I just bought an older home with an upstairs shower that had been leaking into the framing below it. The section 1 pest report notes "fungus and rot decay" to the wood members below it, and recommends replacing all the damaged framing. However, inspecting this framing myself reveals wood that has certainly been exposed to water and is discolored, but is still structurally sound. The thought that these members need replacing seems silly to me. Poking into the wood shows no soft spots.

I think the place that did the inspection was simply trying cash in. I've read about Timbor and other treatments that will kill any mold present, and as long as the wood isn't rotten, I can't see why this wouldn't be adequate. The subfloor and pan shower will all be replaced, but I don't want to replace that framing unless I need to.

I am required by our mortgage lender to have this repaired and to obtain a "section 1 clearance" from a certified pest inspector. Should I get a second opinion before I begin any work?

MOWERMAN2468

You Say You Don't Want Or Think It Needs Done, Then You Throw In About The Mortgage Company. Yes, Get A Second Or Even Third Opion And Estimate. Then Proceed.

ballengerb1

Damaged framing is different than stained framing. Framing will look stained long before it rots or weakens. This guy was couching his words to be safe. You don't have to replace anything that is simply stained.