bypassing integral furnace "circuit breaker"

[YaakYaak]

Hi guys, I hope this isn't a repost of something already discussed.... I have found a couple threads discussing the opposite of my question, but none that talk about my case.
I frequently help maintenance guys in an apartment complex who are a little in over their heads on electrical issues. (The business structure is complicated, and irrelevant, but I am employed by the owner of many commercial and residential properties to deal with all of their electrical maintenance, troubleshooting, and when I'm lucky, construction. But on this one large apartment complex, they only call me when maintenance realizes they don't know what's going on.) The maintenance tech called me to ask if he can bypass the integral disconnect on the furnace, since there is a readily accessible subpanel feeding the furnace less than 2 feet away from the furnace. He wants to do this because the integral disconnect (he thinks, but he's unsure, that it is a circuit breaker built into the furnace, and not just a circuit breaker shaped disconnect built into the furnace) isn't allowing any power through it, and new breakers are too expensive. (Yes, the property is currently in very bad financial straits.)
I don't think there is anything in the NEC explicitly prohibiting this. He just wants to use a single device as both the disconnecting means and the OCPD, which is a very common thing to do. The thing that is making me uncomfortable is bypassing a manufacturer-installed safety device. Emotionally, it just doesn't seem like a responsible thing to do. But logically, I don't see anything wrong with it. And that's where you guys come in...
Am I missing something here? Is this actually against code or some other rule? Or am I just being overly worried about nothing?
(I am aware that the arrangement of having maintenance techs performing skilled labor that should be reserved for licensed experts is incorrect. I am not in a position in my career that I can put my foot down about anything other than insisting I do MY work properly. I can't change what happens in other parts of the company.)
Sorry for rambling. Thanks!

 

[infinity]

The thing that is making me uncomfortable is bypassing a manufacturer-installed safety device. Emotionally, it just doesn't seem like a responsible thing to do.

Sounds like you've answered your own question. I would think that altering the equipment would violate the listing. So the question is does the installation become unsafe? Maybe not but if something were to happen to the equipment then the person who altered the equipment would likely get blamed.

 

[Jraef]

Sounds like you've answered your own question. I would think that altering the equipment would violate the listing. So the question is does the installation become unsafe? Maybe not but if something were to happen to the equipment then the person who altered the equipment would likely get blamed.

I agree. Bypassing any circuit protective device exposes you to extreme liability risk, even if done at the behest of the owner, based on the precept of “you are the professional so you should have known better”. This is one of the reasons things like this are an Article 110 code violation.

That said, I would investigate what the device is and if it is a circuit breaker and is tripping, chances are that it is doing its job because something else is wrong. I hate the fact that so many people Ass-U-Me that if a breaker trips, replace the breaker. To me, the definition of a “defective” breaker is one that does NOT trip when it is supposed to. I understand that nuisance tripping can happen, but that is the exception, not the rule so replacing (or in this case bypassing) it shouldn’t be the first response.

If in the other hand this is just a switch, I would just replace the switch.

 

[infinity]

Bypassing any circuit protective device exposes you to extreme liability risk, even if done at the behest of the owner, based on the precept of “you are the professional so you should have known better”. This is one of the reasons things like this are an Article 110 code violation.

Who knows it could be just as safe without it but if the place burns down the first question will be why didn't you make a proper repair by replacing the damaged part.

 

[YaakYaak]

Thanks. As Infinity pointed out, I guess I really did know the answer to this one. I passed along my (our) professional opinion that it is not a good idea. As far as assuming it's a good circuit breaker just doing its job by tripping when something is wrong, that does not see to be the case here. The breaker/switch cannot be reset; it doesn't let power through regardless of its position.

 

[retirede]

Thanks. As Infinity pointed out, I guess I really did know the answer to this one. I passed along my (our) professional opinion that it is not a good idea. As far as assuming it's a good circuit breaker just doing its job by tripping when something is wrong, that does not see to be the case here. The breaker/switch cannot be reset; it doesn't let power through regardless of its position.

It may have failed due to some downstream fault. It’s best to understand the situation before taking any remedial action.