Correction notices

[paul]

After reading George's "I am the AHJ" thread I'm left to wonder how many inspectors do not write down the violation on their correction notices. I know it's required here for them to do so, and for the most part they are pretty specific on what/where the violation is. To just say straps need grounding without or no sheet rock screws without quoting the specific section that's in violation, just seems inefficient to me. And then when asked which section of the code that was violated to respond with, 'I don't have the whole code memorized'....well that's nothing short of incompetence.

 

[mdshunk]

Re: Correction notices

I normally don't get red tags that had a code citation unless it was something really obscure. Then it had the code citation.

 

[apauling]

Re: Correction notices

paul: are we having a mad at the inspector day. It never was nor will be the responsibility of the inspecting body to quality control, punch list, itemize with code sections, or otherwise critique a project. Special inspectors hired by the contractor may have to do so, but jurisdictional inspectors are only required to do what their employers require. In almost all states (maybe all) the responsibility falls on the contractor to build the project to code. Period. On many government projects, the failure may not come until the end of the project requiring major redo's. Most counties and cities are helping ("for the public good") by timely inspections. There generally are no laws requiring the jurisdictions to conduct inspections in any manner whatsoever.

The job description does not include memorizing any code book, and your calling that incompetence would only point out your bias. It also implies that you have never asked a question here, and think little of those that do. You might argue that the questions were all over conflicting or unclear sections. There are some great big and funny and sad topics that make it seem that the question of code vagaries is quite prevalent, but the most questions are what code and where. I guess all those posters are incompetent.

In many jurisdictions inspectors are combo inspectors, doing all the trades, with upgrades to each code every cycle and product research continually. Some are given busy days with little time to really inspect, and sometimes they have slow days to look closer. At least for the first few years, most are poorly paid.

However, I do not think all inspectors are competent and professional, and some just do not belong in the field.

paul

 

[iwire]

Re: Correction notices

Originally posted by apauling:
It never was nor will be the responsibility of the inspecting body to quality control, punch list, itemize with code sections,

I believe in order to write a legitimate red tag a code section must be quoted.

I can't say for sure because I have never seen one. We are on site with the inspector and he either signs the building card or he does not.

 

[davedottcom]

Re: Correction notices

Originally posted by iwire:
I believe in order to write a legitimate red tag a code section must be quoted.

Absolutely, without validation, it's just an opinion.


Dave

 

[apauling]

Re: Correction notices

Not signing an inspection card is not a red tag. A red tag is a cease and desist order, and is an official document. It does not need to itemize all the code violations. It may merely state a condition.

Failing an inspection hardly deserves a red tag. Most failures are just "not ready", "correct and proceed" where the contractor is trusted by the inspector or work is visible at a later date, and the hated "correct and reinspect". Sometimes the inspector doesn't have to produce evidence of where he has been, and just says to the contractor to fix a problem without a reinspection fee. There is an assumption that a "not ready for inspection" must contain a punch list or code violations is erroneous. Sometimes the code violations are too numerous to list. It is NOT the inspectors job to itemize them. He may list new ones on the next inspection ad infinitum. Because some contractors have got some inspectors to do this, in no way actually proves the requirement. Please cite local ordinances stipulating that this listing requirement exists. Please do not cite requirements for red tags, as pointed out to those so uninformed, are not inspection failutres, but cease and desist orders.

As far as red tags go, these are gross violations and bring into question the ethics and comptency of those receiving them. They hardly belong in a topic about inspections.

paul

 

[ryan_618]

Re: Correction notices

We are not required to include the reference on our citations, although I try to in an effort to keep myself sharp on the different code sections.

 

[George Stolz]

Re: Correction notices

Most items cited are common knowledge oversights that don't really require proof they exist (supporting cables, etc) For more unusual items, it wouldn't hurt for the AHJ to look around the code a bit and see if they can find it. If not, there arises a question of whether or not it's a violation. IMO.

I don't expect to see references on a correction notice. But I'd be impressed to.

I do expect to get a reference if I take time out of my day to ask for one.

[ July 02, 2005, 02:29 PM: Message edited by: georgestolz ]

 

[artc]

Re: Correction notices

In the State of Michigan:

80.23. Violations. If it is found that any electrical equipment does not conform to the provisions of the code, then the enforcing agency shall notify, in writing, the person who installs, or who is responsible for installing, the electrical equipment, in accordance with section 12(3) of 1972 PA 230, MCL 125.1512(3), of the defect, misuse, or violation. Violations and penalties shall be as specified in section 23 of 1972 PA 230, MCL 125.1523.

 

[apauling]

Re: Correction notices

artc: I hope you weren't citing a section to support the idea that the code section must be cited, as cited section still doesn't say code section must be cited, only that notice is in writing. That's a few too many "cite"s.

It generally is required if requested to provide the actual code violation, but it is generally not done in the field, as often is the case that only some code books go with an inspector, time is crucial.

If guys really wanted that punch list the fees could be raised and the waiting time for inspections might go to a couple of days. Shut the job down, fix a few items and then shut the job down again. Sounds like a good idea. All of you complainers should start lobbying soon. I expect to hear about the new rule real soon.

paul.

 

[mdshunk]

Re: Correction notices

Originally posted by apauling:
As far as red tags go, these are gross violations and bring into question the ethics and comptency of those receiving them. They hardly belong in a topic about inspections.

Perhaps there is a difference in local jargon here. What you call a "correction notice", in the jurisdictions in which I work are written on red tags. A cease and decist or stop work is written on a fluorescent orange paper. Sorry if I added the term "red tag" into the mix when it doesn't really apply in all areas.

Apauling's assertion that a red tag brings into question ethics and competency is somewhere between unwise and uncool. Especially since we now know that the term "red tag" has different meanings.

[ July 02, 2005, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: mdshunk ]

 

[roger]

Re: Correction notices

Paul, this is not a one way street. It seems as though I remember a few years ago someone posted a link to a case where the Municipality, AHJ, and the Inspector were sued and lost for a bogus stop work order hidden behind a supposed code violation.

I have no idea where to find it, but I'm sure there have been more, maybe someone else will know.

I may be thinking about some business literature I get at work, but it was intersting that there was some conversation in the article about what liability a Municipality, AHJ, and Inspector can carry for lost revenues and distress caused by their wrongfull interpretation and or malicious wrong doings.

BTW, I'm not trying to bash any inspectors, I personally have a very good relationship and have respect for those I deal with.


Roger

[ July 02, 2005, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: roger ]

 

[paul]

Re: Correction notices

Originally posted by apauling:

...The job description does not include memorizing any code book, and your calling that incompetence would only point out your bias. It also implies that you have never asked a question here, and think little of those that do....
paul

Somebody {do something bad to} {Moderator?s Note: Edited to remove or replace disrespectful, crude, or otherwise inappropriate words.} your oatmeal this morning? You're comments are way off base and really aren't worth rebuttle. You should really stop and think before you post.

As I stated in my original post, the inspectors here site the code section that was violated if they turn you down. So, to me, it seems odd that many other places don't get the courtesy of knowing the code they violated when they are turned down. I have yet to see a correction notice without the article referenced, whether it be the state's jurisdiction or the city's.

[ July 02, 2005, 08:49 PM: Message edited by: charlie b ]

 

[physis]

Re: Correction notices

By mdshunk:

Perhaps there is a difference in local jargon here. What you call a "correction notice", in the jurisdictions in which I work are written on red tags. A cease and decist or stop work is written on a fluorescent orange paper. Sorry if I added the term "red tag" into the mix when it doesn't really apply in all areas.

The terminology looks funny to me too. Out here a red tag is a stop work order. A correction notice is what we're talking about here when someone says red tag. I can't remember ever seeing an actual stop work order discussed here.

It would be fun to see one but I don't think most guys would be very proud to say "yeah, sniff, got me a STOP WORK ORDER today".

 

[sfav8r]

Re: Correction notices

Maybe everyone should take a happy pill.

I think the bottom line (in the real world) is this.

If the inspector isn't going to sign off, obviously he'll tell you why. "Hey Mr. GC, I noticed that you have 37.5 of IMC running down this wall with no straps and it terminates in pancake box with 72 connections."

Maybe he'll write it up with the actual code numbers, maybe he won't because he assumes you might actually know what he's talking about.

I can see only two reason that you need the actual numbers. The first being that you are not familiar with the code section and want to look it up and the second is you dispute what is required and would like to see it.

In either case, you can always say, "I'm not familiar with that requirement, (hand him YOUR code book) and say "could you point me in the right direction."

I think there is a huge difference between saying "You gatta prove it buddy" and saying "Could you point me in the right direction."

It works the other way with inspections too. An Inspector doesn't need to say "wholly Sh**, what were you thinking when you installed that."

I made the mistake once of responding poorly to an inappropriate comment an inspector made to me.

The inspector didn't site any actual NEC violations on the reinspection, but for some reason he didn't like the fact that I used a 90 degree elbow instead of bending the EMT (the reason actually seemed quite obvious to me), so the inspector says "what were you thinking with a 90 here instead of bending the EMT? When I was in the field by boss would have fired me for using a $4 el where a bend would work.", I replied, "I guess he valued his $4 more than he valued your time."

He shouldn't have wasted our time with editorial comments and I shouldn't have made the dumb response...can't we all just get along?

 

[physis]

Re: Correction notices

By sfav8r:

I can see only two reason that you need the actual numbers. The first being that you are not familiar with the code section and want to look it up and the second is you dispute what is required and would like to see it.

There is a third. It's the basis for the violation sited.

can't we all just get along?

I think most of the time we do. I get along with the inspectors in my area. Roger says he likes his inspectors. Sometimes humans have a tendency to butt heads though. That's where the code numbers remove some of the attitude from the equation so we can consider the work instead.

 

[apauling]

Re: Correction notices

Paul 89: I am not the {sulky} {Moderator?s Note: Edited to remove or replace disrespectful, crude, or otherwise inappropriate words.} one today. You are the one who called anyone who doesn't know the code by heart incompetent. Or can't you remember what you wrote?

I know that this is a two way street and having been on both sides, I am only arguing the stated idea that the code section needs to be cited. It doesn't. it would be nice, but the times when it is really helpful is usually with less commonly seen problems, or it is with obvious items. Although this is an electrical discussion site, many of the inspectors out there are doing multiple discipline inspections for far less pay than the tradesman, let alone the contractors. They are employees. Most of them are trying to do the best job that they can.

Inspectors often move from one jurisdiction to another for a variety of reasons, often taking a local ordinance or practice with them to the new jurisdiction. With the change from the Uniform codes to the I Codes, many inspectors are playing catch up as fast as they can. Politics gets thrown in the middle and officials sometimes meddle.

Yes, counties have been sued for delays that were for bogus code. Do you think they won for delays for code not cited on inspection tag when the reason for failure was later shown to be a code violation? show me one.

The red tag issue was not obvious to me. As others have pointed out, it is common to have an inspection card that gets signed, and that is the way it is on both coasts. A red tag has always been a stop work order every where i worked. Sorry for the mistake.

Some of the big houses I worked on had pages of corrections, they wouldn't fit on a tag. I had to be right or the lead inspector would do the "who-do-you-think-you-are" dance at my desk. I was inspecting his buddies. I had to eat crow when wrong, and when right, he would say, "now, you are being picky". But I still didn't have to write the code section on the correction notice. just had to find it later.

There are some big jobs around here where the inspector bills for the time as there is so much individual attention to on site changes. I was being only half humorous about the idea of paying for the punch list/code referenced. Petition the jurisdiction you are in if you want that. The inspector can spend a lot of time sitting in the truck to verify the code sections, and a lot more time on the job finding more things for the list.

paul the anti-depressents are working well. I don't care that I'm depressed.

[ July 02, 2005, 08:48 PM: Message edited by: charlie b ]

 

[stud696981]

Re: Correction notices

Unfortunately there are too many inspectors who fail jobs because something wasn't done to THEIR STANDARDS. When asked what code was broken they can't cite a specific code, just it's a violation. If I screw something up, I don't expect an inspector to cite specific references, when I can see the mistake. However, when the inspector comes up with something off the wall and has no backing reference........that's a problem. When an inspector holds up a job for something that is not on the books, that becomes an even bigger problem.

 

[physis]

Re: Correction notices

I don't mind if there's not a code number every time. But I do mind that you can't just get the code number in less than two or three days sometimes for I don't even care what reasons. I have work to do too. Maybe if there were someone at the building department I could get on the phone. I have to leave a message. And wait. a lot of times call back again tommorow. And wait.

So just give me the code already. Forget about the city can't afford it or whatever. Permits aren't free. This isn't benifit work.

The city has never let me off the hook because I didn't have time to look up a code.

All that aside I do have compasion for the next guy and his plight, but this stuff is work.

 

[jwelectric]

Re: Correction notices

As an electrical contractor I found over the years that there are all types of electricians in this world. There is the guy that works every day, is always on time and loyal as a good dog and worth about the same on the job. Then there is the guy that is out a couple of days a month, always late but he is a hard worker and knows his stuff. Then there is the guy that is constantly trying to learn new ways and works at staying current with the codes.

These same words can be said about inspectors. As an instructor of inspectors one of the lessons I try to teach is for them to never think of themselves as being inspectors. I try to get them to think of their selves as Code Enforcement Officials.

I had one guy that had been in inspections for over 10 years and had changed jurisdictions and was now getting his Level II electrical. He had become complicit and had the attitude that if it didn?t look right then it wasn?t right. He turned up his nose at the thought of being called a Code Enforcement Official. His attitude was he was the authority having jurisdiction and nothing else mattered.

He now likes the title of Code Enforcement Official and from what I hear is a great guy. All this is just to say that if you take a class from me I will teach you that being a good Code Enforcement Official is a full time learning experience. As a Code Enforcement Official the responsible is yours alone to know the codes that you enforce and to stay current with them. This is the difference between an inspector and a Code Enforcement Official.

Lesson one: Never turn something down that you can?t back up with an article and section.