# Problem with building inspector. Please help.



## Marvin Gardens (Sep 30, 2008)

I would be calling his boss and the city officials. I would call the press. I would make so many waves that this guy would have to leave the country.

He also made you feel threatened. This is called assault and I would be calling the police (assault is not physical contact, battery is physical contact). You can also get a restraining order against him which will screw him over big time.

There is no reason to treat anyone like this. He was totally unprofessional and needs to find another job where he works alone.


----------



## troach (Nov 14, 2008)

I am afraid. Should I just wait till the bathroom gets done and yell later? I am very apprehensive and still fear the retaliation. I feel I could scream and they could make it worse. He said he could drag it on.

I just want my bathroom done :-( so I can take a bath.


----------



## Marvin Gardens (Sep 30, 2008)

troach said:


> I am afraid. Should I just wait till the bathroom gets done and yell later? I am very apprehensive and still fear the retaliation. I feel I could scream and they could make it worse. He said he could drag it on.
> 
> I just want my bathroom done :-( so I can take a bath.


I can't say. But the threats he made are illegal and you could have a good chance of making a claim against the city for damages.

But I am a scrapper and know my rights.

Most inspectors are nice caring easy going people. On the other hand some have a God complex and enjoy making life difficult for people like you and me. I have had to deal with both.

If I were you I would be screaming at the top of my lungs. Just an in person visit to his supervisor would probably get results.

My guess is that this inspector has had issues before and management is fully aware of his problems.


----------



## troach (Nov 14, 2008)

My Contractor just said lets finish it since they are now asking for drawings and creating red tape because that creates another 7 day wait. When finished, I can cancel the permit. Just say we decided to cancel it. The Inspector did not get into the house. 

Would that work? It will be done in 2 days if he works through the weekened and we will just say we repainted the walls.

Wouldn't they have to prove that I did something? It is my house. Is that the best approach? What's the risks?


----------



## Marvin Gardens (Sep 30, 2008)

troach said:


> My Contractor just said lets finish it since they are now asking for drawings and creating red tape because that creates another 7 day wait. When finished, I can cancel the permit. Just say we decided to cancel it. The Inspector did not get into the house.
> 
> Would that work? It will be done in 2 days if he works through the weekened and we will just say we repainted the walls.
> 
> Wouldn't they have to prove that I did something? It is my house. Is that the best approach? What's the risks?


Finish it.

He never saw it and in order for him to come in uninvited he will have to get a warrant. To get that he will have to have a lot of evidence to convince a judge to issue the warrant. The evidence will have to include things like what you are doing is dangerous and has potential for life or serious threat of injury. Few judges are inclined to issue a warrant for stuff like "we think they are doing this".

Then the police will have to execute the warrant to get the inspector in.

In fact the inspectors can't even step foot on your property except to knock on your door.

Can't give you legal advice on what to do in your situation but I kind of agree with your contractor. Then again I am a rebel to begin with so take that into consideration.


----------



## concretemasonry (Oct 10, 2006)

A $60,000 loss (plus penalties) on a simple tub and sink replacement? - Something does not make sense!! and there must be more to the story.

You have shingle problems, water in the walls in addition to probably new floors and vanity. Sounds like a bit of major items including exterior, interior, plumbing and probably some electrical.

Anyone that relies on the internet for legal and code advice when it is much easier to check with the code people to determine the actual requirements is wrong. Did you bother to check with the permit people or even ask your contractor? It sounds like the inspector has more respect for the contractor than you.

Unless there is a personal issue, a neighbor will only complain if they think the project is being done poorly, will affect their property value or they will pay higher taxes because you are not paying your fair share.

Calling the inspector a "jerk" was obviously a very bad move.

It gives people a good feeling to fight city hall, but is not always the proper route to go unless you just giving advice.

Dick


----------



## troach (Nov 14, 2008)

concretemasonry said:


> A $60,000 loss (plus penalties) on a simple tub and sink replacement? - Something does not make sense!! and there must be more to the story.
> 
> You have shingle problems, water in the walls in addition to probably new floors and vanity. Sounds like a bit of major items including exterior, interior, plumbing and probably some electrical.
> 
> ...


You sound shocked that someone would act this way? So was I. hence the comment which I probably should not have done. It's not bad (meaning no damage)according to my guy and I saw it. He said if I waited a while it would have been a problem and I was right to act when I did (but sooner the better). Nontheless, I tried to correct the problem and thought I was within my right to fix it (based on what I was told), and I then tried to correct it after I was informed I needed a permit and then I was nothing but threatened and given disinformation. I am just frustrated. I don't want to fight city hall, I want my bathroom finished so I can take a bath.

I checked the city website for what is required and they had a FAQ section. It said nothing about bathrooms. It also said, you do not need a permit if their are no structural changes.

I have gotten a lot of opinions, and they are all over the place. I appreciate yours. I really do.


----------



## Termite (Apr 13, 2008)

I'm an inspector. I deal with people working without permits on a very regular basis. I've never once screamed at anyone in the manner you described, although I've had to be assertive a time or two when the contractor or homeowner acts combative. As for the way you were treated, he has no right to do that and you should inform the City Manager, the mayor, and your councilmembers. 

However, you screwed up bigtime when you argued with him and called him a jerk. Even though he's in the wrong, you stooped to his level. _Any complaint you make regarding him should include that, otherwise you're not being truthful_. Level-headedness will prevail, but you have to remain level-headed and humble, given the situation you're in. From my standpoint, someone that is being abusive or mouthing off is going to get a very, very, very thorough inspection out of me...If it gets too abusive the job gets shut down until they gain an understaning of how to be professional.

My suggestion is to state to the city officials that due to his confrontational behavior, you feel unsafe having him near you, your family, or your home. Request another inspector or an approved third party inspector at the City's expense. If there's a fine, take your lumps and learn a tough lesson. 

Now...The code. You and your contractor screwed up by not getting a permit. The type of work you are doing often requires a permit, and it is your/your contractor's responsibility to know the codes and requirements. Checking the website does not absolve you of the responsibility for knowledge of the city's codes and ordinances. So, that's a null and void point, and I'd drop it. Here, you'd get an automatic $500 fine for working without a permit.

In the real world...Where inspectors are normal pretty good guys (not your neighborhood apparently!)...The inspection and permitting process is in place to advocate for your family's safety, your home's longevity, compliance with local ordinance, and to ensure that work is done right. Any contractor that sidesteps or avoids the permitting and inspection process is not doing you any favors, and compliance with minimum code standards is no challenge for a competent contractor or subcontractor.

As for dealing with this inspector, I would avoid it by going over his head. He will most certainly make this tough on you for whatever reason he has in his head. By law, he has the right of entry onto your job and property (chapter one of the international codes) whenever he sees fit. Your best bet is to get another inspector assigned to your job. If he's the only one, the city should make arrangements for a 3rd party, given his threatening behavior.

In inspector circles, we call guys like this "the ten pound badge" and we hate them as much as you do.


----------



## Termite (Apr 13, 2008)

troach said:


> It also said, you do not need a permit if their are no structural changes.


If it says that, I'd print it off and ask the high-ups in the city about it. Fact is, the code they have adopted has much stricter requirements than that statement implies, and you're required to know it, or find someone that does. If the website says that, it is some poor information. That essentially says you can re-wire your house with no permit if you ask me, and I assure you, you can't!


----------



## concretemasonry (Oct 10, 2006)

I am not shocked after seeing many similar situations where a home owner tries to take over and fight a battle thay cannot win because they have not been diligent. If you had looked further into the code, the inspector could have been working for you instead of against you to make sure you were protected from yourself and the "contractor", who may have been a DIYer working cheap to do what was necessary to get the job done and get paid. A real contractor would have done things properly.

Apparently the inspector has more respect for the contractor after your ill-advised actions. Not knowing the difference between shingles and tile is no excuse for not knowing what is required and is going on.

Dick

Dick


----------



## Termite (Apr 13, 2008)

concretemasonry said:


> I am not shocked after seeing many similar situations where a home owner tries to take over and fight a battle thay cannot win because they have not been diligent. If you had looked further into the code, the inspector could have been working for you instead of against you to make sure you were protected from yourself and the "contractor", who may have been a DIYer working cheap to do what was necessary to get the job done and get paid. A real contractor would have done things properly.
> 
> Apparently the inspector has more respect for the contractor after your ill-advised actions. Not knowing the difference between shingles and tile is no excuse for not knowing what is required and is going on.
> 
> ...


I agree with Dick 100%, but the inspector's behavior has to remain fairly professional.

This is a losing battle for you, guaranteed. The only battle you could fight and possibly win is the issue about his behavior.


----------



## ponch37300 (Nov 27, 2007)

If i were in your shoes i would be upset at this contractor that you are paying to do this job when he doesn't know enough or didn't do his homework to know he needs a permit. Any contractor should know that most any bathroom remodel is going to need a permit. Your right that the inspector acting way out of line but in my opinion your contractor is more out of line for trying to do a job without doing his homework, and charging you. That is why you are paying him to be a contractor, so you don't have to worry about the details of the job, he should be the one taking care of this with the inspector cause that's a contractors responsibility. If i were you i would have a talk with your contractor about why this happened and how he is going to fix this, quickly. If he isn't going to take care of this i would print off that website that says you don't need a permit unless doing structural changes and bring it down to the building inspectors in person, say sorry for not doing things in the right order and explain why you were confused and explain you would like to do this the right way but as quickly as posible cause of the lack of a bathroom. Most inspectors do actually have a heart and hopefully will help you out the best they can. And then hope all your contractors work passes inspection and he hasn't forgot any other parts of being a contractor. Do your have a contract with this contractor?


----------



## troach (Nov 14, 2008)

I would take the $500 if that is all it was and go down and complain. The fact that I can be hit with more scares me. 

I talked to the contractor and he went down there to talk to them again today. They are asking for drawings now. Meanwhile I sit here.


----------



## buletbob (May 9, 2008)

when ever I remodel bathrooms I have to pull a plumbing permit not a building permit,that could be why they stated no structural changes, but the plumbing still has to be inspected. BOB


----------



## troach (Nov 14, 2008)

buletbob said:


> when ever I remodel bathrooms I have to pull a plumbing permit not a building permit,that could be why they stated no structural changes, but the plumbing still has to be inspected. BOB


Oh this guy is definitely retaliating against me. He talked to another of his buddies and he went down today and filed for a permit and got one for a roof. Is it him or the whole office? I am paranoid now.

What is the cheapest, fastest, most efficient way for me to get my bathroom done? If I complain, can he make it much worse than he already is?


----------



## concretemasonry (Oct 10, 2006)

Using terms like "retaliation" and "talking to his buddies" mean nothing. That is just a personal opinion which goes nowhere in the civilized world.

Once you jump in and try to take controll, you are becoming the responsible party (owner AND contractor) and are resposible for what was done (by anyone) earlier and all future actions.

When you called the inspector a "jerk", you lost any connection with a possible source of benefits. I would imagine he will be happy if you inherit another inspector that may not really care and will welcome the challenge.

In hind site, if you had started out properly with drawings and a permit, you probably would not have had the confrontation you could not handle and the inspector could have lead you through the minor problems instead of making his job impossible.

I am not a fan of the "out of work" tradesman being an inspector, but at least they have some experience and practical knowledge. A general contractor gone bust might be better in ticklish situations because they know how to handle "customers".

Most inspectors are just handed jobs and have to go through the enforcement process reasonably no matter who the owner/contractor is unless problems are created in advance. Not getting a permit where required, is a red flag for neighbors and inspectors.


----------



## troach (Nov 14, 2008)

concretemasonry said:


> Using terms like "retaliation" and "talking to his buddies" mean nothing. That is just a personal opinion which goes nowhere in the civilized world.
> 
> Once you jump in and try to take controll, you are becoming the responsible party (owner AND contractor) and are resposible for what was done (by anyone) earlier and all future actions.
> 
> ...


Hindsight is 20/20 but he acted like a jerk well before I called him one. It wasn't like he wasn't acting inapproproately but I do regret doing it. The problem is if I asked for a permit(which I should have done) they would probably have never asked for drawings and we would have had it the same day. It's all speculation.

I just feel like something is going on to draw the whole process on. How long is reasonable for permits to get done? Really?


----------



## Termite (Apr 13, 2008)

troach said:


> I just feel like something is going on to draw the whole process on. How long is reasonable for permits to get done? Really?


We have a saying for dealing with situations like the one you've put yourself in...
"An emergency on your part does not necessarily constitute an emergency on my part." 

Once you turn in a completed application and plans, most jurisdictions will turn around a plan review, code check, and permit in less than a week. I can guarantee that the fact that you were doing work illegally puts you at the back of the line.

Understand that I don't agree with the way the guy acted toward you. I wouldn't have been your best friend for sure, but I would have been completely professional with you. I get the feeling that you are so convinced that you are a victim that you cannot take a step back and put any blame on your own shoulders for the situation that you're in. Chalk it up to experience and lessons learned. You'll get very little sympathy from reasonable DIYers and contractors when you get caught breaking the rules.


----------



## troach (Nov 14, 2008)

thekctermite said:


> We have a saying for dealing with situations like the one you've put yourself in...
> "An emergency on your part does not necessarily constitute an emergency on my part."
> 
> Once you turn in a completed application and plans, most jurisdictions will turn around a plan review, code check, and permit in less than a week. I can guarantee that the fact that you were doing work illegally puts you at the back of the line.
> ...


Thanks for your feedback. I said I was wrong in calling him a jerk and I just didn't know. 

PA state law says that as long as you request a permit within 3 Days of emergency work started, you should be fine (which was done).

I'll go down and make a complaint Monday morning and I'll mention at which point I called him a jerk (which was way after his unprofessional condescending attitude was exerted at me). The guy was overreacting bigtime but that didn't make it right.


----------



## troach (Nov 14, 2008)

For others experiencing issues, here is what I found in respect to PA.



> I'm a Pennsylvania Certified Building Code Official and can tell you with all certainty that residential alterations and repairs are exempt from permit and excluded from compliance with the Pennsylvania Uniform Construction Code.
> 
> The only exception is, however, if your local municipality had local ordinances that regulated residential alterations and repairs that pre-date the adoption of the statewide Pennsylvania Uniform Construction Code (PAUCC) in April of 2004, they CAN require permits for the type of work you are having done.
> 
> ...


----------



## Termite (Apr 13, 2008)

troach said:


> PA state law says that as long as you request a permit within 3 Days of emergency work started, you should be fine (which was done).


*Get ready to hear that a bathroom remodel is not considered emergency work*. A tree on your roof, a broken air conditioner on a 95 degree day, and a basement full of poo due to a plumbing backup are all examples of emergency situations where chapter one of the International Code and most municipalities will allow work to begin up to 24 hours before a permit is secured.


----------



## ponch37300 (Nov 27, 2007)

You never mentioned if your contractor is licensed or not. I would think he would have better luck pushing the permit threw since you and the inspecter aren't on good terms. Also do you have a contract with the contractor? If you do i would check for a clause that says "homeowner responsible for permits", if it doesn't say that and you are paying him to be the contractor i believe it would be his job to pull the permits.


----------



## troach (Nov 14, 2008)

ponch37300 said:


> You never mentioned if your contractor is licensed or not. I would think he would have better luck pushing the permit threw since you and the inspecter aren't on good terms. Also do you have a contract with the contractor? If you do i would check for a clause that says "homeowner responsible for permits", if it doesn't say that and you are paying him to be the contractor i believe it would be his job to pull the permits.


He is licensed and it says that. I can't seem to find an amendment locally that says I need a permit. According to state law I don't need one for what I am doing. Even the contractor seems baffled. We are going to go down on Monday.

Also, this is PA statelaw. Termite keeps giving me the law where he is and I appreciate it but that is where he lives.

Also, the emergency it may or may not be. I had water leaking behind the tub. Take that for what it's worth. He pulled it out in an emergency and saw there wasn't really any damage. But I am without a bathroom.

Like most people say, it may not be worth it for them to fight it. I am just going to raise the issue on Monday. As long as you apply for a permit within 3 days of emergency work, you should be ok, but then again, we didn't think we needed a permit, he told us we did, so we applied for it. He (the inspector) can let it sit there all he wants but I will raise it on Monday. I have a PA code inspector from another jurisdiction assisting me and making me aware of the laws which is helping.

I will also bring up his behavior on Monday as being totally unprofessional, mention what he said, that I called him a jerk in a heated exchange, and how his attitude changed towards a male person. He was very condescending towards me and talked down to me (way before I called him a jerk). He was very irrational and when I asked him where to go for the permit he said, "I DON'T KNOW". That is probably what made me snap and call him a jerk (yes I was wrong to do that), but like I said, he just kept piling it on. He really was a jerk.


----------



## ponch37300 (Nov 27, 2007)

I'll just say good luck. And for future reference one phone call to the building department would eliminate all this mess. Anytime i do work i call and tell them what i'm doing and they tell me if i need a permit. They may be in the wrong by being on a power trip but just remember that it was your responsibility as the home owner to know this or hire someone that knows this so you are not the victim.

Thekctermite is stated international code, IBC, while every state and city can make admendments this is the universal building codes.


----------



## Termite (Apr 13, 2008)

I'm telling you what the code says, not what the law is where I'm at. If your municipality has adopted the International Residential Code...Which the _vast majority_ of the country has...What I'm telling you is the gospel, because it is written right in the adminstrative chapter of the code. In most instances, whatever code or code-related laws the state has adopted is not applicable on jobs within jurisdictions that adopt their own code. 

I'd suggest a trip to the local library to read chapter one of the IRC before you continue down the path of trying to beat the city at their own game. I guarantee they know their laws and codes better than you do, and they're adept at dealing with people that put themselves in this situation and then want everyone to bend over backwards for them.


----------



## troach (Nov 14, 2008)

thekctermite said:


> I'm telling you what the code says, not what the law is where I'm at. If your municipality has adopted the International Residential Code...Which the _vast majority_ of the country has...What I'm telling you is the gospel, because it is written right in the adminstrative chapter of the code. In most instances, whatever code or code-related laws the state has adopted is not applicable on jobs within jurisdictions that adopt their own code.
> 
> I'd suggest a trip to the local library to read chapter one of the IRC before you continue down the path of trying to beat the city at their own game. I guarantee they know their laws and codes better than you do, and they're adept at dealing with people that put themselves in this situation and then want everyone to bend over backwards for them.


So you are saying there is no chance that this guy is out of line or they could be wrong? You said you "Guarantee they know".

This guy said it is state law. Unless they had an amendment added (which I don't see but I will check on Monday) then I shouldn't need a permit. I mean. There has to be a chance they could be wrong. I just want my bathroom done, that's all. I don't want a fight or anything like that. They seem to be the one picking the fight (this inspector specifically).


----------



## DangerMouse (Jul 17, 2008)

i too have had my share of good and bad inspectors. a couple quotes that comes to mind are-- "looks like i'm going to have to fight you with every nail you put in every board here" and "can't you just find a contractor willing to fix this mess for as cheap as you want?" i always check for permit necessity though. most of the guys i deal with are great! polite, helpful and professional. i treat them with respect and they mostly treat me the same. permits are there to protect you from any possible mistakes you or contractors might make and end up with a safety issue! so always get the needed permits and make sure the inspector does HIS/HER job properly too! having the contractor there for the inspection is advisable. kc makes some valid points on this one. 

DM


----------



## Marvin Gardens (Sep 30, 2008)

troach said:


> *So you are saying there is no chance that this guy is out of line* or they could be wrong?


Oh he is out of line the way he talked to you. If anyone ever talked to my wife like that on my property he would be leaving in a body bag. No one would ever come on to my property and talk to my wife that way and survive.:furious::furious::furious::furious:

Whether or not he is correct on the permit thing is something that is up for debate and I have no dog in this fight. If he came and had a nice chat with you about it and took the attitude that he was there to enforce the law but would work with you to get you through the process then I would have felt that he was being helpful and you probably wouldn't be having this conversation.

Most of my contacts with inspectors have been good and some excellent. I had one that had a serious God complex but I made some waves with my bike riding buddy who is a city commissioner and he got things squared away. The inspector is now swinging a hammer for a living. He had way to many complaints against him.

To me, it's not the way you do things, it how you do it. You can be a marginal inspector but if everyone speaks highly of you because of your people skills then you will always have a job.

Your inspector has a serious lack of people skills.


----------



## troach (Nov 14, 2008)

Marvin Gardens said:


> Oh he is out of line the way he talked to you. If anyone ever talked to my wife like that on my property he would be leaving in a body bag. No one would ever come on to my property and talk to my wife that way and survive.:furious::furious::furious::furious:
> 
> Whether or not he is correct on the permit thing is something that is up for debate and I have no dog in this fight. If he came and had a nice chat with you about it and took the attitude that he was there to enforce the law but would work with you to get you through the process then I would have felt that he was being helpful and you probably wouldn't be having this conversation.
> 
> ...


Thanks. I would never resort to violence to solve anything. I am not asking these people to "bend over backwards for me." If anything, it seems like they are asking me to do the bending over.


----------



## Marvin Gardens (Sep 30, 2008)

troach said:


> Thanks. I would never resort to violence to solve anything. I am not asking these people to "bend over backwards for me." If anything, it seems like they are asking me to do the bending over.


My issue is his attitude. That is where I get irritated. If he were to come back and apologize then I would accept it and move on. But so far I have not see than happening and the time for apologizing is past.

Whether or not you need a permit will be sorted out and is an issue with local code of which I am not familiar.

[sarcasm on] Government asking you to bend over....say it isn't so. They would never do that!!! [sarcasm off]


----------



## Termite (Apr 13, 2008)

troach said:


> So you are saying there is no chance that this guy is out of line or they could be wrong? You said you "Guarantee they know".
> quote]
> 
> Go back and read my earlier posts. I was one of the first to say that he is way out of line treating you the way he did. That certainly isn't arguable. He went way over the edge.
> ...


----------



## ciera (Jun 24, 2007)

One point: did you check county codes? At least in Allegheny Co., PA, we have county codes in addition to the city codes. Both the county and city have inspectors, and BOTH have permits that you have to get.


----------



## AtlanticWBConst. (May 12, 2006)

Bottom line is:

Troach, you and your contractor went about this 100% all wrong. Any experienced contractor (especially licensed) knows that you need a permit even for a bathroom job like yours. Your contractor made the big mistake (big wrong). You compiled the wrong, by calling the guy a Jerk. That gets you, not only no-where, but puts you at the bottom of the permit pile. 

Example: You do something wrong, you get pulled over by a cop...cop ends up being a jerk and also giving you a ticket, when you think he should not. You call him a jerk = You're getting the ticket, and a look over for more citations to boot. 

The only way to get this situation cleared up is by co-operating, not starting WWIII. 

If you start a war: Have fun fighting city hall, they'll probably drag this process out even longer with ther red tape.


----------



## James Con (Aug 29, 2007)

In my area of Pa. If you don't alter the structure. Beams, Headers, columns, Etc. We don't need a permit.


----------



## AtlanticWBConst. (May 12, 2006)

James Con said:


> In my area of Pa. If you don't alter the structure. Beams, Headers, columns, Etc. We don't need a permit.


Is that in your code book? Have you talked with your local inspectional offices/State offices about that?

I write this, because many in my own area (home owners, handy-men, unlicensed contractors) have said this, but are very mistaken.

Is that something that you assume?
As shown by the OP, that is what they assumed too...

It is a common "_urban myth-type misconception_", in most regions.


----------



## Termite (Apr 13, 2008)

AtlanticWBConst. said:


> It is a common "_urban myth-type misconception_", in most regions.


Yes it is. The International Codes as well as the National Electric Code all have much more restrictive rules for what requires a permit and what does not. 

Structural issues take a back seat to the dangers of improper electrical work when it comes to safety in my opinion. It is nothing short of blatant irresponsibility if any jurisdiction responsible for codes actually only requires a permit/inspection for structural modifications.


----------



## Marvin Gardens (Sep 30, 2008)

I have found that you can do all kinds of carpentry and make major modifications without a permit in many areas.

When it comes to plumbing and electrical you need a permit for almost everything including changing out a faucet according to the local city inspector.


----------



## Gary_602z (Nov 15, 2008)

IN our county anything over 100.00 needs a permit!(yeah right). Farm use does not. Basically if it isn't major and they can't see it get'r done!

Gary


----------



## James Con (Aug 29, 2007)

AtlanticWBConst. said:


> Is that in your code book? Have you talked with your local inspectional offices/State offices about that?
> 
> I write this, because many in my own area (home owners, handy-men, unlicensed contractors) have said this, but are very mistaken.
> 
> ...


I work as a sewage enforcement officer for my township so I know first hand from the Building inspectors I work with. I even double checked today. If there are no structual alterations you don't need a permit. We only adopted building codes in my area about 8 to 10 years ago. There was only Zoning, Elec.and onlot septic system inspections at the time.


----------



## James Con (Aug 29, 2007)

thekctermite said:


> Yes it is. The International Codes as well as the National Electric Code all have much more restrictive rules for what requires a permit and what does not.
> 
> Structural issues take a back seat to the dangers of improper electrical work when it comes to safety in my opinion. It is nothing short of blatant irresponsibility if any jurisdiction responsible for codes actually only requires a permit/inspection for structural modifications.


It is up to the Homeowner to call a 3rd party elec. inspector by me. We have capable inspectors to perform the inspections but the township doesn't want the liability of performing these inspections. Your right the elec. inspection is a critical one but it is up to the home owner to call for there own inspection for it. We are still talking Renovation here right. It is a different ball game for new construction.


----------



## Marvin Gardens (Sep 30, 2008)

I deal with one inspector and he just writes the permit over the phone. I tell him what I am doing and he just says, "sounds good". Then as I am working on the project I email him pictures of the important stuff. He approves it from that. It is a 150 mile round trip for him to come out. The last 2 miles requires a 4 wheel drive some of the time. It's an all day affair to come out and approve it in person.

We can build a 200 sq ft building in Oregon and no permit is required.


----------



## DangerMouse (Jul 17, 2008)

Marvin Gardens said:


> We can build a 200 sq ft building in Oregon and no permit is required.


same thing here in rural Michigan, although within city limits, it's only 100 sq.ft. no permit needed.

DM


----------



## Termite (Apr 13, 2008)

James Con said:


> It is up to the Homeowner to call a 3rd party elec. inspector by me. We have capable inspectors to perform the inspections but the township doesn't want the liability of performing these inspections. Your right the elec. inspection is a critical one but it is up to the home owner to call for there own inspection for it. We are still talking Renovation here right. It is a different ball game for new construction.


That is incredible! Any competent attorney could have a party in his wallet suing the city for gross negligence in the form of their policy...Relaxation of the minimum enforcement standards set forth by the code has put a lot of authorities having jurisdiction in the hot seat. If the city doesn't have inspectors that are competent electrical inspectors, they should _require_ an approved third party inspector, and retain the appropriate approval records.


----------



## James Con (Aug 29, 2007)

thekctermite said:


> That is incredible! Any competent attorney could have a party in his wallet suing the city for gross negligence in the form of their policy...Relaxation of the minimum enforcement standards set forth by the code has put a lot of authorities having jurisdiction in the hot seat. *If the city doesn't have inspectors that are competent electrical inspectors, they should require an approved third party inspector, and retain the appropriate approval records.[/quote*]
> 
> We do have certified elec. Inspectors, But the Twsp chooses to use a 3rd party. for Liability reasons. If the homeowner procedes without getting the Service,Rough and Final elect. inspections then they won't get the C of O. Then they have to open the walls for the inspection. And we do keep records from the 3rd party inspector. But as far as reno goes if the homeowner does the elec. he should get the 3rd party inspection if he's smart. So I don't see how the twsp would be liable in this case.


----------



## ponch37300 (Nov 27, 2007)

I'm sure thekctermit will be along shortly to clarify but from what i know is that the international residential code states the minimum code requirements and the states, cities, counties have to enforce these minimum codes. The original poster still has not responded as to why this licensed contractor didn't have the knowledge to at least check and see about permits like i mentioned on the first page and atlantic then mentioned that any contractor should have this knowledge, that's what your paying him for. It is his problem and you should be upset with him for not doing his job, not the building inspector who was doing his job. Even though the inspector did act out of line, he was at least doing his job to protect you from half azz contractors who take shortcuts and don't pull permits. In my opinion your contractor is 100% at fault here and he should be the one you are upset at and putting you up in a hotel till your bathroom is done because he didn't do his job.


----------



## concretemasonry (Oct 10, 2006)

By saying the contractor is 100% wrong may not be totally acurate.

The home owner is the one that chose to select the contractor, so the home owner is 100% responsible. If the contractor did not have good information (that may have been hidden/known), his liability is reduced. Usually home owners know when something is not right and that is why they call contractors for help. This is not a new situation and is fairly common. Contractors should also be more careful about the jobs they do, what is expected and assesment of the customer.


----------



## ponch37300 (Nov 27, 2007)

In the end it is the homeowner who hired the contractor so you a right in that fact. Some home owners may know what permits are needed and some might not. That is why they pay a contractor to know these things, and any contractor should know that a bathroom remodel will almost for sure need a permit of some kind be it a building, electrical, or plumbing. Even if they aren't 100% sure if they will need a permit they should at least have the common sense to call the building department to ask. That is why when a contractor does a job they pull the permits because they are the ones doing the work. It is the homeowner who chose the contractor but it is the contractor who does this everyday and according to the original poster is licensed so he should be familiar with the building department and the inspection/permit procedure.


----------



## Joe Carola (Apr 14, 2006)

troach said:


> Why are you being such a *dick?* I asked.





> Hindsight is 20/20 but he acted like a jerk well before I called him one.


Maybe it's because you called him a Dick and not a jerk. Being called a jerk isn't as bad as being called a Dick, especially from a lady, even though the guy was acting like one.


----------



## fireguy (May 3, 2007)

I suggest you read the comments made by the Termite again. Ignore what others have said. Contact the Inspectors office & talk to whoever is in charge. Ask for an in-person discussion. Tell him your story, referring to your written notes. Admit your ignorance, and ask nicely for his help. Ask to see the code, and ask for him to explain the code. It may be the inspector is a jerk, and others have complained about his actions. I work in Oregon, Idaho and Washington. I have found most inspectors to be fair and good to work with. When I have found a poor inspector, other contractors have noticed the same thing. It sounds as if both you and the inspector were/are jerks. 

Good luck, both you and inspector are facing an uphill battle.


----------



## Termite (Apr 13, 2008)

concretemasonry said:


> The home owner is the one that chose to select the contractor, so the home owner is 100% responsible. If the contractor did not have good information (that may have been hidden/known), his liability is reduced.


Ignorance of the code and the laws on the books in no way reduces the contractor's (or the homeowner's) liability. "I didn't know" is an excuse, but it isn't a good excuse, and carries no weight.


----------



## Termite (Apr 13, 2008)

James Con said:


> But as far as reno goes if the homeowner does the elec. he should get the 3rd party inspection *if he's smart*. So I don't see how the twsp would be liable in this case.


The authority having jurisdiction bears the responsibility of requiring the code-required inspections on all projects that require permits and inspections (as set forth by the code). As far as renovations go, you don't have a codes enforcement department, you have a codes _suggestion_ department. Merely suggesting that homeowners spend hundreds of dollars on electrical inspections but not requiring it makes the city ripe for a lawsuit.


----------



## 47_47 (Sep 11, 2007)

fireguy said:


> It sounds as if both you and the inspector were/are jerks.
> 
> Good luck, both you and inspector are facing an uphill battle.


Fireguy said it all. You both said things that were inappropriate and this is a no win situation. It is your word against the inspectors and they already have you at fault with no permit. You can't undo the past, swallow your pride, be persistent and get your permit to finish the room.


----------



## James Con (Aug 29, 2007)

thekctermite said:


> The authority having jurisdiction bears the responsibility of requiring the code-required inspections on all projects that require permits and inspections (as set forth by the code). As far as renovations go, you don't have a codes enforcement department, you have a codes _suggestion_ department. Merely suggesting that homeowners spend hundreds of dollars on electrical inspections but not requiring it makes the city ripe for a lawsuit.


The town does require all the code required inspections for all projects requiring a permit. If they didn't I could see your point as far as law suit possibility. But if the project doesn't require a permit why would the town be liable for the homeowners house, As long as there was no structual changes it's the home owners baby. Keep in mind here I am not argueing with you I just want to understand your side. Like some towns require a permit to change a faucet, I think that's crazy. Job security for the inspector and revenue for the town but that's a little overboard. Just my opinion.


----------



## Termite (Apr 13, 2008)

James, section R105.1 of the International Residential Code outlines what requires a permit and what does not, and R109 describes what inspections are required. They're too wordy and lengthy to copy here. 

You said that in your town the homeowner that does remodeling wiring chooses to get the 3rd party inspection _if he's smart_. From that statement I assume that the city suggests it, but does not require it, and that's the mistake. If the city chooses to ignore the minimum requirements of the code they've adopted, they're open to all sorts of liability. Simply requiring an approved 3rd party inspection (for whatever reason they won't do it themselves :huh would place all the responsibility on the 3rd party inspector and not the city. Even if the city adopted the IRC and the NEC, and they knowingly relax requirements in that code by writing them out of the code adoption process, there's an immense amount of liability on their part for making the poor enforcement decision. I've seen it happen. As an enforcement body, you can change the code, but you'd better make it more strict if you want to be able to defend the choice in court.


----------



## concretemasonry (Oct 10, 2006)

The code(IBC, IRC) is the worst you can build and still be legal unless a local area choose to operate at a better level to guarantte better property values.

As an old code person I worked with said "You can never be wrong going by the effective code, but you may not be right!"


----------



## Marvin Gardens (Sep 30, 2008)

So the bottom line here is, and correct me if I am wrong:

The permit issue is up for debate. No one here knows for sure if it was required since the OP has not confirmed it either way.

The inspector was way out of line. I don't think there is any doubt on that.

The OP was out of line in calling him a name probably out of frustration. It was not appropriate but she was rattled by the inspector and her fight or flight response was to be expected when confronted by an out of control person.

The contractor should know if a permit was needed since that is what she paid him for, his expertise in these matters.

Codes are not always correct but they are the code and need to be followed even if they are wrong.

Codes vary from county to county, city to city and state to state. They are not always the same and if in doubt call the code department to verify.

Is that about it?


----------



## James Con (Aug 29, 2007)

thekctermite said:


> James, section R105.1 of the International Residential Code outlines what requires a permit and what does not, and R109 describes what inspections are required. They're too wordy and lengthy to copy here.
> 
> You said that in your town the homeowner that does remodeling wiring chooses to get the 3rd party inspection _if he's smart_. *From that statement I assume that the city suggests it*, but does not require it, and that's the mistake. If the city chooses to ignore the minimum requirements of the code they've adopted, they're open to all sorts of liability. Simply requiring an approved 3rd party inspection (for whatever reason they won't do it themselves :huh would place all the responsibility on the 3rd party inspector and not the city. Even if the city adopted the IRC and the NEC, and they knowingly relax requirements in that code by writing them out of the code adoption process, there's an immense amount of liability on their part for making the poor enforcement decision. I've seen it happen. As an enforcement body, you can change the code, but you'd better make it more strict if you want to be able to defend the choice in court.


The Town doesn't suggest it at all in a reno where a permit is not required by the town, It just would be a good idea (IMHOP) for a diyer to call the third party elec. insp.for safety sake, In say a bath reno. 
Ill have to read the R105.1 in the IRC to shed some light on the subject, And then I'll grab one of theTownship supervisors and see how they are getting around this if something would come up.To be continued lol, Before troach yells at us for highjacking his thread.


----------

