You can't fight city hall

Status
Not open for further replies.
I raised the mast yesterday. I'm going to meet the inspector today. The one question I am going to ask him is to convince me that his ruling in any way furthers the "practical safeguarding of persons and property from hazards arising from the use of electricity" (90.1(A)). He won. This was not a fight worth fighting any further. I feel that he is wrong plain and simple. I have the interpretations of a half dozen other jurisdictions and the state on my side. He has his own opinion on his. Still he won.
 

mcclary's electrical

Senior Member
Location
VA
I raised the mast yesterday. I'm going to meet the inspector today. The one question I am going to ask him is to convince me that his ruling in any way furthers the "practical safeguarding of persons and property from hazards arising from the use of electricity" (90.1(A)). He won. This was not a fight worth fighting any further. I feel that he is wrong plain and simple. I have the interpretations of a half dozen other jurisdictions and the state on my side. He has his own opinion on his. Still he won.



That was no the update I hoped to hear:mad:
 

LarryFine

Master Electrician Electric Contractor Richmond VA
Location
Henrico County, VA
Occupation
Electrical Contractor
I think the only way to close something like that is to say "I've done it your way, but we both know this isn't anywhere in the code and isn't required."
I don't know. I might add "... as long as you pay for the cost difference. My contract only calls for legally-required code compliance, not the extras needed to comply with the whims of a maverick inspector."
 

mcclary's electrical

Senior Member
Location
VA
I don't know. I might add "... as long as you pay for the cost difference. My contract only calls for legally-required code compliance, not the extras needed to comply with the whims of a maverick inspector."

I would love to be a fly on the wall in the room when that happens:D:D
 

stars13bars2

Senior Member
I hate to say this, but it is going to take a few contractors with the kahunas to appeal some of these inspectors bogus calls to end this type of I'm the inspector and I say so mentality. 90.4 says they can interpret the rules, but they think it says they can make up the rules.

I am one that can't just go along to get along, and numerous times I have told inspectors, chief inspectors and building officials that I need the code citation for the violation they have made up. This usually results in a returned phone call where in a now curiously meek voice they admit there is no code requirement to back their call, and the inspection is now passed.

Although they are initally angry at the questioning of their call, when the inspectors realize you are knowledgable of the code, some have even come back to ask my opinion on some situations they had going.

I even had a building official tell me in about 2000 that their county did not recognize a concrete encased electrode. When the 2005 NEC came out I just smiled and asked if they would recognize a CEE now.
 
So I met this inspector today and it bordered on surreal. In general he seemed amiable enough and didn't have a chip on his shoulder. He told me that after I talked to him and after the state inspector called him that he talked w/ his boss. He kind of talked in a few circles, and never really came to a point. He really almost seemed ready to agree with me (although the work was already done), but stopped just short.

He told me multiple "war stories" about this and that. A theme of many of his stories was inspectors who made their own rules and how he did not care for that. Apparently the irony was lost on him.

His only other justification came as a result of the talk w/ his boss. Bossman said that the decision for 5' came from a meeting 18 years ago w/ reps from the POCO and a few building officials. No one around really could vouge for this and it was never written down but it has been the way it has been done ever since.

In the end I asked him how this hope promote the practical safeguarding etc etc. He pretty much just started telling me about the meeting nearly 2 decades ago and that's when the decision was made and that's how blah blah blah.

I guess I could have fought this more but in the end I really didn't see the point. I confronted him, I went over his head (kind of), I met him and tried to get him to justify it. It didn't work. To continue to fight this would have taken weeks and probably months with the POCO continually threatening to turn off the HO's power. It cost me a few hours, a stick of 2" GRC and 45' of 2/0. If there were more invested in the remedy I would have been more inclined to fight it further but at some point you need to know when to cut your losses.

My hope is that the next time this comes up it might be easier for the next contractor. Or maybe I'm naive.
 

growler

Senior Member
Location
Atlanta,GA
the decision for 5' came from a meeting 18 years ago w/ reps from the POCO and a few building officials. No one around really could vouch for this and it was never written down but it has been the way it has been done ever since.


I do believe that this is called a "tradition" when no one knows who started something or why they did it in the first place but they intend to keep on doing it because it has been done for so long it would be a shame to stop now.

Watch "Fiddler on the Roof" and you can see that traditions do have a significant place in human history.

The human race really is big on tradition. :D
 

jmellc

Senior Member
Location
Durham, NC
Occupation
Facility Maintenance Tech. Licensed Electrician
Sounds like you have more of a power loving bureaucrat than in inspector.
 

Dimwit

Member
Now, I know this could backfire but, I'd let the POCO disconnect the HO, and let the HO sue the inspector. Then the inspector would have to state in court what his decision was/is based on. I gotta think most judges would side with the homeowner if I understand the situation correctly.
Joe
 

gadfly56

Senior Member
Location
New Jersey
Occupation
Professional Engineer, Fire & Life Safety
Not Likely

Not Likely

Now, I know this could backfire but, I'd let the POCO disconnect the HO, and let the HO sue the inspector. Then the inspector would have to state in court what his decision was/is based on. I gotta think most judges would side with the homeowner if I understand the situation correctly.
Joe

And for the 3-5 years it takes for the matter to go to trial, the homeowner is alternately freezing and sweltering in the dark, assuming the house isn't condemned by the health inspector as uninhabitable :roll:.
 

220/221

Senior Member
Location
AZ
So the punch line is I need to rebuild half a service because this guy is unwilling to listen to logic.


Was this your first service change?

When there is something obvious like a non conforming drop, I always find out what the inspectors want before I do the work. I hate doing things twice.
 
Was that snide?

I didn't re-read this thread but I'm pretty confident that I explained the numerous reasons that things unfolded the way they did. And with the support of the State, every other local jurisdiction, and the NEC plus the fact that I asked if there were any local amendments to the NEC when I pulled the permit versus some phantom meeting 18 years ago I think I had every reasonable right to think that this would be a standard installation.

Do you check with the inspector on every aspect of every job anytime you work in a new jurisdiction? Are we supposed to just bow down to any little whim that an inspector wants? I thought we were all professionals here and trying to get away from the mindset of "I'd like to see it done this way" when there is no support for such statements.
 
something to be said for no permit or inspection required. Our utility in the rural areas here will hook up here if it meets their spec. In fact one of the utility companies here still installs the meter, riser, disconnect, etc.---Too much code, too confusing, too much incompetent government intrusion.
 

GUNNING

Senior Member
Non conforming property.

Non conforming property.

Got something similar here.
Nonconforming residence in a neighborhood. Locals wont give me a permit to fix a service put in 11 years ago even though their rules state they have to give me a permit. Now, the hook comes in they don't have to pass or approve the work because its a nonconforming property. Hmmm.... what would you do?
 

One-eyed Jack

Senior Member
Got something similar here.
Nonconforming residence in a neighborhood. Locals wont give me a permit to fix a service put in 11 years ago even though their rules state they have to give me a permit. Now, the hook comes in they don't have to pass or approve the work because its a nonconforming property. Hmmm.... what would you do?

That sounds like a Zoning issue. You can do all the NEC compliant work you want. They don't have to inspect or release until you meet the Zoning requirements.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top