2014 and still a problem

[ICE]

The job is a service upgrade to accommodate PV. This is the old cabinet. You can see that it is a surface mount with KOs missing in the back.

This is the new cabinet. As you can see, it is also a surface mount and it's quite a bit longer than the old cabinet.

This is where the old cabinet was mounted over an old recessed cabinet. The plan was to place the new cabinet over the recessed cabinet/hole.

This method is practiced, mostly unimpeded, on a large scale. I turn it down every time. And every time, I hear "You've got to be kidding. I've done it this way for years and you're the first inspector to say no". I don't think that they are lying about that.

The contractors that do this are not all hacks and bandits either. I have inspected many jobs with clean, correct work...except for this one fatal flaw. The disappointment on their faces tells me that they don't see anything wrong with this.

In as much as this happens so often and I am convinced that I stand alone with this correction, I am thinking that I might just lay off. You know, what the Hell, houses aren't burning down....so many are past their expiration date anyway....why should I keep pi$$ing these people off?

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

The ago-old mantra of the corner cutters: "They don't make me do that in [__Fill in the blank__]!"

What they do in [__Blank__] is their problem. What you do in my jurisdiction is my problem. I cited the code section. Here's the address of the State Building Inspector if you really want to appeal. The appeal process is currently running about two to three months ... and there's no guarantee you'll win.

 

[Inspector Gadget]

Yep. I've long lost count of the times we've had the "I've never had to do that before!" conversation.
The response I've sadly turned to using - because it's a grumpy-old-fart response, but damnit, I'm tired of contractors who haven't read a code book in eons, if at all, is

"You've had to do that before. You just didn't know you had to."

I had one contractor argue a dead-flat basic simple code principle with me, using the ancillary line, "that must be new, then."

So I showed him a copy of the 1995 Code, and said "That wasn't new then, either. This has been in force for more than 30 years."

<sigh>

 

[Joe.B]

Here's the address of the State Building Inspector if you really want to appeal.

We don't have a "State Building Inspector" or any oversight from a state level. Each building department is left to fend for themselves. The appeals process is handled at a local level. This quoted text comes from the plumbing code, because that's what I have in front of me right now, but the same (similar) exists in each code book.

107.0 Board of Appeals.
107.1 General. In order to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions, or determinations made by the Authority Having Jurisdiction relative to the application and interpretations of this code, there shall be and is hereby created a Board of Appeals consisting of members who are qualified by experience and training to pass upon matters pertaining to plumbing design, construction, and maintenance and the public health aspects of plumbing systems and who are not employees of the jurisdiction. The Authority Having Jurisdiction shall be an ex-officio member and shall act as secretary to said board but shall have no vote upon a matter before the board. The Board of Appeals shall be appointed by the governing body and shall hold office at its pleasure. The board shall adopt rules of procedure for conducting its business and shall render decisions and findings in writing to the appellant with a duplicate copy to the Authority Having Jurisdiction.
107.2 Limitations of Authority. The Board of Appeals shall have no authority relative to interpretation of the administrative provisions of this code, nor shall the board be empowered to waive requirements of this code.