I have never herd of any jurisdiction wanting receptacles added because of a panel change. But I have never worked in South Florida.
That’s sounds fine but where does it end particularly in a older house. Arc faults, tamperproof receptacles, cord and plug appliances ??? Pull chains in closets why is one a hazard more than another. Draw the line at what your permitted and paid for that’s it. You want and need GFCI receptacles it costs extra and is not part of this permit. But in this case you’ll have to suck it up then write up the next one that is something else is required there will be additional costs.
see post #27 second paragraph
It can also snowball to the point the homeowner no longer can afford it and gets a under the table brother in law panel change and everyone dies in the house fire.
see post #32 last sentence.
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.
Don’t understand your point. It is a one for one replacement it simply went from a 15amp fuse to a 15amp breaker is it any safer or more dangerous to not have GFCI receptacles now. No it’s exactly the same. Dangerous and the homeowner should be made aware of the dangers and the cost to repair. Sign here plz you have been made aware and refused the extra cost. Now the inspector should go after the homeowner to comply.
Do you do that for all your jobs or just the ones that require an inspection ?
This doesn't qualify as a like-for-like replacement. Like-for-like replacements do not involve different equipment or device types and generally do not require permitting. MCCB's can provide GFCI protection whereas fuses cannot. Yes it is safer with GFCI protection. That's why it is now required. Its not like its unsafe all of a sudden, its been that way for a long time. The liability is leaving it that way knowing todays standards or putting on the blinders and not wanting to look beyond the panelboard.
I do it for all my jobs - whether its myself or someone under my supervision to do the job walk, survey or review of data provided. Where I physically cannot verify pertinent information, I disclose any assumptions and plan for the worst. One option when scope is unknown is to do the work on a T&M NTE basis, but I am pretty selective and will not accept every job (especially with a history of problems unless the client is committed to go all the way and is intending to hire me for that reason).
Do you do that for all your jobs or just the ones that require an inspection ?
at least in my neck of the woods it’s all about the number. Most people regardless of the dangers and warnings simply only ask for the specific job price and then say my husband can put in the GFCI receptacles. Never gets inspected maybe I get a call later because lights are flickering. But you get the idea anyone calling for an estimate think your just being a salesman and trying to pad a estimate and you never get the job. A person gets three estimates yours has GFCI protection added on as well as permit fees and inspection fees the other two are $500 cheaper. Yours will be the best most safe and inspected install but you’ll never get the job. it tough sometimes.
IMO in a very competitive market you will be left behind doing paperwork for a job you’ll never get. I don’t disagree with you not at all and have been guilty of doing just that. In fact in my current NYC nightmare where I find things like 12/2 BX used as a 50Amp range line the homeowner says to me “we don’t need the works just fix the lights flickering problem.”
No one said contracting is easy. What you are describing is the pressure to lower ones standard (and integrity) to win work. A conversation to help educate the the owner can go a long way. I have won work I estimated twice as high as what the competition was offering simply because I had a detailed discussion about what I would do vs. what everyone else actually quoted them in disguise.
There is no "like for like" replacement requirement found in the NEC. Unless it is something required by a local AHJ, it is not a requirement, even if once in a blue moon it is a good idea.
While it's only my personal preference, the two who will refuse are the types of customers I will tend to avoid. I have no problem telling them to look elsewhere.
Agreed. The like-for-like clause really comes from the local building code exemption for pulling a permit. They allow you to do the work without a permit because nothing is "changing" other than a direct replacement of devices/equipment to repair or re-instate the original system. Thus no inspection required. When you deviate from like-for-like replacements, its now a different animal. The version of the NEC adopted always applies though. The question is, when you pull a permit, which edition of the code are you working under?
