NEC Violation?

[Tiger Electrical]

I recently did a very small repair for an item listed as a violation on a home inspection report. The GFCI outlet below the panel had a short wire from the breaker to the outlet. It was so short that the wire crossed the lower buss bar which was listed as the violation. I personally couldn't think of an NEC violation of a branch circuit conductor crossing a buss bar.

 

[jxofaltrds]

110.12 Mechanical Execution of Work. Electrical equipment
shall be installed in a neat and workmanlike manner.

Remember when dealing with HI reports the Home Inspector is making recommendations to his client. Forget about the code unless it causes a violation. Buyers, sellers, agent could care less about the CODE. Trust me been there done that.

 

[K8MHZ]

I recently did a very small repair for an item listed as a violation on a home inspection report. The GFCI outlet below the panel had a short wire from the breaker to the outlet. It was so short that the wire crossed the lower buss bar which was listed as the violation. I personally couldn't think of an NEC violation of a branch circuit conductor crossing a buss bar.

I believe it would be a violation in Canada, though. That's where at least one of the TV shows that show residential electrical work being done comes from, and some think the same rules apply in the US.

 

[kwired]

110.12 Mechanical Execution of Work. Electrical equipment
shall be installed in a neat and workmanlike manner.

Remember when dealing with HI reports the Home Inspector is making recommendations to his client. Forget about the code unless it causes a violation. Buyers, sellers, agent could care less about the CODE. Trust me been there done that.

110.12 is not enforable IMO, as they have no guidelines as to what is neat or workmanlike. As is written one could fail everything out there based on 110.12 alone. I may not do as neat of work as Tom, but can easily do neater work than Dick, then along comes Harry, who sets the bar real high when it comes to neat standards

I understand buyers sellers and agents and the willingness to fix something that someone presents as a problem. But I also do believe in getting second opinions whether it is house repairs, auto repairs, health care ....

I guess the house in question here is deemed pretty unsafe because of this found "violation":roll:

It would take so much effort to make the necessary change here if someone wanted to use that particular breaker space at the time of some future installation, in the meantime the same HI maybe misses bootlegged equipment grounds at receptacles, or K&T wiring encased in thermal insulation, or a missing bonding jumper in the service disconnect, or discoloration of a lug that has maybe been overheating because of bad connection, all things that present much more serious threats.

 

[K8MHZ]

110.12 is not enforable IMO, as they have no guidelines as to what is neat or workmanlike. As is written one could fail everything out there based on 110.12 alone. I may not do as neat of work as Tom, but can easily do neater work than Dick, then along comes Harry, who sets the bar real high when it comes to neat standards

I understand buyers sellers and agents and the willingness to fix something that someone presents as a problem. But I also do believe in getting second opinions whether it is house repairs, auto repairs, health care ....

I guess the house in question here is deemed pretty unsafe because of this found "violation":roll:

It would take so much effort to make the necessary change here if someone wanted to use that particular breaker space at the time of some future installation, in the meantime the same HI maybe misses bootlegged equipment grounds at receptacles, or K&T wiring encased in thermal insulation, or a missing bonding jumper in the service disconnect, or discoloration of a lug that has maybe been overheating because of bad connection, all things that present much more serious threats.

We had an HI 'gig' a panel on a house because there were two wires on the breakers (which were listed for two wires). There were some other things, too. The report scared the buyer out of the deal. I saw the report and called the REAL inspector for the area. He OK'd the panel, but the HI missed the incandescent bulbs in the closets. We put proper lights in, didn't touch the panel and got an OK from the real inspector for the homeowner.

The cost for the real inspection was 35 bucks. I think the HI's cost about 200 bucks. That is for more than electrical, though.

 

[kwired]

We had an HI 'gig' a panel on a house because there were two wires on the breakers (which were listed for two wires). There were some other things, too. The report scared the buyer out of the deal. I saw the report and called the REAL inspector for the area. He OK'd the panel, but the HI missed the incandescent bulbs in the closets. We put proper lights in, didn't touch the panel and got an OK from the real inspector for the homeowner.

The cost for the real inspection was 35 bucks. I think the HI's cost about 200 bucks. That is for more than electrical, though.

And what other non-electrical items did he address that maybe were not as big of a deal as it may have appeared to be?

My opinion, buying a previously lived in home is no different than buying a used car in a way. There is always going to be something wrong somewhere.

I hate how some of these HI's seem to think we need new condition items in an older home. If there is something that is a serious hazard that needs immediate attention that is one thing worth bringing attention to, but normal wear and tear should be expected, if buying anything that is not new.

 

[mgookin]

I recently did a very small repair for an item listed as a violation on a home inspection report. The GFCI outlet below the panel had a short wire from the breaker to the outlet. It was so short that the wire crossed the lower buss bar which was listed as the violation. I personally couldn't think of an NEC violation of a branch circuit conductor crossing a buss bar.

Ask the inspector for the code section they are talking about.

 

[iwire]

Home inspectors are not code inspectors. They can recommend anything and then it is between the buyer and the seller if it gets addressed or not.

Electricians seem to always want to get into a battle over this stuff.

Do what's asked and cash the check.

 

[kwired]

Ask the inspector for the code section they are talking about.

HI's don't always inspect to code, and do look for maintenance and other issues that would not necessarily be NEC covered, so they will not always have a code to cite when they do find something that may be a safety concern. That said this problem he brought up is not a NEC violation, and probably doesn't create much safety issue for the owner/occupants of the building either.

 

[Little Bill]

Closest thing I can see to what the violation could be is 408.3(D)

(D) Terminals. In switchboards and panelboards, load terminals
for field wiring, including grounded circuit conductor
load terminals and connections to the equipment
grounding conductor bus for load equipment grounding
conductors, shall be so located that it is not necessary to
reach across or beyond an uninsulated ungrounded line bus
in order to make connections.

 

[Tiger Electrical]

I did what anyone would do. I spliced a wire to increase the length. That splice will be on the next home inspection report.

 

[GoldDigger]

I did what anyone would do. I spliced a wire to increase the length. That splice will be on the next home inspection report.

Oh no! A splice inside a panel. :happysad:

 

[mgookin]

I did what anyone would do. I spliced a wire to increase the length. That splice will be on the next home inspection report.

I thought this receptacle was about a foot away from the panel? Doesn't that mean pull out a 1' wire and put in a 2' wire?

 

[kwired]

I thought this receptacle was about a foot away from the panel? Doesn't that mean pull out a 1' wire and put in a 2' wire?

That would take an extra 2-5 minutes to install, we can't afford that kind of labor cost:angel:

 

[kingpb]

110.12 is not enforable IMO, as they have no guidelines as to what is neat or workmanlike.

You might want to take a look at NECA 1-2006; Standard for Good Workmanship in Electrical Construction

 

[iwire]

You might want to take a look at NECA 1-2006; Standard for Good Workmanship in Electrical Construction

Another unenforceable standard unless tied to contract documents.

 

[kwired]

Another unenforceable standard unless tied to contract documents.

or adopted by the AHJ.

I sure would hate to see all the rejected installs because someone did not meet the inspectors standards of just how neatly one should bend conductors when routing them in a circuit breaker panel. Like I said, I may not do as neat of a job as one guy, but at same time maybe do a neater job than the next guy - who still does a fairly neat job. Who is going to have the balls to enforce such stuff? Don't answer that, there probably is some guys stupid enough and do reject things based on this alone from the AHJ perspective, rejection from owner, designer, etc. is not the same as rejecting it from a codes perspective.

 

[kingpb]

I think it goes in the book as you better make sure you don't piss off the inspector category. But, as an FYI - it is in our specifications. Still tough to enforce, but gives more ammo when there is a difference of opinion.

Many years ago we figured out the inspector loved jelly doughnuts. So, every time we had an inspection we would make sure it was in the morning and we would have some coffee and jelly doughnuts ready. Never failed, we passed every time. :angel:

 

[kwired]

I think it goes in the book as you better make sure you don't piss off the inspector category. But, as an FYI - it is in our specifications. Still tough to enforce, but gives more ammo when there is a difference of opinion.

Many years ago we figured out the inspector loved jelly doughnuts. So, every time we had an inspection we would make sure it was in the morning and we would have some coffee and jelly doughnuts ready. Never failed, we passed every time. :angel:

Exactly what kind of standards are in this publication? There is literally an unlimited amount of things one could call neat and workmanlike, or lack thereof. Some guys get all upset if all the slots in cover plate screws do not line up. Now what if cover plate screws had a tightening torque specification - now it gets even harder to meet torque requirement as well as slot orientation:roll:

 

[JDBrown]

Exactly what kind of standards are in this publication? There is literally an unlimited amount of things one could call neat and workmanlike, or lack thereof. Some guys get all upset if all the slots in cover plate screws do not line up. Now what if cover plate screws had a tightening torque specification - now it gets even harder to meet torque requirement as well as slot orientation:roll:

The rest of us call those guys "anal". And that's coming from an engineer.

I've cited "neat and workmanlike" a couple of times -- as a designer doing a site visit, not as an inspector. I think both times I was actually citing the IT installer: the Cat5e cables at the data rack looked like a giant rat's nest.