energized white conductor in the panel?

[busman]

I don't have my '99 code book with me, but I passed my Master's exam based on that cycle and am fairly sure that re-identification of the white wire was required in that code cycle.

Mark

 

[wasasparky]

I don't think the inspector can be held accountable.
Here's how he stated the problem.
"A white wire enters the AC breaker. White wires are only to be utilized as neutrals, not ?hot? wires.

Wrong -hold him accountable.

The AC wires are also undersized for this breaker. 40 amp breakers require a minimum #8 copper wire; the present wires are #10.

Wrong -hold him accountable.

Recommend a licensed electrician be consulted for further evaluation and/or repairs.

Recommend more training for the inspector?

I think it's the licensed electrician who should be blamed if he replaced the breaker, while such replacement was not necessary. Don't you all agree?

It sounds to me the electrician was hired to do what he was told. (Although he should of said this is BS?)

Also, I called the AHJ and they said that they are still enforcing 98/99 code, and that white wire going into 220V breaker is ok with them since that's how they used to do it in the past.

And it was/is not a code violation? (not sure about the 99, but don't recall it ever being required)

Based on the information you all provided I think the breaker replacement was not necessary and I think a licensed electrician should know that, shouldn't he ?

Yes, and that breaker he was told to change did not result in a violation.

What should be my next recourse?

Have the inspector pay the electrician to put the 40A breaker back.

 

[jumper]

We recently purchased a house and during an inspection I noticed that the 40A breaker at the main going to Air Conditioner unit had black and white #8 energized wires going to it. The seller had an electrician fix this error. In doing so the electrician replaced the breaker to a 30A and taped the white wire black.

what should be my next recourse?

Thanks

Zazmat, who made the decision to change the breaker? You, the seller, the electrician, or the inspector? It is not totally clear to me.
Never mind I reread your other post more clearly. It was inspector. His mistake, his problem to fix.

 

[wasasparky]

Also, I called the AHJ and they said that they are still enforcing 98/99 code, and that white wire going into 220V breaker is ok with them since that's how they used to do it in the past.

And it was/is not a code violation? (not sure about the 99, but don't recall it ever being required)

Looks like i'll be eating a few of my words...

 

[charlie]

. . . What should be my next recourse? . .

Do nothing until the 30 ampere circuit breaker starts tripping . . . if it ever does. Keep the 40 ampere circuit breaker for replacement if the 30 ampere circuit breaker starts tripping. It is time to chalk this up to experience and walk away. Besides, look at how much you have learned.

 

[infinity]

I don't think the inspector can be held accountable.

Here's how he stated the problem.

"A white wire enters the AC breaker. White wires are only to be utilized as neutrals, not ?hot? wires. The AC wires are also undersized for this breaker. 40 amp breakers require a minimum #8 copper wire; the present wires are #10. Recommend a licensed electrician be consulted for further evaluation and/or repairs."

The inspector is incorrect. The electrician may or may not have known that but he simply did the job based on the information provided by the inspector. IMO they're both at fault but the inspector should assume most of the blame for missing the obvious in the first place.

 

[LarryFine]

I think it's the licensed electrician who should be blamed if he replaced the breaker, while such replacement was not necessary. Don't you all agree?

I obviously do:

I think the 40a breaker should be re-installed and the seller refunded the money.

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

I don't think the inspector can be held accountable.

Here's how he stated the problem.

"A white wire enters the AC breaker. White wires are only to be utilized as neutrals, not ?hot? wires. The AC wires are also undersized for this breaker. 40 amp breakers require a minimum #8 copper wire; the present wires are #10. Recommend a licensed electrician be consulted for further evaluation and/or repairs."

I think it's the licensed electrician who should be blamed if he replaced the breaker, while such replacement was not necessary. Don't you all agree?

Also, I called the AHJ and they said that they are still enforcing 98/99 code, and that white wire going into 220V breaker is ok with them since that's how they used to do it in the past.

Based on the information you all provided I think the breaker replacement was not necessary and I think a licensed electrician should know that, shouldn't he ?

what should be my next recourse?

I really appreciate responses from this great bunch here. I am an engineer and not a licensed electrician and this site has proved very uselful in enhancing my understanding of some of these things

Really is no next step. Your good to go. Should you ever start having a breaker tripping you could put a 40 back in. The electrician might have changed the breaker to a 30 just to not going thru a long fight. While ugly your panel is safe.
Stick around this site sometime we need an engineer.

 

[brian john]

Really is no next step. Your good to go. Should you ever start having a breaker tripping you could put a 40 back in. The electrician might have changed the breaker to a 30 just to not going thru a long fight.

If the 30 holds no harm no foul.

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

If the 30 holds no harm no foul.

As the unit gets older it might start harder and trip it. Easy $10 fix

 

[wasasparky]

As the unit gets older it might start harder and trip it. Easy $10 fix

Unless you need to hire an electrican to do it.

 

[George Stolz]

I think it's the licensed electrician who should be blamed if he replaced the breaker, while such replacement was not necessary. Don't you all agree?

Yes, the electrician should have addressed the home inspector's error.

 

[zazmat]

Appreciate the input from all of you. It has definitely been a learning experience for me. I commend you all for your knowledge and willingness to help

Thanks
zazmat

 

[wasasparky]

Yes, the electrician should have addressed the home inspector's error.

So the electrician gets hired to change out the breaker, and he is obligated to try to screw himself out of time and money?

I'm not sure how things were phrased to him, but if he was hired to do it, and told an inspector is requiring it, then he should not be afraid to do it. He may not have pressed enough to find out if it was a home inspector or AHJ inspector...depending how things were phrased, and all the detail we are missing, it could go mant ways...

No matter what, the electrician should get paid - and not "fix" anything for free. The person who Required unecessary work should pay.

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

Yes, the electrician should have addressed the home inspector's error.

Lets think this out for a minute. The man sent to do this job likely is not a master and perhaps not even a journeyman. His work order says tape the white wire and change the breaker to AC unit to a 30. Thats exactly what he did and since wasnt told to put white tape on neutral he didn't. Had he even known better and called his boss he likely been told change it anyways. This was a 15 minute repair plus drive time. May have even been given a flat charge so he is not wasting any time over this. On a job as simple as this i might even sent a first year helper. Will assume this problem that really wasnt a problem was the result of a HI. Wonder what else on report was wrong or even missing. Lets hope you got a great price on this house and savings will been enough to fix a few things. House in Tampa are going for 50 cents on the dollar of what they sold for 4 years ago.

 

[George Stolz]

Let's think this out for a minute. You're called to a home to do an unnecessary repair at the beckon of a home inspector. Perhaps it would be a good idea to have this event in recent memory next time you get a similar call, so that you charge for your time regardless - and give them a decent electrical inspection while you are there, pointing out all the different issues the HI missed. Could be a lucrative opportunity in the works there.

 

[rt66electric]

Wirenuts in Panel??

Wirenuts in Panel??

Almost every inspector would have cow(maybee amule) if he saw a red wire-nut in a newbuild panel..

Also isn't there a code about leaving 1/4in or more of the romex sleaving showing when entering a panel or J-box??

 

[infinity]

Almost every inspector would have cow(maybee amule) if he saw a red wire-nut in a newbuild panel..

Also isn't there a code about leaving 1/4in or more of the romex sleaving showing when entering a panel or J-box??

Splices are permitted in a panel new or old. Someone may not like the idea but they are code compliant.

 

[Jim W in Tampa]

Let's think this out for a minute. You're called to a home to do an unnecessary repair at the beckon of a home inspector. Perhaps it would be a good idea to have this event in recent memory next time you get a similar call, so that you charge for your time regardless - and give them a decent electrical inspection while you are there, pointing out all the different issues the HI missed. Could be a lucrative opportunity in the works there.

Not how this works. The seller usually pays the bill to fix what the HI found wrong. Last thing seller wants is for him to find anything else wrong. Yes this call was unneeded but they are wanting to close on the sale. Few HI really know enough to be inspecting every trade. The buyer of a house would be better off to skip a HI and hire a licensed EC, Air conditioner man (who would check the unit for condition), plumber,and a GC to check the rest. Now this will be costly but now you have something real to bargain price with. Lets face reallity here, this HI did not know what was a violation and what wasn't. A clue to him was house near new and passed building department. Unless you know what exact code year it's built under then you need be carefull what you write down.

 

[infinity]

Not how this works. The seller usually pays the bill to fix what the HI found wrong. Last thing seller wants is for him to find anything else wrong. Yes this call was unneeded but they are wanting to close on the sale. Few HI really know enough to be inspecting every trade. The buyer of a house would be better off to skip a HI and hire a licensed EC, Air conditioner man (who would check the unit for condition), plumber,and a GC to check the rest. Now this will be costly but now you have something real to bargain price with. Lets face reallity here, this HI did not know what was a violation and what wasn't. A clue to him was house near new and passed building department. Unless you know what exact code year it's built under then you need be carefull what you write down.

You're right, individual inspections by specific trade professionals would provide a much more detailed look into the place but would cost many times more than what the typical HI charges. Buyers have been convinced that the one stop shopping approach of a single HI to look at everything is good enough. Problem is that there are good HI's and not so good HI's. What you get for 400 bucks can be either of those.