"Not in my town" Still Applies

Status
Not open for further replies.
cschmid said:
I am going to stand with Bob on this issue..He made the correct decision..


This really not an issue, especially with good inspectors..We should thank good inspectors for their extra effort in public safety..Not discipline them..Disipline bad inspectors who turn head to blatant violations and request violations, them a poor inspectors..
Click to expand...




I am not saying that we should punish good inspectors...how is an inspector who knowingly asks for more than what is required for safety's sake called a good inspector???
Where did that individual get such good training that he knows more than the CMPs who wrote/approved the wording/meaning of the minimum codes we follow.
 
See Item #10

See Item #10

7. Fees from FP&L are specifically excluded. (none anticipated)
8. Permit, Processing, and any fees or penalties imposed by The City of Oakland Park associated with this project shall be the responsibility of the owner.
9. Patching, painting and restoration of landscaping or finished surfaces by others.
10. Any additional work required by the local building authority not specified in the above scope of work shall be the responsibility of the owner.(none anticipated)
11. Additions or changes to the above scope of work are considered separate from the initial project agreement. (none anticipated)
 
Pierre you said it the code is minimum standard..so you are saying you have never been in the spot where you required just alittle extra out of your EC's when you inspect..You have never made a request of an EC on a job..You consider yourself just average..I think Not..

I know you understand our position and if you requested something you knew was a good thing and someone fought you through the system when you requested an upgrade which was not a violation and you got reprimanded and put on probation you would be OK with that..I think not..

We get along with the inspector we work with him and him with us the way it should be..The way I bet you like it working with your Ec's in a good relationship..If I had problem we would talk right away..infact I have EI in my cell phone can call any time..Yet I still use the system doing regular business..I have question on your inspection I will call you..Would I go to the state district inspector yep if we could not reach common ground..yet never had to go there in fact have done work for them..:grin:
 
I have my Code Book sitting in a prominent posistion when the inspector arrives and I carry it around while we are having a look. I believe it saves time arguing. If they are going to hit me, they know they will have to show me why in the book.:)
 
At least you have a electrical inspector because some cities have all in one inspectors who do it all and know nothing!

Worst yet! Industrial Manufacturing facilities which don't want to comply to NEC.
 
cschmid said:
Pierre you said it the code is minimum standard..so you are saying you have never been in the spot where you required just alittle extra out of your EC's when you inspect..You have never made a request of an EC on a job..You consider yourself just average..I think Not..

I know you understand our position and if you requested something you knew was a good thing and someone fought you through the system when you requested an upgrade which was not a violation and you got reprimanded and put on probation you would be OK with that..I think not..

The way I bet you like it working with your Ec's in a good relationship..If I had problem we would talk right away..infact I have EI in my cell phone can call any time..Yet I still use the system doing regular business..I have question on your inspection I will call you..Would I go to the state district inspector yep if we could not reach common ground..yet never had to go there in fact have done work for them..:grin:
Click to expand...




I own the inspection company, and rarely get any negative feedback at the office. Yes I do have contractors who get extremely mad at me, usually it is because the corrections are expensive or time consuming. contractors know they can call me anytime. My phone rings everyday, including Sundays. It starts as early as 6am and usually stops around 9 pm. Contractors are not always organized. :wink:



I only inspect for the code. I do not knowingly ask for any more. I carry the 5 books the State requires and some of the standards they reference in my book bag, which goes to work with me every day, including the UL White Book. ALL of my books are very well tabbed and highlighted. I do not expect anyone to exceed the code unless it is their choice. I have learned to just say enough on the jobs to keep myself from having issues.

There are contractors who take out their code books on the job..then I take mine out and they kind of get shy after seeing all the highligts, notes and paperwork stuffed in my book for easy reference. I am pretty good at qouting the code section numbers in Chapters 1-4 for general work as well. I never ask for a correction without a code section provided!!!

Of course there are jobs that I run into that I have very little experience with. That is when I start asking as many questions on the job as possible. Usually those types of jobs the contractor and their men are more knowledgeable than I am...so I learn from them. On those jobs I take a large number of photos, maybe staying on the site with them for hours. I go home study the photos, google info and try to learn.


Am I perfect...far from it. In the front of my mind every day when I inspect is the remembrance of what it was like as a contractor to deal with inspectors who terrorized contractors with nonsense.

Do I help contractors? Every single day, even though I am not suppose to help them with either remediation or engineering the job. That is a weakness I cannot seem to get over, which one day may bite me in the a$$, so be it.
 
electricmanscott said:
Ha Ha Bob, you are a loser forever! That is a looonggg time you know. :D :grin:
Click to expand...

No dont take it that way.All i am saying is backing down with no fight is why inspectors get to be that way.If your right then fight.And i dont see Bob as a just give it to them type.
 
pierre sounds like I would not mind you inpsecting around here..man you are losing couple of miles per gallon on the extra read weight..no wonder everyone calls you, you got all the info no need to use library; wait you are the library..:grin: :D
 
Pierre, though you and I may never cross paths, I appreciate you setting a higher standard. It sounds like you go above and beyond. Kudos! :)
 
Back to the "Bare Concrete" for a minute.....Remembering back a few years, I was a chief electrical inspector for 5 years back in the early 90's, and I thought I read in a NEC handbook notes,that the intent of GFCI's on bare floors was the fact that bare concrete sustains a higher level of moisture or humidity content, hence the necesitiy for GFCI protection.

In Residential occupancies, its more likely to have a person with "bare feet" on a "bare concrete floors" making the potentional hazdard greater. So my train of thought has always been if you have the potentional of higher moisture in a floor and the probability of bare feet, I always aired on the side of requiring GFCI's when this sort of thing comes up.......To me its a common scense thing that the code is trying to protect the public from.

Mule
 
I'm an inspector in Cupertino, California. If we tried to do that, the experienced electricians would laugh and call my boss right away. They'd make me get out the book and prove it. That's how it should be in a government of laws, rather than a government of men and women.

But other contractors are afraid of the inspector, or just want to get past it, so they do what the inspector wants, which leads some inspectors to believe they can just say what they want.

Lengthy and difficult appeals processes with state agencies are not the best way to deal with something like this. Charge into your local office with code in hand and make a pain in the butt out of yourself til they wise up.
 
Mule said:
Back to the "Bare Concrete" for a minute.....Remembering back a few years, I was a chief electrical inspector for 5 years back in the early 90's, and I thought I read in a NEC handbook notes,that the intent of GFCI's on bare floors was the fact that bare concrete sustains a higher level of moisture or humidity content, hence the necesitiy for GFCI protection.

In Residential occupancies, its more likely to have a person with "bare feet" on a "bare concrete floors" making the potentional hazdard greater. So my train of thought has always been if you have the potentional of higher moisture in a floor and the probability of bare feet, I always aired on the side of requiring GFCI's when this sort of thing comes up.......To me its a common scense thing that the code is trying to protect the public from.

Mule
Click to expand...

Maybe in your own installations you can lean this way but as an inspector it is NOT your decision to make.
 
Ok....I hear you loud and clear....BUT...my comment was that I had read that in a NEC handbook notes, as it was the intent. So I thought as a inspector that enforcing the intent is the obligation of the inspector. Code books are not always 100% pure perfect, but the intent in which the commitee was trying to accomplish definitly has merit......So to me, a good inspector is a person who understands "intent", and uses it in his/or her thought/interpetation process when reading the legal verbage.

Just my two cents.....
 
Mule said:
Ok....I hear you loud and clear....BUT...my comment was that I had read that in a NEC handbook notes, as it was the intent. So I thought as a inspector that enforcing the intent is the obligation of the inspector. Code books are not always 100% pure perfect, but the intent in which the commitee was trying to accomplish definitly has merit......So to me, a good inspector is a person who understands "intent", and uses it in his/or her thought/interpetation process when reading the legal verbage.

Just my two cents.....
Click to expand...

You are correct, but the NEC is pretty clear about the use of GFI receptacles, so I'm pretty sure that if they were required in areas that had concrete floors (warehouses, big box stores, machine shops, etc) they would have said so and not left it to the inspectors to decide.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top