Problem with local inspeactor

[tsamples]

As an inspector I prefer to inspect without someone trying to distract me, but if the installer is present most write-ups can be eliminated. In Oregon as well, as Augie47 stated, it is illegal for a homeowner to pull a permit and have someone else do the work. Many times we can tell that this is the case and will not make it easy on the installer for working without a permit.

Personally I will always mark on the stud with an 'NP' where a nailplate is required and an 'x' if a staple is required, but if I find more than 5 violations I stop marking them. In that case it is better for the installer to go back and check all of his work, I am not a babysitter.

The best solution is to have a friendly relationship with your inspector. I always appreciate the electricians who admit their fault and don't try to accuse me of being an AH.

 

[kwired]

I don't know where people get the mind set that inspectors like to write correction notices. Which do you think makes my day go easier, signing the job card or going out and sitting in the hot truck looking up code sections and listening to the contractor tell you that 1) you're the only one calling that 2) they just let me do this in ______ 3) can you come back later today? 4) can you just sign the card and I'll do this before I leave.

In answer to a direct question, no I do not always write code sections. If you used cable and I write "NMC cable is not secured per it's NEC requirements", I'm pretty sure that you should know what that means. Now yes it could be by the box or in the attic, but I took the time to find it now it's your turn.

I'm of the other school about contractors, I want them there (hey give me a stapel there) and I don't mind chit chat. I've been doing this a long time and have a pretty set routine for most things. Remember I don't need to look at everything, I'm not looking at all the stuff that's right, I'm looking to see if anything got missed, but then I have the reputation of being able to see the one missing KO seal half way across a 200,000 sq ft building.:happyyes:

But at same time if you did a rough in for me on a 200,000 SF building and the only thing you found wrong was one missing KO seal, I would sure hope you will tell me where to find it, or I will be the one giving you a hard time. If I had missing KO seals all over the place that should be a bit more of a sign of incompetence, but there is just one missing ... things happen, and thank you for finding it, I sure hope you are not going to hold up the rest of the project over this one KO seal either just because you are on a power rush (not necessarily you but an inspector in general). I have no problem with inspectors that are fair and understand we all have jobs to do, they are not just working for the contractor, they are also working for the owner.

Now an inspector who never writes you a correction notice is not really doing you any favors (unless you're really that good) nor is one that writes one every time, just to write one. As someone else said we're all just human, so as with different type of inspectors there are different types of contractors, those that argue every time they get a correction notice and those that say thanks I'll call you out when I have it taken care of.

Again it depends on the rules/practices of the jurisdiction. As I have said formal correction notices here is an automatic $50.00 reinspection fee, and $100.00 for additional reinspections of the same thing. The idea is not to raise more funds for additional inspections but tocut down on having to reinspect in the first place. If you are on site when inspector is there, the small things like needing a staple or nail plate here or there can be taken care of and no reinspection. If you are not there they don't have much choice but to write it up, and if they do that you will get a letter from the main office with a good description of the problem, where it is at, and the applicable code sections that are in violation. You will also have 14 days to fix it and a billing of $50 for reinspection fees. If you feel you have been a victim of a bad inspector there is always the telephone and chief inspector or executive director to talk to, but you are not getting an approved final inspection until all issues are resolved.

 

[mgookin]

I always preferred to have the contractor present when doing inspections. Simple things can be done while I'm still there. Even if they need more time, I can go to lunch and come back on the way back to the office. It's everyone's job - owner, contractor, bldg dept and everyone should work together to make it a success. The contractor might be gone at CO or after a 1 year warranty, the owner might flip it, but the building dept owns that baby forever. If something goes wrong, it's the first place to look; pull the drawings and inspection records.

 

[George Stolz]

This sounds less like an inspector problem than an unlicensed individual doing side work problem to me... :?

 

[sparky8786]

With 8 items you're fortunate he didn't just write "not ready" on the inspection sheet. Inspectors are not there to write your punch list. Your work is expected to be complete and compliant. You're a professional; that's why there are licensing laws.

It is also important to note that the Electrical inspector is NOT required to act as an Electrical Instructor. We, as licensed electricians should understand the code as it relates to the type of work we do. That being said, we should take the time to inspect our own completed work before we call for an inspection. It would be very bad in this industry to have an inspector that feels that our company completes sub-par installations.

 

[iwire]

I've dealt with a few inspectors who "prefer" I not be there during inspection, which I have a hard time agreeing to. I would totally understand an inspector who requests that I don't talk to him during the inspection, but that I not be there at all? That's rude.

Sounds like you have made a bad impression on them.

 

[__dan]

Sounds like you have made a bad impression on them.

I wish that were true, things would be so much more predictable.

Try getting health, wetland, zoning, building permits from a town pursuing a longstanding anti building agenda, which is pretty much everywhere but maybe more aggressive in Mass.

You as a builder or contractor or landowner asking for permits to build your own, just showing up and asking for permits makes you the enemy, the devil. The towns play this game sharply, with lies, fake and arbitrary standards. Either they believe building adds to the school age population and threatens increases in the town budget, or they believe growth is bad in general and there is too much already.

Instead of killing you quickly, they drain your time and money in approvals, years, decades is the norm. Many apply and never build.

I saw a number a long time ago, the regulatory approval process was costing >$50,000 per lot. That was for professional developers in the 1990's. Not everyone has an extra 50 grand to make the payoff to the regulatory mafia. That cost is also averaged over the successful applicants. The cost applied to the people who apply legally and never get approved is in the millions per occurrence.

 

[gadfly56]

Probably not as much as it would mentioning a city/State near me, most inspectors territories here are sized in the hundreds or even thousands of square miles.

Try to understand, NJ is more densely populated than India. The US as a whole has about 3,000+ large municipal areas; 565 of them are in NJ, although some are really tiny. Mentioning the city was all the information anyone needed to know to identify who is being discussed.

 

[macmikeman]

There is another possibility: Greenhorns and uninformed do this alot- stapling the wire less than 1-1/4" from the front edge of the stud and not using nail plates . Guaranteed to fail.

 

[kwired]

I wish that were true, things would be so much more predictable.

Try getting health, wetland, zoning, building permits from a town pursuing a longstanding anti building agenda, which is pretty much everywhere but maybe more aggressive in Mass.

You as a builder or contractor or landowner asking for permits to build your own, just showing up and asking for permits makes you the enemy, the devil. The towns play this game sharply, with lies, fake and arbitrary standards. Either they believe building adds to the school age population and threatens increases in the town budget, or they believe growth is bad in general and there is too much already.

Instead of killing you quickly, they drain your time and money in approvals, years, decades is the norm. Many apply and never build.

I saw a number a long time ago, the regulatory approval process was costing >$50,000 per lot. That was for professional developers in the 1990's. Not everyone has an extra 50 grand to make the payoff to the regulatory mafia. That cost is also averaged over the successful applicants. The cost applied to the people who apply legally and never get approved is in the millions per occurrence.

Almost exactly opposite of what generally happens here. Unless there is concern over environmental impact, most construction is welcome here as it is a sign economy is strong. Otherwise population is generally dwindling in the small communities here, meaning there are less people to bear the costs of public programs/facilities/etc.

 

[iwire]

I wish that were true, things would be so much more predictable.

Try getting health, wetland, zoning, building permits from a town pursuing a longstanding anti building agenda, which is pretty much everywhere but maybe more aggressive in Mass.

You as a builder or contractor or landowner asking for permits to build your own, just showing up and asking for permits makes you the enemy, the devil. The towns play this game sharply, with lies, fake and arbitrary standards. Either they believe building adds to the school age population and threatens increases in the town budget, or they believe growth is bad in general and there is too much already.

Instead of killing you quickly, they drain your time and money in approvals, years, decades is the norm. Many apply and never build.

I saw a number a long time ago, the regulatory approval process was costing >$50,000 per lot. That was for professional developers in the 1990's. Not everyone has an extra 50 grand to make the payoff to the regulatory mafia. That cost is also averaged over the successful applicants. The cost applied to the people who apply legally and never get approved is in the millions per occurrence.

Well, I guess we just do not agree. And considering I work for a company in MA that wires new buildings all the time I don't find it anywhere near what you describe.

 

[MichaelKelley]

Yes, I think that the inspector should have pointed out the location or exact problem to make it easy for repairing and not only in this, but in any testing the tester should explain clearly to make it work.

 

[__dan]

Well, I guess we just do not agree. And considering I work for a company in MA that wires new buildings all the time I don't find it anywhere near what you describe.

Getting the electrical permit when the building permit is already in place is a walk in application, sign, walk out.

What I described was getting permits for raw land, changing the building footprint, or use and subdivision changes. Try getting the permit for a home on raw land or for 20 units of elderly retirement.

If you buy an approved building lot, that permit process has already been done for you. If you buy raw unapproved land, especially land with no sewer line out front, you could get bankrupted before you get permits. There is a pretty long list of people I am aware of that has happened to, people who have lost their land.

Edit to add: try getting the permit for something the town, for any reason but usually anti growth reasons, does not want to issue a permit for.

 

[Sierrasparky]

Getting the electrical permit when the building permit is already in place is a walk in application, sign, walk out.

What I described was getting permits for raw land, changing the building footprint, or use and subdivision changes. Try getting the permit for a home on raw land or for 20 units of elderly retirement.

If you buy an approved building lot, that permit process has already been done for you. If you buy raw unapproved land, especially land with no sewer line out front, you could get bankrupted before you get permits. There is a pretty long list of people I am aware of that has happened to, people who have lost their land.

Edit to add: try getting the permit for something the town, for any reason but usually anti growth reasons, does not want to issue a permit for.

What state is this in?



sounds like a way to fill the town couffer without building.

 

[cowboyjwc]

But at same time if you did a rough in for me on a 200,000 SF building and the only thing you found wrong was one missing KO seal, I would sure hope you will tell me where to find it, or I will be the one giving you a hard time. If I had missing KO seals all over the place that should be a bit more of a sign of incompetence, but there is just one missing ... things happen, and thank you for finding it, I sure hope you are not going to hold up the rest of the project over this one KO seal either just because you are on a power rush (not necessarily you but an inspector in general). I have no problem with inspectors that are fair and understand we all have jobs to do, they are not just working for the contractor, they are also working for the owner.

Probably not going to, until I come out for the third time and that same KO seal, that you promised me that you would put in the first time, is still missing.

Again it depends on the rules/practices of the jurisdiction. As I have said formal correction notices here is an automatic $50.00 reinspection fee, and $100.00 for additional reinspections of the same thing. The idea is not to raise more funds for additional inspections but tocut down on having to reinspect in the first place. If you are on site when inspector is there, the small things like needing a staple or nail plate here or there can be taken care of and no reinspection. If you are not there they don't have much choice but to write it up, and if they do that you will get a letter from the main office with a good description of the problem, where it is at, and the applicable code sections that are in violation. You will also have 14 days to fix it and a billing of $50 for reinspection fees. If you feel you have been a victim of a bad inspector there is always the telephone and chief inspector or executive director to talk to, but you are not getting an approved final inspection until all issues are resolved.

No reinspection fee's here, until about the third time for the same corrections. It would cost us more to send you a letter, than the $50 you're being charged.

 

[iwire]

Getting the electrical permit when the building permit is already in place is a walk in application, sign, walk out.

What I described was getting permits for raw land, changing the building footprint, or use and subdivision changes. Try getting the permit for a home on raw land or for 20 units of elderly retirement.

If you buy an approved building lot, that permit process has already been done for you. If you buy raw unapproved land, especially land with no sewer line out front, you could get bankrupted before you get permits. There is a pretty long list of people I am aware of that has happened to, people who have lost their land.

Edit to add: try getting the permit for something the town, for any reason but usually anti growth reasons, does not want to issue a permit for.

Again, we just don't see it the same way at all.

As far as a town not wanting growth .... Isn't that an issue for the town to decide and not an outsider?

 

[growler]

If you buy an approved building lot, that permit process has already been done for you. If you buy raw unapproved land, especially land with no sewer line out front, you could get bankrupted before you get permits. There is a pretty long list of people I am aware of that has happened to, people who have lost their land.

Those people that buy land not knowing if they can build (expecting to build) on it are what we call suckers.

Before a person purchases a property they really should do their homework and not assume anything.

 

[__dan]

Again, we just don't see it the same way at all.

As far as a town not wanting growth .... Isn't that an issue for the town to decide and not an outsider?

Actually, I see it your way, but that was the person I was prior to ~1988 and my own experience, that took a long time, and did eventually change my mind. I would much prefer to continue seeing it your way and have remained the person I was. Changing someone's mind against their will using coercive methods is brainwashing. So, yes, I admit my defeat. It took a long time but they did change my mind.

I just want to build and my appetite is for the larger, more economical, and more complex. I cannot afford the extortion payouts required of me so I have a ... job going nowhere. But I know it's going nowhere so it's not costing me a fortune.

The zoning law is the worst law ever written and when you get down to it, the law says the decision rests in the minds of the people on that commission. So yes, the law says it is for the town to decide. The law makes no allowance for the difference between 10,000 people going to shop at a Wal Mart and 20 people shopping at the farmer's fruit stand.

But when the average approvals cost for residential building lots exceeds 50 grand per lot, the town is not giving their yes or no in an economical manner. They are deciding only rich people who are either too stupid or too old to have children can build new in that town. They are not giving building approvals for working class homes, occupied by the men who do the actual work of the homes construction. The tradesmen and laborers who make the sacrifice for others are priced out of the market. Less construction means less jobs and more competition for those jobs. Not to mention the increased competition driving down prices, which drives down quality. Do you want to compete on quality, or do you want to compete on the fact that you can get approved to build and your neighbor cannot.

 

[kwired]

No reinspection fee's here, until about the third time for the same corrections. It would cost us more to send you a letter, than the $50 you're being charged.

Why? Do you have attorneys write the letter?

You saying it saves your department money to come out a second time for no fee and still have uncorrected items that were mentioned the first time around?

Even if $50 isn't enough from the viewpoint of the AHJ, it is enough to make the installers think a little harder about wanting to pass inspections the first time around.

 

[cowboyjwc]

Why? Do you have attorneys write the letter?

You saying it saves your department money to come out a second time for no fee and still have uncorrected items that were mentioned the first time around?

Even if $50 isn't enough from the viewpoint of the AHJ, it is enough to make the installers think a little harder about wanting to pass inspections the first time around.

It's the same reason that contractors charge $150 for service calls. You have to include everything and everyone that's involved.

I get paid to be in the field anyway, so whether I go to 5 jobs a day or 15 jobs a day, I get paid all the same. We simply feel that come the third call you're just wasting our time.