So, I bought my first home back in 06, then moved to a new city in 10. I was unable to sell the place for what I needed (was not going to pay someone to buy the joint), so it became a rental property. It pays for itself and then some with rent each month. So I'm ok with the arrangement, though it is not ideal considering my proximity to the property (I live about 95 miles away). The house was built in 1925, with a 650 or so square feet addition added in the late 1950s. The problem I am having is in the 1950s addition. Right after moving into the place, the walk-in shower was clearly in need of some attention. The floor was cracking along grout lines, but it didn't look horrible. Called a tile guy in, he said I likely had a leaking shower pan that needed replacement. So I had him install a new shower pan using one of those pan liners that goes up the wall, which he said would "never leak." At the time, he also said that there might be damage underneath the house, but that there was no obvious structural damage...no bounce or troubling unevenness in the floor. Anyway, I am fairly certain that shower pan he installed has performed quite well since...and is not currently leaking. However, it would seem that there was considerable damage done before the new lined pan was installed. Specifically, a floor joist was soaking in water leaking from the pan for quite a while...maybe years. From what I see under the house, it looks like the joist actually bent fairly significantly, before eventually breaking in the not too distant past, thanks to rot. I have never seen a bent joist...I wonder if it is a testament to the older growth lumber that would have been used at the time. It would take quite a while for a timber to bend like that, no? As you can see, I have hard water, which has caused some calcification on the foundation wall there, as well as the wood subfloor and joists. Those two joists in the pic (to the right of where the rotten joist sits) have the hard water staining, but they don't seem to have any rot...I poked them substantially with my screwdriver to check for weak spots. Then again, perhaps there's no way that the integrity of the timber isn't compromised, considering that we can see that the water has definitely been in contact with the wood at some point. And, to my untrained eye, it looks like maybe those joists were sistered at some point to shore up the wood compromised by prolonged contact with water?