Replies

1. 
   edwardh1 | Oct 03, 2004 04:43pm | #1

   ground treatment with thermador (sp) may be better

   baits stations can be bad:

   1. the real bait station is your house

   2. failure of the termite company to check the stations well, even tho they charge you for the service call

2. 
   rjw | Oct 03, 2004 07:57pm | #2

   For treating a home?

   If you're ever going to sell it, you'll have to be prepared to pay for licensed treatment when you sell, so you may as well bite the bullet and get it done right the first time.

   Note, a good termite inspector will find signs regardless of how crafty you think you are in eliminating them.

   At least in my area, when the termite inspector find signs of prior infestation, if there is no evidence of prior professional treatment and renewals of the guarantee, the home owner is usually required (by the marketplace) to have professional treatment done.

   ---

   God never gives us small ideas.

   ---

   Sojourners: Christians for Justice and Peace

1. 
   DaveRicheson | Oct 04, 2004 01:28pm | #3

   Bob, have you ever done any research on the renewal and warrenty work ratios for  professional treatments?

   I ask, because I don't know.

   I use to do repair work for one of the large exterminating companies. All warrenty work on previously treated homes. Seemed like I was doing a lot of work because of improper treatment or improper follow up treatments. Reinfestation averaged about 3 to 4 years after intial treatment and most had annual inspections and retreatments.

   I was just working for one national chain, but if others operate the same way, I would not put my faith in the "professionals".

   Just wondered if you have developed any feel for the ratios, as a home inspector.

   Dave

1. 
   rjw | Oct 04, 2004 04:09pm | #4

   In my area, I'm more likely going to see poor inspections by the nationals than poor treatments, although it sounds like you would have a much greater chance to see their failures to treat properly.

   I'm not a big fan of the nationals, or of several of the locals either.

   There is only one treatment company I will use in my area, and it is strictly local

   One interesting twist, which I'm not sure of the implications of: I have been told that the insurance companies which insure the "termite" companies require that a certain (relatively high) percentage of their work be treatment.

   I suppose it is because the claims from a bad inspection will tend to be higher than the claims from a bad treatment; but it seems to me that is also going to put some pressure on to do treatments where they might not be necessary.God never gives us small ideas.

   Sojourners: Christians for Justice and Peace

2. 
   BillHartmann | Oct 04, 2004 06:58pm | #5

   A friend of mine went thought that.

   If I remember correctly there are two large national chains, but I can only thing of one right now.

   But I believe that both got into trouble in a number of states for several different practices. Both not treating to the levels that they where suppose to and also for not honoring their quantees.

   If I remember correctly Ky was on of the states and one of the "trick" was the the applicators where not drilling holes deep enough through concrete to actually reach dirt. Just enough to make it look like a hole.

1. 
   DaveRicheson | Oct 04, 2004 07:47pm | #6

   BIL worked for one of them. That's how I ended up with some of the repair work.

   Another way was to cut the amount of pesticide to less than 50% of the rcommended mix ratio.

   My brother was a state Pesticide Control Officer in the Agriculture dept. He had to teach courses and give the licensing test for all commercial and agricultural users. He also did inspections and sampling for test in disputes involving hebicides and pesticides. Scarey stuff. Professional applicators cut product to make more money, but the bulk of chemicals used is by home owners. HOs think if a little is good... a lot is better. About the same thing with many farmers. Environmental impact of over use is  enough to make you think about joining Greenpeace :)

   Dave

1. 
   edwardh1 | Oct 05, 2004 03:50am | #7

   I have two neighbors who had termites and in both cases the national companies gave them a one day take it or leave it deal - we will pay x $ to fix this -- if you don't accept that amount today you will have to sue us to get anything.

2. 
   BossHog | Oct 05, 2004 04:03am | #8

   " HOs think if a little is good... a lot is better. About the same thing with many farmers."

   I agree with the HO part, but not the farmers.

   For a HO to spray his yard or house with 3 times the label rate of a herbicide or fertilizer isn't terribly expensive.

   But for a farmer to spray a whole bunch of ground with expensive chemicals can cost a lot of bucks. So I'd say it's less true for farmers that HOs. Even if it's only for financial reasons instead of environmental ones.

   This is one of my pet peeves with the "dead zone" in the gulf of mexico - It's automatically blamed on farmers. But no one gives a though to the possibility that HOs are spreading huge amounts of fertilizer on their yards with zero regulation or oversight.Last night I had a dream that my flour sack was kidnapped and the abductors started sending me muffins in the mail. [Frasier]

3. 
   DaveRicheson | Oct 05, 2004 01:09pm | #9

   You are probably right on that one Boss. Education is also better in the ag. community now, than it was 20-30 years ago. Not so in the retail sales of herbicides and pesticides.

   I believe my brother said that there were actually more chemicals sold across the counter  than to farmers in many densely populated areas of the country.

   Dave