90.4 Code enforcement ? Inspector Mike?s way!

Status
Not open for further replies.
jxofaltrds

jxofaltrds

Inspector Mike®
Location
Mike P. Columbus Ohio
Occupation
ESI, PI, RBO
Often I post here debating what I think the code says. And most of the time I am asked ?how can you require that??

Never said I required it ?just said that I think the code says it.

Before you attack me ? attack my argument(s).

I take a liberal interpretation of the code when ?applying? it.

Sometimes I give a reference that is not applicable to the question at hand but it goes to how I came to a conclusion.

Rarely, (not always) am I challenge with a code section that tells me that I am wrong. I?m just told that my opinion is wrong.

If you are a contractor and want to get an inspector to change his mind use the code.

I have lost many a battle as a contractor but have the respect of the inspectors because I use the code to argue with them not just ?I don?t like your decision?.

I know that if the code does not prohibit it that it is permitted but try to tell me why it should be allowed.
 
jxofaltrds said:
...
I know that if the code does not prohibit it that it is permitted but try to tell me why it should be allowed.
Click to expand...
I don't have to...You, as the inspector, have to tell my why and what section prohibits it. If you can't do that, then I can install it my way.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
I don't have to...You, as the inspector, have to tell my why and what section prohibits it. If you can't do that, then I can install it my way.
Click to expand...

I'd say that's spot on.
I see things almost daily that I would prefer not be done but unless the Code prohibits it --continue on. My primary job is to enforce Code... if I can't show you the violation in the book it's not one.
 
Somebody on this forum once posted that he knew an inspector that wore a hat that said 90.4 on it. If it was you, please own up to it and tell us about it again. It was a hoot.

Like it's been said...if you can't tell me which code article I'm violating, I'm not violating one.

I recently heard that India has a legal system opposite of ours. If they haven't made a law allowing it, it's illegal. Anybody have the truth on that?
 
One of our local inspectors wanted to have me install bonding bushings on a PVC MA that was coming through concentric KO's. The whole run of pipe was PVC.

He wouldn't pass the building without that bushing. I didn't agree at all, but I put it on there .

It was faster to get one off the truck and unhook everything and install it than it would have been to make him mad at me and drag his feet coming back around. Then who knows, maybe he would have gotten out his code magnifying glass and driven me insane......
 
augie47 said:
I'd say that's spot on.
I see things almost daily that I would prefer not be done but unless the Code prohibits it --continue on. My primary job is to enforce Code... if I can't show you the violation in the book it's not one.
Click to expand...

Awesome, I wish you could smack some sense into some of the inspectors around me.


I will also say that I often do things that are code compliant but I don't necessarily believe are the best ways to do the job. I have to do things as per plan and / or within the customers budget.
 
Missed my point.

If I give you a code section as to the violation why is OK for the contractor just to say "you are wrong".

Yes a little testy because I try to explain my point and saying "Mike your are wrong" is not an argument.

Not everyone here does that.
 
jxofaltrds said:
...If I give you a code section as to the violation why is OK for the contractor just to say "you are wrong".

Yes a little testy because I try to explain my point and saying "Mike your are wrong" is not an argument.
Click to expand...
I agree, that's not an argument... so quit trying to explain your point and let them explain theirs. After all, you are not going to change your mind unless they persuade you, right?
 
jxofaltrds said:
OK. :thumbsup:

Maybe that's what really bothers me is they don't try. My mind is always open.
Click to expand...
Let them not try... :p When they do, you can explain your point if theirs doesn't convince you, or cede if it does. You will earn their respect.

If left with indecision, you have an avenue (hint) to discuss the finer points... :D
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
I don't have to...You, as the inspector, have to tell my why and what section prohibits it. If you can't do that, then I can install it my way.
Click to expand...

I agree and I see a real problem with an inspector who without any code basis tells you "I want it done this way" and then spends an inordinate amount of time trying to justify his position instead of just saying "I was incorrect". Fortunately here in NJ there's a higher authority to appeal too when an inspector is trying to make up his own version of the code. There are areas of interpretation within the NEC that give the inspector some leeway in determining what's required and then there's the inspector who simply tells you he wants it his way because it's a good idea and quotes 90.4. I hear stories in CEU classes all of the time about inspectors who say "well I make them do this way" even though it's not required. Those rogue inspectors need to be put in their place.
 
We used to have a very strict inspector that would come to the site, NEC in hand with sticky notes in it marking pages he would visit to illustrate to the contractors exactly why he was gigging them.

Great guy, too. Just don't try to win a code argument with him. Actually, there was never much arguing with him. Any argument would be with the code book.

It didn't take long to realize arguing with any inspector that showed up with a well used and marked code book was not used to making mistakes and they also didn't make up rules.

I have had inspectors ask me to do things they wanted done. They admitted it wasn't a code issue and explained why they made their request. Every time I complied and the cost was minimal compared to the learning experience.

A good, experienced inspector will do two things. One, enforce the NEC as written, and second, assure the contractor that anything suggested beyond the NEC is just that, a suggestion, and the intent is to keep living things and buildings safe and sound. It also does not hurt to remind a contractor that the NEC is a bare minimum.
 
Mike, I think the biggest problem is when you are completely wrong you refuse to admit it.

You will search the code for an article that may have a single word that resembles something in the discussion but has nothing to do with the issue at hand and say it some how enforces your call.
Then you use the 90.4 as substantiation.

Roger
 
K8MHZ said:
We used to have a very strict inspector that would come to the site, NEC in hand with sticky notes in it marking pages he would visit to illustrate to the contractors exactly why he was gigging them.

Great guy, too. Just don't try to win a code argument with him. Actually, there was never much arguing with him. Any argument would be with the code book.

It didn't take long to realize arguing with any inspector that showed up with a well used and marked code book was not used to making mistakes and they also didn't make up rules.

I have had inspectors ask me to do things they wanted done. They admitted it wasn't a code issue and explained why they made their request. Every time I complied and the cost was minimal compared to the learning experience.

A good, experienced inspector will do two things. One, enforce the NEC as written, and second, assure the contractor that anything suggested beyond the NEC is just that, a suggestion, and the intent is to keep living things and buildings safe and sound. It also does not hurt to remind a contractor that the NEC is a bare minimum.
Click to expand...

All that is fine and dandy but, if all I want is a Kia that's built to minimum safety standards then I am fine. An inspector can suggest all day and if it doesn't increase my cost I might consider it, otherwise I'll say thanks but no thanks.

As far as the well worn code book and not used to making mistakes, inspectors find that when they see me pull mine out.

And finally, I will add to your good experienced inspector list, he/she is still learning and open to discussion and is not afraid to admit when he/she is wrong

Roger
 
I agree with Roger-- in the last thread about grounding electrode conductor protection it always came down to protection from damage. Despite the fact that the code allows similar scenarios without protection it seems you use that ambiguous article to support your reason. No one can argue a subjective viewpoint but when shown how it makes no sense you appear to ignore the similarities and go back to protection from damage. To be honest, I felt like we were being trolled.
 
Two things an inspector can do to impress a contractor.

1) Know the code, inspect by the code and make few mistakes.
2) Readily accept the mistakes you do make and thank the contractor for educating you.
 
I never say "because that's what I want" because the book is to big for me to need to make stuff up.

But I think some of the point trying to be made is when I go on a job, tell someone what the code says and then have to listen to the "I've never heard that before" or "no one else is calling that", etc. Then I tell the contractor that if he want's to argue to go get the code book out of his truck and show me where I'm wrong. No code book, we're done talking. Yes I have mine in my truck, but I'm not the one trying to prove a point. In fact I have three in my truck. I also have added the pages that talk about smoke alarms, ADA, work in suspended ceilings, etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top