Did My Contractor Blow It?

Factual Questions
1

So here’s the deal:

He replaced what I think is called a “joist” – a wooden piece that extends from the central beam of the house to the foundation and which gives support to the floor.

The piece he installed, however, is not quite long enough to extend from the foundation to the central beam. So he installed a shorter piece to “bridge the gap.” The two pieces are connected by a metal plate, and are bolted to a sister joist.

Of course I am annoyed because, as described in another thread, he cut a hole in the wall to fit the replacement joist into the area, and now it seems that that was in vain, since the replacement joist was too short anyway.

In any event, my question is – is this arrangement proper and stable? Or will it give me problems down the road? When somebody goes to buy the house, will their inspector tell them that there has been shoddy workmanship?

Thanks so much in advance.

2

I’m having a hard time picturing what you describe. A joist runs horizontally and makes up the base of the floor. Studs or posts are positioned vertically, running from a plate on top of the foundation to a second plate on which the joists rest. It sounds like he replaced a post, or a series of studs with a post. This would not be uncommon if settling had resulted in a situation where it was no longer bearing the load of the floor above properly. Am I correct so far?

Two or more 2x4s (or similar lineal lumber) sistered together will make a fine post. I would say that is should be an unnecessary shortcut for one of these pieces to be composed of two shorter lengths. However, if the two pieces are mated firmly end to end, they should still be capable of withstanding the compressive force necessary. If I have misunderstood, and there is any shear or tensile forces on this piece of lumber, then you may indeed have a serious problem. Please clarify, and I’ll try to help.

3

The piece he replaced was a horizontal piece.

Let me explain:

The house can be seen as a rectangle, about 30 ft. by 50 ft.

There is a central “beam” running horizontally, the entire length of the house (50 feet).

A series of pieces (what I call “joists”) run horizontally, but perpendicular to the central beam, each about 15 feet long.

Each of those pieces rests on the “beam” on one side and on the foundation on the other. Thus, each pair of joists totals about 30 feet.

The floor rests on these pieces, and it is one of these that he replaced.

maybe this will help (a view from overhead)

++++++++++++++++++++++++

  • | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +
  • | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +
  • | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +
  • | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +
    +=======================
  • | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +
  • | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +
  • | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +
  • | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++

the + signs are the foundation
the = signs represent the central beam
the |'s represent what I have called joists

thanks again for your help!

4

I got you now. I would not trust any joist that does not run uninterrupted from support to support. Under the loading of the floor above, any type of joinery is going to be a weak point. Granted I can’t picture exactly what he did, but I can’t think of a joint loaded in this way that won’t rely on the nails or bolts to resist shear forces; a bad idea in IMO. Here’s my advice: rather than get into a disagreement if he is unlikely to yield, pay an engineer for ½ hour or so of his time to come give you a professional opinion. Cost should be well under $100. He will either give you piece of mind stating that it is indeed fine; or give you an expert assessment suggesting it be reworked, which a reasonable contractor should respect.

5

Thanks for the advice - I will talk to the contractor and let you know how it goes.

6

Proffesional Carpenter Here

Yes.I think he did blow it.
I’m not sure I understand everything about what he did,but a joist that only runs part of the required distance doesn’t sound adequite.
It does sound like the shorter joist is partnered up with another joist,and that makes me more curious as to what exactly this joist is being asked to do.
Is it part of a new opening in the floor for a hatch of some kind,or a chimney?
or
Is it a joist that is simply expected to hold up the floor?

7

Presumably your contractor had a permit to perform the work. Wouldn’t any issues of structural soundness be caught in the final inspection?

8

Great advice, and to build on it, make sure that you are paying an actual engineer, that is, a P.E., to do the exam and to put their seal on it. That’s extremely powerful evidence for your side should it be found lacking and you take your contractor to court - in fact, when presented with a P.E. -stamped report in your favor (unless the other side has their own P.E. who asserts otherwise), a judge will often summarily rule in your favor pretty quickly, and most of the time is spent arguing the remedies available under the law.

Una, P.E.

9

IANASE but I’m not that concerned about the stability of his patchwork. From what I’ve seen in historic restorations it is common practice to patch a joist that’s rotted at one end in a manner similar to what you described.

However it does sound like the hole he knocked in your wall was perhaps unnecessary.

10

I thought its called a ‘shim’?

Anyway you can always call the BBB & ask them if they have any notices about the contractor. Hope his license is real :slight_smile:

11

I have remodeled a couple of houses and know a little about weight bearing. The mending plate would have to bear the weight of the floor. I don’t understand why your floor is configures teh way that it is.

You may simply have a bad floor design that needs more extensive remedial work. I saw this in a house in my neighborhood. THe whole floor had to be replaced.

12

My biggest concern is over the original joist. Why did it need to be replaced? If it was broken due to overload, then no way in hell would I put in a weakened joist. If nothing else, I’d have him build another pier where the shortened joist is patched to give extra support.

13

I work in a Structural Engineer’s office and I just want to point out that there’s nothing inherently wrong with the splice as described by the OP provided that it has been properly designed to take all the loading and shear stresses. Follow the advice of Waverly and Anthracite and get an engineer. Get him to visit the site. You may get lucky and he’ll approve the connection, otherwise he’ll have to design and stamp his own connection.

In the future, insist that the contractor provide you with the name of any engineer or architect he may be working with. It’s better to check these things yourself.

Hodge

PS The floor plan looks like a typical layout

14

You say it was ‘bolted to a sister joist’? That makes all the difference. It sounds like you had a joist that was rotting, so he added a second joist right beside it and bolted it to the first joist in the areas past the rotted part.

There’s nothing particularly wrong with that, and it’s standard way to repair a questionable joist. Of course it would be stronger if carried through to both supports, but that’s not mandatory.

The only question is whether or not the job was done properly, and that’s a judgement that no one on this forum can make. That would depend on the integrity of the original joist, the size of the joists, the number of bolts used to tie them together, where they were tied together, the thickness of the metal plate…

The only way to know for sure is to get an inspector in to check it.

15

I have got to agree with the others above. Get a P.E. to look at it.

Structures are typically designed with significant factors of safety, meaning that there is redundancy and that the floor is likely to be structurally fine even with that joist being removed or reduced in strength. That being said, the use of an improper joist still ultimately reduces the strength of your floor, and that isn’t what you paid the contractor for, or at least wasn’t explained to be a likely consequence of whatever work you were having done. I don’t understand why the contractor wouldn’t do it right in the first place though. 16 foot lumber is a fairly common length, and should be readily available. The money he saved by going with a 12 foot and a 3 foot peice of scrap was probably insignificant. If you get a price from a P.E., and it is high compared to the cost of the lumber and labor, you might want to split the cost of fixing the joist with the contractor.

Don, P.E.

16

Thanks for all the tips, guys.

I have read what you said, researched the issue, and re-examined the joist in question.

First, let me say that the old joist was rotted due to termite damage.

Interestingly, the new joist isn’t supporting the floor.

See, under the old setup, there were three 2x12’s, flush against eachother. (Most of the joists in the house are “singles.” There are a couple doubles and triples) One (and only one) was rotted. My contractor tore out the rotted joist. The new piece is basically “sistering” (reinforcing) the others.

My research indicates that in reinforcing joists, it is typical to use two pieces, often a long and a short, to reinforce them. This is for two reasons: First, it’s often difficult or impossible to get a full-length joist into position in a finished house. Second, it’s best to have any “gap” as far away from the center of the floor as possible, since the center is under the greatest strain.

So, the upshot is that the structure is stronger than it was before the work was done, but not as strong as in the original house.

When we had the house inspected a couple months ago, the inspector told us that the termite damage was not threatening the structure of the house – it was mainly aesthetic. Thus, I’m fairly comfortable with the current setup, although I intend to inspect it on a regular basis.

I have fired my contractor – I think it was inappropriate for him to make these decisions without consulting me. For “political” reasons (he’s my neigbor) I intend to pay his bill.

Thanks again for your help, and please let me know if you disagree with any of the above.