Inspection question.

Status
Not open for further replies.
ritelec said:
"just" replace a couple of GFI's..... there are no five minute jobs,

Ok, you decide to just replace a couple of gfi's, you open the kitchen receptacles and they are on a 15 amp circ with the lights.... now what?
Click to expand...
You're missing the point. The objective is to know about these things before you start tearing into equipment and before you agree to the work.

ritelec said:
The gfi's are NOT part of the panel change contract.
Click to expand...
It seems to me the owner is relying on the contractor to provide their expertise and do what is required to do the job correctly (including define the scope and quote the job appropriately). What makes you think the owner only wants a panel upgrade with a failed inspection?

In Nevada, depending on the facts of the case, the contractors board would likely side with the owner and expect more from the licensed contractor. Hiding behind a contract you drafted is iffy at best especially when your expertise was called upon to begin with to represent the owner who rarely knows how any of this works. Think about how this would look if the owner was an elderly person or a person with a diagnosed physical or mental disability.

I'm definitely ranting now, so it would be good to hear from the OP to see what the real situation is.
 
Last edited:
xptpcrewx said:
People who don't understand contract law do it all the time
Click to expand...
a contract is no more than a piece of paper Xptp

so is a lien, for that matter

the pursuant litigation it can assume has in no way shape or form anything to do about right/wrong

get that right outta yer head, and we can continue the conversation

yeah, i KNOW how much that hurts....



~RJ~
 
romex jockey said:
a contract is no more than a piece of paper Xptp

so is a lien, for that matter

the pursuant litigation it can assume has in no way shape or form anything to do about right/wrong

get that right outta yer head, and we can continue the conversation

yeah, i KNOW how much that hurts....



~RJ~
Click to expand...
I don't know what you are trying to get at here.
 
xptpcrewx said:
I’m not saying to replace or add any receptacles in the house or to eat every unreasonable cost. Adding GFCI’s in the new panelboard would have been the way to go to demonstrate due diligence and get the inspector off your back.

Personally, I would not take the work unless I knew exactly what it was I was disturbing. I always do an inspection and try to look at things as a whole rather than pieces. Making too many assumptions with a bid is a good way to inherit problems. Plus I don’t like doing the bare minimum, but that is just me. My experience has been if you pose the issue as a safety problem, most reasonable people will pay to do the right thing. At the very least you will have documentation it was highly recommended but forgone by the owner.

This predicament sounds a lot like the following:

1. The owner is under the impression the job would only cost X amount of dollars and are unwilling to pay more. They are also withholding payment until the inspection is approved.

2. The contractor only expected to replace the panelboard (irrespective of the can of worms it may have opened up for the owner by implicating an inspection). The contractor doesn’t appear to have a mutual understanding with the owner about responsibilities or how to recover unforeseen costs.

3. The reason the inspector is failing the inspection is not really clear. It sounds like there is more to the story we aren't being told. Either way, the inspector needs to separate what the contractor is responsible for vs. what the owner is responsible for.
Click to expand...
Other than one of the large "flat rate" companies, I know of no contractor/electrician that will go through a house looking for GFCIs when they're only there to give a price on a panel change.

You digging yourself quite a hole with your assertions that adding non-required things on just a panel change is required and looking worse the further you dig down.
 
Little Bill said:
Other than one of the large "flat rate" companies, I know of no contractor/electrician that will go through a house looking for GFCIs when they're only there to give a price on a panel change.

You digging yourself quite a hole with your assertions that adding non-required things on just a panel change is required and looking worse the further you dig down.
Click to expand...

I don’t see why. I’m just advocating for doing the right thing. I doubt the inspector is requiring installing GFCI outlets. GFCI protection in the panel perhaps.
 
xptpcrewx said:
I don’t see why. I’m just advocating for doing the right thing. I doubt the inspector is requiring installing GFCI outlets. GFCI protection in the panel perhaps.
Click to expand...
I guess you missed the part where the OP stated they want new receptacles installed in the kitchen and bathroom. :cautious:
 
Jon456 said:
I guess you missed the part where the OP stated they want new receptacles installed in the kitchen and bathroom. :cautious:
Click to expand...
no I already responded that adding additional outlets in the bathroom and kitchen is unreasonable.

The OP first stated he failed inspection because he needed to install GFCI outlets in post #1. Then the OP also stated it was GFCI protection that was needed in post #26. Which one is it? I don't think we are being told the whole thing...
 
xptpcrewx said:
I don't think we are being told the whole thing...
Click to expand...
Which hasn't stopped you from opining that he should have done more than what was in his contract or on his permit. You are picking and choosing only the parts of his posts that you want to make your arguments against him.
 
Jon456 said:
Which hasn't stopped you from opining that he should have done more than what was in his contract or on his permit. You are picking and choosing only the parts of his posts that you want to make your arguments against him.
Click to expand...

The only thing I’ve suggested the contractor do “more of” is protect himself with solid boilerplate to recover unexpected costs and consider the impact of any work done to other parts of the system ahead of time. I’m not sure what else you think I’m saying. I get it’s not a popular opinion, but you can take it with a grain of salt.
 
romex jockey said:
I've been to court many times Xp

waving my 'boiler plate' contract.....

~RJ~
Click to expand...
RJ, did the boiler plate contract help in court?
Are you suggesting that it provides for contingencies of "if there is underlying unseen issues" that effect "code compliance" that would indemnify you from "eating" such costs to meet code?
If your "boiler plate" is proven court reliable I'd like to see it, PM me if so.

I haven't had major issue yet, but seeing a lot more customers that are becoming unreasonable to what it takes and costs to be code compliant. Maybe such language can help to CYB for a job that "could be" only $5000 but if unseen (but not unlikely) issues appear as work progresses; these "could be", "maybe", situations, if you have to include that into an estimate makes the job a $20,000 one, and customer says no way. But there is no way for me to cover the extra $15,000 out of my pocket either to give them "only" the $5000 estimate.
If there is a way to give an "as seen" estimate that CYB I could land more jobs. But I get a lot of customer who call, that complain about a contractor that tells them an $xxx price then start the job that in then it cost double or more. But if you give them a "realistic" contingency estimate they get a handiman that cares nothing about being code compliant.
Most that I get who are fine with "whatever it takes" to be compliant have been burned by a handiman in the past who provided noncompliant or unsafe work.
 
xptpcrewx said:
I don’t see why. I’m just advocating for doing the right thing. I doubt the inspector is requiring installing GFCI outlets. GFCI protection in the panel perhaps.
Click to expand...
Adding gfci protection for a service change isn't the 'right thing'. Unless it's a local requirement, it isn't required and the inspector shouldn't be asking for it. If a contractor wants to go above and beyond, they certainly can, but don't pass it off on the customer as a requirement.
 
Frank DuVal said:
I see, pricing a job out of reality, so YOU make the homeowner hire their brother in law who saw a you tube video..... But you sleep well at night. Do you do any residential work?
Click to expand...
I don't make anyone do anything. I explain to them how I would do the job, and what they could reasonably expect by hiring me. I do my best to explain the facts, reasoning and risks involved as I see them. I also tell them if cost is the main deciding factor, not to hire me as there are others who will gladly take the risk for less. I don't do residential anymore unless its someone I know, its just not enough reward for the effort but that's just my opinion.

I have no issues sleeping at night. I have (on some occasions) done free work or given advice to random people I've crossed paths with at the Home Depot who were being told by the staff there to "just increase the size of the breaker" to prevent tripping. I'm sure others have done the same.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top