, 12:00�am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 19, 2:42 am, bud-- wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:31:07 -0500, bud--
wrote:
The notion that insurance companies just go around "redlining" for no
reason is silly.
The notion that insurance companies have gone around "redlining"
neighborhoods is well documented. The neighborhood are likely to have
old houses. Old houses may have K&T. They also tended to have a black
population (maybe coincidence?)
Likely have a very high loss ratio in the neighbourhood.
They have their factors which affect how much they
may or may not pay out depending on multiple factors.
Like casualty [loss] data?
Personally, I
would not want to insure a 100 year old house with hacked up knob and
tube as described in the original post.
Personally I wouldn't want to insure my kid's house (when he bought it)
with hacked up Romex and other wiring.
Hacked up, along with not many outlets, is a separate issue.
IMHO K&T is safer than the early Romex (which also did not have a ground).
And what about the early 60 degree rated Romex that is buried in
insulation? Twice the heat, wires in close proximity?
Maybe insurance companies could look at the condition of the wiring?
They could at least look at casualty data. No indication yet that they did.
I guess I'd guiltu of
"redlining", whatever exactly that term means.
It was (maybe metaphorically) drawing a "red line" on a map and not
insuring houses in that area. I believe it is illegal in many (all?)
states, so insurance companies may use other means to accomplish the
same thing.
Insurance companies
are in the business of making money. Denying to take policy when
there is not substantial increased risk makes no sense.
Which goes back to the same question - what is the evidence there is
increased risk? Still missing.
Anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare's younger brother) proves Romex
is hazardous.
You are being STUPID.
The romex was not the hazard. The house was. And the installation of
the Romex.
The hazard is anecdotal proofs, which this thread seems to be full of.

--
bud--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

the proof the OPs wiring is a hazard is found in his first post. he
admitted its been hack repaired and altered. the perfect combo for a
home fire

since the OP is working for a client he will be on the hook if theres
a fire, even years later.

Whatever the condition from the OP, that is not a reflection on K&T in
general, as you want to claim.

Still missing - evidence that K&T is an intrinsic hazard. Or that it is
more of a problem than, for example, early 2 wire Romex.

--
bud--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

obviously anything thats been around this long is obsolete, lacks new
safety upgrades, and is great risk of hack repairs over its life.

have you called statre farm to confirm they wouldnt write new policies
for K&T homes?

On Sep 20, 4:25*pm, bob haller wrote:
On Sep 20, 12:00 am, bud-- wrote:





bob haller wrote:
On Sep 19, 2:42 am, bud-- wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:31:07 -0500, bud--
wrote:
The notion that insurance companies just go around "redlining" for no
reason is silly.
The notion that insurance companies have gone around "redlining"
neighborhoods is well documented. The neighborhood are likely to have
old houses. Old houses may have K&T. They also tended to have a black
population (maybe coincidence?)
Likely have a very high loss ratio in the neighbourhood.
They have their factors which affect how much they
may or may not pay out depending on multiple factors.
Like casualty [loss] data?
Personally, I
would not want to insure a 100 year old house with hacked up knob and
tube as described in the original post.
Personally I wouldn't want to insure my kid's house (when he bought it)
with hacked up Romex and other wiring.
Hacked up, along with not many outlets, is a separate issue.
IMHO K&T is safer than the early Romex (which also did not have a ground).
And what about the early 60 degree rated Romex that is buried in
insulation? Twice the heat, wires in close proximity?
Maybe insurance companies could look at the condition of the wiring?
They could at least look at casualty data. No indication yet that they did.
I guess I'd guiltu of
"redlining", whatever exactly that term means.
It was (maybe metaphorically) drawing a "red line" on a map and not
insuring houses in that area. I believe it is illegal in many (all?)
states, so insurance companies may use other means to accomplish the
same thing.
Insurance companies
are in the business of making money. Denying to take policy when
there is not substantial increased risk makes no sense.
Which goes back to the same question - what is the evidence there is
increased risk? Still missing.
Anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare's younger brother) proves Romex
is hazardous.
You are being STUPID.
The romex was not the hazard. The house was. And the installation of
the Romex.
The hazard is anecdotal proofs, which this thread seems to be full of.

--
bud--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

the proof the OPs wiring is a hazard is found in his first post. he
admitted its been hack repaired and altered. the perfect combo for a
home fire

since the OP is working for a client he will be on the hook if theres
a fire, even years later.

Whatever the condition from the OP, that is not a reflection on K&T in
general, as you want to claim.

Still missing - evidence that K&T is an intrinsic hazard. Or that it is
more of a problem than, for example, early 2 wire Romex.

--
bud--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

obviously anything thats been around this long is obsolete, lacks new
safety upgrades, and is great risk of hack repairs over its life.

have you called statre farm to confirm they wouldnt write new policies
for K&T homes?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

As in 'early' 1950s installations of domestic electricity here!
Meter in the halfway, 115 volt two wire service, no ground, two
cartridge fuses probably 20 or 30 amps fuses, one in the neutral and
one in the live, one ceiling light (with a pull cord) in the kitchen
with everything, small radio, fridge, and when required an electric
iron (replacing the ones you used to heat on top of the stove) plugged
into it with extension cords. Quite often a water pump under the sink,
unless one still 'dipped' water from the well outside. Later on maybe
a single outlet for the big wooden TV set (only one channel until
1958); if that wasn't also plugged into the ceiling light!
Wouldn't even be allowed for hook-up these days!
There is also a story about someone who wired their own house, back
then, as electricity became available in small rural communities,
couple of hundred miles from the main city, by running individual
wires from each individual light and outlet location in the house.
Apparently ended up with a huge mess of wires at the fuse panel; must
been quite job to get ten wires on one terminal!

On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 11:42:15 -0700 (PDT), stan
wrote:

On Sep 20, 4:25Â*pm, bob haller wrote:
On Sep 20, 12:00 am, bud-- wrote:





bob haller wrote:
On Sep 19, 2:42 am, bud-- wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:31:07 -0500, bud--
wrote:
The notion that insurance companies just go around "redlining" for no
reason is silly.
The notion that insurance companies have gone around "redlining"
neighborhoods is well documented. The neighborhood are likely to have
old houses. Old houses may have K&T. They also tended to have a black
population (maybe coincidence?)
Likely have a very high loss ratio in the neighbourhood.
They have their factors which affect how much they
may or may not pay out depending on multiple factors.
Like casualty [loss] data?
Personally, I
would not want to insure a 100 year old house with hacked up knob and
tube as described in the original post.
Personally I wouldn't want to insure my kid's house (when he bought it)
with hacked up Romex and other wiring.
Hacked up, along with not many outlets, is a separate issue.
IMHO K&T is safer than the early Romex (which also did not have a ground).
And what about the early 60 degree rated Romex that is buried in
insulation? Twice the heat, wires in close proximity?
Maybe insurance companies could look at the condition of the wiring?
They could at least look at casualty data. No indication yet that they did.
I guess I'd guiltu of
"redlining", whatever exactly that term means.
It was (maybe metaphorically) drawing a "red line" on a map and not
insuring houses in that area. I believe it is illegal in many (all?)
states, so insurance companies may use other means to accomplish the
same thing.
Insurance companies
are in the business of making money. Denying to take policy when
there is not substantial increased risk makes no sense.
Which goes back to the same question - what is the evidence there is
increased risk? Still missing.
Anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare's younger brother) proves Romex
is hazardous.
You are being STUPID.
The romex was not the hazard. The house was. And the installation of
the Romex.
The hazard is anecdotal proofs, which this thread seems to be full of.

--
bud--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

the proof the OPs wiring is a hazard is found in his first post. he
admitted its been hack repaired and altered. the perfect combo for a
home fire

since the OP is working for a client he will be on the hook if theres
a fire, even years later.

Whatever the condition from the OP, that is not a reflection on K&T in
general, as you want to claim.

Still missing - evidence that K&T is an intrinsic hazard. Or that it is
more of a problem than, for example, early 2 wire Romex.

--
bud--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

obviously anything thats been around this long is obsolete, lacks new
safety upgrades, and is great risk of hack repairs over its life.

have you called statre farm to confirm they wouldnt write new policies
for K&T homes?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

As in 'early' 1950s installations of domestic electricity here!
Meter in the halfway, 115 volt two wire service, no ground, two
cartridge fuses probably 20 or 30 amps fuses, one in the neutral and
one in the live, one ceiling light (with a pull cord) in the kitchen
with everything, small radio, fridge, and when required an electric
iron (replacing the ones you used to heat on top of the stove) plugged
into it with extension cords. Quite often a water pump under the sink,
unless one still 'dipped' water from the well outside. Later on maybe
a single outlet for the big wooden TV set (only one channel until
1958); if that wasn't also plugged into the ceiling light!
Wouldn't even be allowed for hook-up these days!
There is also a story about someone who wired their own house, back
then, as electricity became available in small rural communities,
couple of hundred miles from the main city, by running individual
wires from each individual light and outlet location in the house.
Apparently ended up with a huge mess of wires at the fuse panel; must
been quite job to get ten wires on one terminal!

"Home Run" K&T wiring was not that uncommon way back when. Called
"common buss" also I think, generally more often used with low voltage
DC "farm power" setups (delco plant, Winco etc). where fusing was
generally NOT in a common distribution panel
The Positive "buss" was a heavy wire, bar, or pipe down one side of a
house, and the negative down the other side. Circuits were strung
across the building.
If someone was familiar with that kind of wiring and then wired a
house to a main panel, it could get very interesting - not to mention
a REAL BUGGER to sort out!!!!

bob haller wrote:
On Sep 20, 12:00�am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 19, 2:42 am, bud-- wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:31:07 -0500, bud--
wrote:
The notion that insurance companies just go around "redlining" for no
reason is silly.
The notion that insurance companies have gone around "redlining"
neighborhoods is well documented. The neighborhood are likely to have
old houses. Old houses may have K&T. They also tended to have a black
population (maybe coincidence?)
Likely have a very high loss ratio in the neighbourhood.
They have their factors which affect how much they
may or may not pay out depending on multiple factors.
Like casualty [loss] data?
Personally, I
would not want to insure a 100 year old house with hacked up knob and
tube as described in the original post.
Personally I wouldn't want to insure my kid's house (when he bought it)
with hacked up Romex and other wiring.
Hacked up, along with not many outlets, is a separate issue.
IMHO K&T is safer than the early Romex (which also did not have a ground).
And what about the early 60 degree rated Romex that is buried in
insulation? Twice the heat, wires in close proximity?
Maybe insurance companies could look at the condition of the wiring?
They could at least look at casualty data. No indication yet that they did.
I guess I'd guiltu of
"redlining", whatever exactly that term means.
It was (maybe metaphorically) drawing a "red line" on a map and not
insuring houses in that area. I believe it is illegal in many (all?)
states, so insurance companies may use other means to accomplish the
same thing.
Insurance companies
are in the business of making money. Denying to take policy when
there is not substantial increased risk makes no sense.
Which goes back to the same question - what is the evidence there is
increased risk? Still missing.
Anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare's younger brother) proves Romex
is hazardous.
You are being STUPID.
The romex was not the hazard. The house was. And the installation of
the Romex.
The hazard is anecdotal proofs, which this thread seems to be full of.
--
bud--- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
the proof the OPs wiring is a hazard is found in his first post. he
admitted its been hack repaired and altered. the perfect combo for a
home fire
since the OP is working for a client he will be on the hook if theres
a fire, even years later.
Whatever the condition from the OP, that is not a reflection on K&T in
general, as you want to claim.

Still missing - evidence that K&T is an intrinsic hazard. Or that it is
more of a problem than, for example, early 2 wire Romex.

--
bud--


- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So are you too lazy or too stupid to edit out this garbage?


obviously anything thats been around this long is obsolete, lacks new
safety upgrades, and is great risk of hack repairs over its life.

"Obviously" is not proof. Obviously missing - evidence that K&T is an
intrinsic hazard. I don't believe electricians in this newsgroup agree
with you.

What evidence is there *hack* repairs are common on K&T? I don't
remember ever seeing any.

Is *hack" wiring more common than with other wiring methods?

Your opinion doesn't count. Where is a source? Never anything but
opinion and anecdotes.

In the link supplied previously an insurance company did not provide
evidence when challenged. Insurance companies employ lots of actuaries
to determine risk. I see no reason to believe insurance companies have
determined such a risk.

have you called statre farm to confirm they wouldnt write new policies
for K&T homes?

Have you read that in Minnesota State Farm (probably) had a surcharge on
older services and the state insurance regulator ordered the surcharge
dropped.

Because an insurance company does something does not necessarily mean
there is a rational basis. Where is your evidence?

I see no reason to believe State Farm is not redlining.

--
bud--

On Sep 21, 12:58�am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 20, 12:00 am, bud-- wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Sep 19, 2:42 am, bud-- wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:31:07 -0500, bud--
wrote:
The notion that insurance companies just go around "redlining" for no
reason is silly.
The notion that insurance companies have gone around "redlining"
neighborhoods is well documented. The neighborhood are likely to have
old houses. Old houses may have K&T. They also tended to have a black
population (maybe coincidence?)
Likely have a very high loss ratio in the neighbourhood.
They have their factors which affect how much they
may or may not pay out depending on multiple factors.
Like casualty [loss] data?
Personally, I
would not want to insure a 100 year old house with hacked up knob and
tube as described in the original post.
Personally I wouldn't want to insure my kid's house (when he bought it)
with hacked up Romex and other wiring.
Hacked up, along with not many outlets, is a separate issue.
IMHO K&T is safer than the early Romex (which also did not have a ground).
And what about the early 60 degree rated Romex that is buried in
insulation? Twice the heat, wires in close proximity?
Maybe insurance companies could look at the condition of the wiring?
They could at least look at casualty data. No indication yet that they did.
I guess I'd guiltu of
"redlining", whatever exactly that term means.
It was (maybe metaphorically) drawing a "red line" on a map and not
insuring houses in that area. I believe it is illegal in many (all?)
states, so insurance companies may use other means to accomplish the
same thing.
Insurance companies
are in the business of making money. Denying to take policy when
there is not substantial increased risk makes no sense.
Which goes back to the same question - what is the evidence there is
increased risk? Still missing.
Anecdotal evidence in this thread (clare's younger brother) proves Romex
is hazardous.
You are being STUPID.
The romex was not the hazard. The house was. And the installation of
the Romex.
The hazard is anecdotal proofs, which this thread seems to be full of.
--
bud--- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
the proof the OPs wiring is a hazard is found in his first post. he
admitted its been hack repaired and altered. the perfect combo for a
home fire
since the OP is working for a client he will be on the hook if theres
a fire, even years later.
Whatever the condition from the OP, that is not a reflection on K&T in
general, as you want to claim.

Still missing - evidence that K&T is an intrinsic hazard. Or that it is
more of a problem than, for example, early 2 wire Romex.

--
bud--
- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So are you too lazy or too stupid to edit out this garbage?



obviously anything thats been around this long is obsolete, lacks new
safety upgrades, and is great risk of hack repairs over its life.

"Obviously" is not proof. Obviously missing - evidence that K&T is an
intrinsic hazard. I don't believe electricians in this newsgroup agree
with you.

What evidence is there *hack* repairs are common on K&T? I don't
remember ever seeing any.

Is *hack" wiring more common than with other wiring methods?

Your opinion doesn't count. Where is a source? Never anything but
opinion and anecdotes.

In the link supplied previously an insurance company did not provide
evidence when challenged. Insurance companies employ lots of actuaries
to determine risk. I see no reason to believe insurance companies have
determined such a risk.

have you called statre farm to confirm they wouldnt write new policies
for K&T homes?

Have you read that in Minnesota State Farm (probably) had a surcharge on
older services and the state insurance regulator ordered the surcharge
dropped.

Because an insurance company does something does not necessarily mean
there is a rational basis. Where is your evidence?

I see no reason to believe State Farm is not redlining.

--
bud--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

would yopu be happy to pay say 100 bucks more a month for homeowners
insurance so homes with K&T and other obsolete systems can have
insurance?

are YOU stating the CURRENT NEC regulations havent made new installs
safer?

K&T requires good soldering skills. thats not common today, worse
connections arent in boxes so a failing joint that overheats can
easily cause a fire.........