Incompetent building inspector costs family it’s new home

[CodeWarrior]

A building inspector allowed numerous violations during construction of a house, and the result is so shoddy, that the home is being recommended for removal rather than repair.

Chatham County will not recheck buildings ok'd by disciplined inspector

Despite the mistakes, WRAL 5 On Your Side has learned the county will not recheck the safety of any other buildings inspected by that inspector.

www.wral.com

Incredibly, Chatham County NC, who was found immune from paying damages, is saying it will not check any other buildings for safety that the inspector handled.

The homeowner says he lacks the funds to move forward, since the builder doesn’t have enough assets that can seized to cover the loss.

 

[tmurray]

This is the difference between authority and responsibility. That official had the authority to do the job properly but cannot be held liable if they do not. Statutory immunity claims in Canada have been found to be inconsistent with modern objectives of tort law. Jurisdictions that retain statutory immunity are only effective if the building officials are passionate about the service to their community. This requires specialized recruitment methodology and consistent vision up the chain of command. There is a lot there to go wrong.

The people on this board likely feel they do have a responsibility to enforce the codes. This is because they are the people I am describing. That responsibility comes from inside. It is something they have been taught. It is something they fully believe. It is something they teach others in the trade.

But this belief is not a result of the system. The only real punishment one could receive is losing their job if the negligence has enough of a public outcry. In today's news cycle, it is likely easier to outwait the public than to navigate the challenging termination requirements.

If our job is to ensure the safety of the public in the built environment, but if the public has no reasonable assurance that buildings are actually constructed to code as there is no accountability and thus no responsibility, one could ask why would building officials even exist in those circumstances?

 

[Mr. Inspector]

The contractor is the responsible one. They built it and made the mistakes. The family should have got enough to have all the violations fixed. Maybe a better lawyer who should of known they would not get anything from the county. The inspector is there just for a short time and anything could have happened after the inspector left.

 

[steveray]

Incompetent contractor and building official..........Contractor should definitely get top billing....

 

[Msradell]

I really do feel that in a case like this there should be some method for them to sue the county. They trusted that the building inspector (a County employee) would ensure that their home was built correctly. Something he obviously didn't do! The county shouldn't be able to hide behind immunity! We all know that the contractor will never cough up any money or at least none that will come close to paying for the repairs that are Req! The county have deep pockets and should accept some responsibility in this case.

 

[Mark K]

Under our legal system the building departments authority is limited to enforcing the building code. It is not the job of the building department to hold individuals such as the contractor responsible. Such issues are resolved by the civil courts.

There is an exemption to sovereign immunity when the building department goes beyond its authority. In such circumstances the building department and possibly individual employees may be held liable.

 

[ICE]

This guy got hosed, The county lost the approved plans and so did the contractor.…mighty convenient for them. I am curious about the thirty code violations. While it is possible, on a final inspection it is not usually structural and framing corrections. The video shows a failed CMU wall…no rebar…no grout.

An acquaintance recently purchased a million dollar tract home. Brand new. Major builder. Hundreds like it. There was a cracking sound and the drywall split open from one end to the other of the great room. An exterior wall is sinking.

 

[Keystone]

Was it just the inspectors fault or a break down of this departments entire inspection system which included the the bldr and its sub contractors? To little details known but as with most news articles ya need to read through the lines.

 

[bill1952]

Just the reason I almost never hire a contractor and do it myself.
(Breaking that rule for an asphalt driveway this month - not diy-able - but carefully vetted contractor.)

 

[Sifu]

NC has a homeowners recovery fund. A small percentage of the permit fees for every home constructed gets contributed to it. When all else fails there is some remedy. I believe at this point all has failed, so I hope they have been guided to this. It does NOT include the actions or inactions of the inspector, but does include losses from bad contractors. The contractor did poor work, but we don't yet know (and may never know) the point at which the AHJ became part of the problem. It is a shame that it appears the county officials know they did wrong, but won't figure out a way to make the owner whole. My guess is they don't want the flood gates opened, and maybe the light of day shining on them for fear of what will be found.

 

[tbz]

So I haven't built a new home for myself or a client since 2000, but back when I was building new homes, 1 - 2 per year, NJ required the builder to either be enrolled in the State Plan New Home Warranty program, or be a part of an approved warranty plan for every new home built, even if you were building the home yourself, for yourself.

Have these warranty requirements disappeared, as they were gaining popularity back then as a requirement by states to project people from this type of purchase?

To me it seems requirement far outweighs the minimum cost back then, what has changed 23 years later?

 

[Inspector Gadget]

There's no such immunity clauses up here in Canada. The AHJ can be held joint and severally liable.

 

[Plumb-bob]

We have the Homeowners Protection Office in BC, which requires builders to be registered and all new homes have a warranty for 10 years (structural), 5 years (envelope) and 2 years (other).
There is a cost to this, which gets passed down to the owners.
Part of the registration requirement is ongoing training, builders must get CPD points every year to maintain their licence.
Not a perfect system but it would help in a situation like this.

 

[ICE]

The laws in place which are intended to protect the consumer seldom result in an equitable outcome. By the time an owner gets through the hoops, they are worn to a frazzle. If an owner has the wherewithal to sue a contractor the result is all too often, a judgement that is insufficient and noncollectable.

Here are some pictures from the video:

 

[e hilton]

Here are some pictures from the video:

Is that the house in the OP?

 

[ICE]

 

[ICE]

Is that the house in the OP?

Yes. All of these pictures are the house in the OP.

 

[Yikes]

An acquaintance recently purchased a million dollar tract home. Brand new. Major builder. Hundreds like it. There was a cracking sound and the drywall split open from one end to the other of the great room. An exterior wall is sinking.

In the 1990s a friend of mine left the contracting business to become a building inspector at a growing So Cal city. He had been framing on "luxury" tract homes where the builder was demanding shortcuts, i.e. one nail instead of 2 on the studs connection to plate. His own ethics wouldn't allow it.
The builder's idea was to put all the money only where it showed, such as a fancy wet bar.

 

[Mark K]

The building department is empowered to enforce the adopted building code but there are many things that are not addressed in the building code. Our legal system assumes that these disputes will be resolved in the civil courts.

The building department has no ability to reimburse the owner for any losses or to force the contractor to do anything. Contractors are motivated to resolve inspectors comments because of their contractual obligations not because of a power by the building department to force them.

 

[jar546]

A building inspector allowed numerous violations during construction of a house, and the result is so shoddy, that the home is being recommended for removal rather than repair.

Chatham County will not recheck buildings ok'd by disciplined inspector

Despite the mistakes, WRAL 5 On Your Side has learned the county will not recheck the safety of any other buildings inspected by that inspector.

www.wral.com

Incredibly, Chatham County NC, who was found immune from paying damages, is saying it will not check any other buildings for safety that the inspector handled.

The homeowner says he lacks the funds to move forward, since the builder doesn’t have enough assets that can seized to cover the loss.

Two words. Gross negligence. Those two words open up the municipality to liability.

The BD will not recheck other homes but will be reactive which is probably the recommendation of their counsel.

 

[ICE]

The building department is empowered to enforce the adopted building code but there are many things that are not addressed in the building code. Our legal system assumes that these disputes will be resolved in the civil courts.

The building department has no ability to reimburse the owner for any losses or to force the contractor to do anything. Contractors are motivated to resolve inspectors comments corrections because of their contractual obligations not because of a power by the building department to force them.

There’s been a time or two when I succeeded in getting contractors to do what they didn’t want to do. Should you attribute that to a magnetic personality?….. Or was it written corrections (not comments) that shall be completed? Wait a minute…is that power?

To state that building departments lack power is ridiculous. How is it that you have witnessed the abuse of power on a grand scale if there is none.

 

[Keystone]

In the 1990s a friend of mine left the contracting business to become a building inspector at a growing So Cal city. He had been framing on "luxury" tract homes where the builder was demanding shortcuts, i.e. one nail instead of 2 on the studs connection to plate. His own ethics wouldn't allow it.
The builder's idea was to put all the money only where it showed, such as a fancy wet bar.

Putting lip stick on a pig.

 

[tmurray]

The building department has no ability to reimburse the owner for any losses or to force the contractor to do anything. Contractors are motivated to resolve inspectors comments because of their contractual obligations not because of a power by the building department to force them.

This would depend on the legislation would it not? Our legislation refers to the "constructor". Additionally, you are referring to a situation where the owner and the builder are two separate entities. Many times, (particularly with new home construction) we deal with developers who are building on their own land under contract for a third party. The third party likely will become the owner at some future date, but during construction the owner is the developer.

 

[steveray]

There’s been a time or two when I succeeded in getting contractors to do what they didn’t want to do. Should you attribute that to a magnetic personality?….. Or was it written corrections (not comments) that shall be completed? Wait a minute…is that power?

To state that building departments lack power is ridiculous. How is it that you have witnessed the abuse of power on a grand scale if there is none.

I can fail an inspection...I can even write a violation...What I can't do is "force" a contractor to do something...That is covered under their contract with the owner....We have no punitive measures. Guessing that is what Mark had alluded to..