1. ATTENTION returning members. If you are coming here from the old forum for the first time, you will need to reset you password. However, we had an email problem getting password reset links set out to a lot of the email addresses. That problem is temporarily rectified but IF you still have an issue, email me direct at info@thebuildingcodeforum.com and I will give you a temporary password.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by clicking here: Upgrades
    Dismiss Notice

An average day

Discussion in 'Contractor Talk' started by ICE, Oct 13, 2011.

  1. ICE

    ICE Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2011
    Messages:
    7,199
    Likes Received:
    493
    Several more inspections were requested and nothing new took place. I finally asked for a re-inspection fee which was paid and another inspection requested. As before, the contractor insisted that the flashing is installed correctly and is over the lower tile. A piece of tile was removed to show me.
    [​IMG]

    I asked to see a little more. Another piece of tile was removed. Now I can see that sheet metal has been added to make it look like the flashing runs over the lower tile....which was an effort to make it look less wrong but not right..

    [​IMG]

    There was but one tile to go. And there I find exposed wood.

    [​IMG]

    The work was done by a sub-contractor to a solar contractor. Both contractors have mounted a campaign to have me banned from inspecting their work. I reckon that they deserve each other and if it wasn't for the owner I would agree.

    What I don’t understand is how they stay in business. Granted, most of the corrections that I hand them are electrical in nature and nobody sees them but me and a few other inspectors. So in the long run, those corrections don’t make much difference but the damage they do to roofs is out there for all to see.
     
    #2801 ICE, Jun 9, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2018
    my250r11 likes this.
  2. ICE

    ICE Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2011
    Messages:
    7,199
    Likes Received:
    493
    Recently I had a conversation with a man that meets me for solar/service upgrade inspections. We have met a dozen times. At this inspection he told me that I wouldn't find anything wrong as he had already looked over the work.

    Missing bonding bushings at three places.
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    The top plate penetrations aren't sealed and smoke alarms are installed incorrectly.

    I asked him how it goes with other inspectors. He said that he doesn't get corrections with most inspectors. In fact quite a few don't bother to look.

    A few days earlier the same company had an inspection from the previous post. They had not yet paid the re-inspection fee so I called them to let them know that I would not be do any inspection. The lady that answered the phone asked if they agreed to pay the fee that day would I still do the inspection. I asked her if the corrections have been completed. She said, "God...every time" and hung up.

    Several years ago the state legislature considered allowing the solar industry to self-regulate as in no inspections. At that time a law was enacted that mandated that an AHJ is restricted to only one inspection. I thought that to be a poor idea. I was used to finding plenty wrong at a rough inspection such as lousy grounding and loose hardware.....never was there a torque wrench and the racking is all aluminum.

    The mistakes that I used to catch at a rough inspection are hidden because the panels are installed. The mistakes are still there but I can’t write corrections for that which I don’t see.

    There’s not much difference between what happens and self regulation. It all seems to be working out just fine. I might be paranoid. I might be stubborn....tilting at wind mills. If anyone has successfully stopped writing corrections with a clear conciounce I would like advice so I can do that too.
     
    #2802 ICE, Jun 10, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2018
  3. ICE

    ICE Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2011
    Messages:
    7,199
    Likes Received:
    493
    The job is solar install. The inverter is at the right of the door. There is a disconnect to the left of the door. It is 4' from the water's edge.

    The switch, receptacle and nmc is energized. The extension between the meter and the socket is where a line side tap occurred. It has Edison's lock and tag. The installer had to move the hanging switch out of the way to complete the work. The service drop is 10' above the pool.

    The Governor wants to do this to a million homes. He must not like homeowners. Considering the property tax the state hauls in you'd think he would show a little more respect.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  4. ICE

    ICE Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2011
    Messages:
    7,199
    Likes Received:
    493
    Here’s two ways to get it wrong.

    [​IMG]

    It isn't a code violation but I did mention it. I'll be on vacation for the next two weeks so I will never know if it was fixed.

    [​IMG]
     
    #2804 ICE, Jun 10, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2018
  5. ICE

    ICE Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2011
    Messages:
    7,199
    Likes Received:
    493
    Owner builder wanted to know if this is okay.

    [​IMG]
     
  6. Pcinspector1

    Pcinspector1 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    2,270
    Likes Received:
    194
    Is this okay?

    Not if it's a bearing wall and the Cripples and header are missing?
    Return air if that's a heat run, wall receptacles meeting the 12-ft rule? Light switches?
     
  7. cda

    cda Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    14,096
    Likes Received:
    755


    Poor Oakland

    In the news again. Maybe they should let another city take them over

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/06/12/oakland-jogger-trashes-homeless-mans-camp-lake-merritt-video/694005002/
     
  8. conarb

    conarb Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    3,166
    Likes Received:
    216
    It does look like junk, but I'm sure the guy will be arrested for throwing it into the lake. I've built a lot in Oakland, even apartments that rented for under $100 a month in the 50s and 60s, but nothing with codes and regulations like they have now.
     

Share This Page