6 motions of the hand Article 230.71

[tbcg]

I'm selling a house and the home inspector wrote up a few minor fixable things but also included that the 150A panel is a code violation since it does not have a main breaker (panel was installed previous to 1984 which did not require a main breaker) I tried to explain that it was installed prior to that section of the code being changed but he refuses to drop the issue. My question is can a municipality require you to update your electrical service? In my 43 years in the trade I've never heard of a municipality requiring a homeowner to upgrade their service just because the code changed. Thanks in advance

 

[roger]

Home inspectors are not code enforcement inspectors and they do not represent a municipality. Tell him to pound sand and have a nice day

 

[roger]

BTW, if he were doing his job he could research what code cycle was in effect when the house was built, that is not your job. He's getting paid by someone so he needs to earn his money

 

[texie]

Home inspectors are not code enforcement inspectors and they do not represent a municipality. Tell him to pound sand and have a nice day

Wow, so harsh! Sounds like something I would say.

 

[texie]

This sounds like like a panel from the 70s or prior that is a split buss with 6 mains and 1 of them feeds the lower section of the panel. These were wildly popular in the day for homes.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Another bunch of curmudgeons.... big word for the day.. lol

 

[tbcg]

Thank you everyone. And yes it is a split bus panel which we all know are no longer made. The reason I asked this question is he got the city chief building inspector involved and even he sided with the home inspector. The inspector holds Mr Holt in high esteem so I thought if he read this he might have an awakening.

 

[roger]

Another bunch of curmudgeons.... big word for the day.. lol

I have worked very hard to get that title.

 

[jim dungar]

.... never heard of a municipality requiring a homeowner to upgrade their service just because the code changed. Thanks in advance

Does the municipality require you to implement other changes that have occurred in the NEC, besides the service entrance?

 

[tbcg]

No but they actually ordered FPL to disconnect the service based on the home inspectors report. (He called the city and stated the home owner and previous home inspector committed fraud) Home inspectors report had 4 electrical issues. After meeting with the city the first time, I disproved 3 of 4 with code articles to back them up. (1 I agreed was a code violation) 2nd home inspector turned in the 1st home inspector into the state. (They just resolved his case finding lack of evidence from the 1st inspector) I could not believe a home inspector could cause all this

 

[infinity]

Sorry to say but with Florida and 4 point inspections insurance companies may require the panel to be changed. The insurance lobby controls much more in Florida than in other states.

 

[roger]

I could not believe a home inspector could cause all this

IMO it shows weakness on the code enforcement department

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Thank you everyone. And yes it is a split bus panel which we all know are no longer made. The reason I asked this question is he got the city chief building inspector involved and even he sided with the home inspector. The inspector holds Mr Holt in high esteem so I thought if he read this he might have an awakening.

Mike rarely reads or posts on the forum. He would likely respond to an e-mail.

 

[kwired]

Whether or not an insurance company will insure something is a different ball game.

A HI report is nothing more than a report card on the condition of certain aspects of the home. This panel though no longer meeting current standards was something that was compliant at one time. Most the HI can really do is state it is something no longer compliant for new installs, and it is up to the owner, buyer, or even an insurance company to decide how to proceed with that information. Someone that is inspecting to NEC and taking into consideration the installation date should only be saying it was in compliance at the time it was installed and shouldn't be making any condemnation attempts.

Sort of no different than demanding someone update their 1970 Ford Mustang with antilock brakes, air bags, etc. and maybe also bring it up to current emissions standards.