who's responsible

R

rwood

Member
Location
ri
Occupation
electrician
Had a post earlier about a crossed neutrals when I installed the new breaker noticed the main breaker showed signs of
arcing at one time not arcing now everything working fine. I let the homeowner know right away via text with pictures telling him
he needed to get this replaced asap. now I call for inspection to inspect my work which was only installing a bathroom exhaust
fan tell him about the breaker. Says he will speak to homeowner in the meantime his boss the building inspector ? says the liability
is on me because I was the last one in the panel didn't notice this until everything was done does this make sense ?

thanks Rob

.
 

Attachments

  • perez2.jpeg
    perez2.jpeg
    70.6 KB · Views: 71
it's incredible how government officials always think they have all the authority in the world, and absolutely zero authority to go along with it.

isn't it?
 
I have said that's just as wrong to fail something improperly as it is to pass something improperly.
 
I get this a lot.

The liability is on you because if you get sued in civil court, you will be the only person in the courtroom with a clue about electricity, so you are likely to get blamed, guilty or not, and you will at least be paying lawyer fees. It's not about being right, it's about having the most convincing expert witness. Not necessarily because you would be found guilty of a code violation by a judge if it went to criminal court. The inspector doesn't know that you didn't cause whatever is wrong in that panel anyway.

If the panel is dangerous, "Somebody" is fixing that panel ASAP. That somebody is going to be a licensed electrician. We don't care who. The fact is that the homeowner is going to ask whoever is there to do it unless you guys have totally destroyed your relationship during the course of the job. If not, they will find me a new electrician. Until I have a different electrician in hand and a plan to fix this panel with a deadline for completion in hand, I'm not letting anyone involved "off the hook", and I'm going to stay involved and applying pressure until someone steps up and resolves the issue. Under no circumstance am I closing an open permit with serious problems present until I have someone else who will take responsibility, and I am certainly not giving legal advice to an electrician by telling them they aren't going to be held civilly responsible for something they touched.

Every person involved is going to try to dodge responsibility. The inspector's job is to get hazards mitigated before they hurt someone without allowing delays caused by quibbling over responsibility. Not fixing the problem immediately is not an option. Using an unlicensed electrician is not an option.

If you don't keep a short leash on that stuff, it will drag out for months and years despite clear and present hazards.
 
Not true at all not everyone’s filthy Rich to spend money frivolously…
That mindset is why things are wrong in this world..

Plus, aren’t these things supposed to be tested in the lab and able to stand our faults or is gonna do as the person gonna be without power for a while it’s gonna arc and then they’ll be calling someone to fix it it’s not gonna Blow the world up

The electrician is just to report the issues if the homeowner doesn’t want to get fixed that’s not the electrician’s issue he noted it. He can’t do crap for free and he’s not gonna hold the gun to his head. He doesn’t have the power of the government behind him.
Plus, you have the immunity of the state behind you where you can’t get sued win-win situation for you lose lose for us—-
That’s the government for you
 
Last edited by a moderator:
NEC Inspector said:
I get this a lot.

The liability is on you because if you get sued in civil court, you will be the only person in the courtroom with a clue about electricity, so you are likely to get blamed, guilty or not, and you will at least be paying lawyer fees. It's not about being right, it's about having the most convincing expert witness. Not necessarily because you would be found guilty of a code violation by a judge if it went to criminal court. The inspector doesn't know that you didn't cause whatever is wrong in that panel anyway.

If the panel is dangerous, "Somebody" is fixing that panel ASAP. That somebody is going to be a licensed electrician. We don't care who. The fact is that the homeowner is going to ask whoever is there to do it unless you guys have totally destroyed your relationship during the course of the job. If not, they will find me a new electrician. Until I have a different electrician in hand and a plan to fix this panel with a deadline for completion in hand, I'm not letting anyone involved "off the hook", and I'm going to stay involved and applying pressure until someone steps up and resolves the issue. Under no circumstance am I closing an open permit with serious problems present until I have someone else who will take responsibility, and I am certainly not giving legal advice to an electrician by telling them they aren't going to be held civilly responsible for something they touched.

Every person involved is going to try to dodge responsibility. The inspector's job is to get hazards mitigated before they hurt someone without allowing delays caused by quibbling over responsibility. Not fixing the problem immediately is not an option. Using an unlicensed electrician is not an option.

If you don't keep a short leash on that stuff, it will drag out for months and years despite clear and present hazards.
Click to expand...
so what you are saying once that panel cover comes off the electrician is responsible for what's inside ? what if I was quoting the job still responsible ? it all worked out my work was inspected and passed homeowner had another licensed electrician pull a permit and replace the panel Thanks for everyone's input
 
rwood said:
so what you are saying once that panel cover comes off the electrician is responsible for what's inside ? what if I was quoting the job still responsible ? it all worked out my work was inspected and passed homeowner had another licensed electrician pull a permit and replace the panel Thanks for everyone's input
Click to expand...
He can correct me if I am wrong, but I read it as that you will likely be "found" responsible by those lacking knowledge regardless of the facts, especially in civil court. To me the most infamous example of this is still the McDonalds coffee lawsuit. I don't see how any sane person would blame McDonalds because a stupid woman spilled hot coffee in her lap.
 
Strathead said:
He can correct me if I am wrong, but I read it as that you will likely be "found" responsible by those lacking knowledge regardless of the facts, especially in civil court. To me the most infamous example of this is still the McDonalds coffee lawsuit. I don't see how any sane person would blame McDonalds because a stupid woman spilled hot coffee in her lap.
Click to expand...
Exactly correct.
rwood said:
it all worked out my work was inspected and passed homeowner had another licensed electrician pull a permit and replace the panel
Click to expand...
That's almost always how it works once the dust settles. When an inspector comes out and is concerned about something you didn't do, you just help coordinate a little bit, give the inspector the owner's contact info and anything else you have that will help them, and just see what happens for a few days. 99% of the time everything works out just fine.

If it's been a week or two, and the homeowner refuses to deal with the problem and the code office is still on your case to fix stuff you didn't do, then you escalate to their bosses and raise a stink. After a week or two, it should be very easy to prove who the problem in the equation is.
 
Strathead said:
I don't see how any sane person would blame McDonalds because a stupid woman spilled hot coffee in her lap.
Click to expand...
Because McDonalds had already been fined for previous injuries from their hot coffee, something like 140°F. The women suffered 3rd degree burns to her groin requiring mutiple surgeries and lifetime scarring.

The more stupid things include the packaging with warnings that staples have sharp points.
 
Last edited:
ptonsparky said:
Yes, it was not a one time thing.
Click to expand...
jim dungar said:
Because McDonalds had already been fined for previous injuries from their hot coffee, something like 140°F. The women suffered 3rd degree burns to her groin requiring mutiple surgeries and lifetime scarring.

The more stupid things include the packaging with warnings that staples have sharp points.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I am more in to personal responsibility. Coffee is hot. Always has been. I'd bet it wasn't that lady's first time getting a McDonalds coffee either. The ideal temperature to drink coffee is 120 to 140 degrees. The brewing temp is 195 degrees. I would expect coffee to be ANYWHERE between those temps when served. The woman SPILLED the coffee. If McDonalds had poured it in her lap, I would agree.
 
ptonsparky said:
Yes, it was not a one time thing.
Click to expand...
Way before McDonalds got sued I noticed that they served their coffee really hot. In the mornings I used to stop for breakfast and the coffee was so hot there was no way anyone could drink it. And being I'd be on my way to a job and didn't have time to sit and wait for it to cool. I'd always end up getting spilled inside the truck because I'd have to get moving before it cooled enough to drink.
 
Strathead said:
The woman SPILLED the coffee. If McDonalds had poured it in her lap, I would agree.
Click to expand...
This is a case of the customer being wronged by a giant corporation that felt it was cheaper to pay fines then change their business practices. The jury was so incensed at Mc Donalds' actions they came back with a punitive award 100 times more than the simple $20,000 medical costs the lady was asking for.

There are many other examples of lawsuits and settlements that are silly, if not stupid, this is just not one of them

www.tortmuseum.org

Liebeck v. McDonalds

The famous hot coffee case explained.
www.tortmuseum.org www.tortmuseum.org
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top