An average day

[ICE]

I read your entire unedited post in the email notification sent to me.

I restored the original post.

 

[ICE]

It is estimated the 60% of so called ADU's are not permitted much less allowed.

That's the impetus behind ADU legislation. The garage conversions and subdivided dwellings were flourishing long before ADU became a thing. There is no way to deal with it other than to legalize them.

I would be sent to investigate a garage conversion because someone logded a complaint. Practically every house in the neighborhood had been converted. A notice would be given to obtain a permit to convert back to the original condition. That notice would be ignored. A lien would be recorded against the property for $1,250.00. There would be no attempt to collect and/or force compliance. The lien did not accrue interest, no permits could be issued for anything, upon sale of the property the lien had to be cleared only if there was a lending institution involved...and sometimes not even then.

So that has changed. Now that illegal garage conversion can become a legal ADU. There is grant money to ease the way to becoming a landlord. I for one applaud the effort. What I don't understand is the grant money and all of the paperwork. The system functioned just fine as it was and now?...well now the people living in garages get to pay higher rent.

 

[ICE]

A LOT of work is done in Long Beach sans permits.

That makes sense. How many of the inspectors that you know would you invite into your home to inspect anything?

A History of Code Compliance Abuse : Case in Point - Riverwalk Saloon, Lehighton, PA

Years ago, my third-party agency was given a set of plans to convert an apartment house into a bar and restaurant. The plans involved major structural changes and, of course, change of use, so under the IEBC, this is a Level 3 AND Change of Use and Occupancy. The plans submitted were...

www.thebuildingcodeforum.com

 

[tmurray]

I took Rick's comment from a post on swimming pools. I didn't want to drift the thread miles off course.


I have encountered that many times with all sorts of projects. I have been given written reprimands. Somehow it never bothered me. The last time was an insulation inspection where I wrote so many corrections on the framing and meps that meetings were held. The inspector that had approved everything up to the insulation was screaming at me.

I was handed a paper that said that I was ordered to approve the insulation or be charged with insubordination. There were two boxes....one for yes and one for no. I checked the no box and wrote "A thousand times no".

There was the time that office managers told me that I am not allowed to write corrections on top of an inspector's approval....beyond that I was only allowed to inspect for the completion of corrections if I was following behind an inspector... Then they said, and I quote, "You don't have to write every correction that you see."

I don't expect anyone to do as I did. I was not married until near the end of my career. My home and cars were paid for...I had savings...I've never lacked for employment opportunities...and I suppose that I am beyond caring what my coworkers thought of me. I had no expectation of being promoted to management. To be honest, there were only a few people worth managing and I am not an office person. Towards the end the offer came and I turned it down.

Given that the forum members are proficient in inspecting and a cut above the rest, I am curious as to how others handle these situations. I realize that the forum reach is nation wide. We even hear from the frozen North. There are small jurisdictions and huge as well. I know that the state of the industry in Southern California has turned dismal. That is probably true in a lot of large urban areas.

After I retired I was hired by a company that services building departments. I didn't want a regular assignment so I filled in for absent inspectors. I was sent to seven jurisdictions over about four months. Oh my gosh, what a mess they are. I wrote way too many corrections and the work dried up....that and I was usually done by 1:00pm and on my way home for an eight hour day. And I thought ** ****** was bad.

Your post, I think, gets to the crux of the issue. I came form a smaller jurisdiction where we typically saw the same contractors time and time again. The comment "you don't need to write every correction you see" rang true, but probably not the way it was intended in your case. At the start of my career I did one of the first framing inspection ever done in my jurisdiction. I had 3 pages of violations. I walked through everything with the framer, then we repeated the process on a second building, then we repeated it again on a third building.

We couldn't just keep writing the same correction time and time again, this process did not serve our interests, the interest of the contractor, or public interests. We asked ourselves why he wasn't getting it. Why he kept getting the same things wrong on every inspection. Well, we were giving him too much to learn at each inspection. So, we backed it off to just the corrections that were critical. He learned those and we stopped writing the corrections and started writing new ones. About two years later, we didn't need to write any corrections. Now, we prioritized corrections on impact to life safety, and even then, felt relatively safe in limiting our corrections. This guy had framed hundreds of houses, and none had any significant issues. These were more related to building longevity.

In smaller jurisdictions, we can make those kinds of investments in our contractors. Larger jurisdictions, it would require a substantial amount of coordination between inspectors to accomplish the same thing. I'm not sure it could work...

 

[tmurray]

"I dun fire-stopped it."


View attachment 10775

Is that a fire damper?

 

[Inspector Gadget]

We couldn't just keep writing the same correction time and time again, this process did not serve our interests, the interest of the contractor, of public interests. We asked ourselves why he wasn't getting it. Why he kept getting the same things wrong on every inspection. Well, we were giving him too much to learn at each inspection. So we backed it off to just the corrections that were critical. He learned those and we stopped writing the corrections and started writing new ones. About two years later, we didn't need to write any corrections. Now, we prioritized corrections on impact to life safety, and even then felt relatively safe in limiting our corrections. This guy had framed hundreds of houses and none had any significant issues. These were more related to building longevity.

That's been the approach in my jurisdiction. We've been raising the bar every year... as much mental anguish as it caused me to look at things like sixty miles of flex duct in a ceiling, it was more important for me to explain that wrapping a window in sheathing tape, or building a deck with deck screws as structural connections, wasn't kosher.

Now we're at a point where most contractors have the basics. So now we're tackling things like sixty miles of flex duct.

 

[Inspector Gadget]

Is that a fire damper?

Yessir. But the annular space has been lovingly closed with sprayfoam.

 

[klarenbeek]

Yessir. But the annular space has been lovingly closed with sprayfoam.

At least he didn't use firecaulk. That's what I usually see.

 

[tmurray]

Do you all allow intumescent fire stopping of the annular space adjacent to a fire damper?

I always made sure it was smoke tight but did not permit any intumescent products in the annular space unless explicitly permitted by the fire damper supplier in the listing.

 

[Inspector Gadget]

Do you all allow intumescent fire stopping of the annular space adjacent to a fire damper?

I always made sure it was smoke tight but did not permit any intumescent products in the annular space unless explicitly permitted by the fire damper supplier in the listing.

Most of the assemblies out there that I've seen for square ducts with intumescent caulk require a metal flange attached to the duct/damper to ensure the intumescent material doesn't deform the duct/damper.

I swear, the phrase that I always include in such things (though this is a file we inherited from another AHJ during area municipal reform stuff) is invisible.

It's like not a single soul sees "fire stop systems must be approved by this office prior to application."

 

[tmurray]

It's like not a single soul sees "fire stop systems must be approved by this office prior to application."

Well, not the design professionals or contractors. But when I required all the fire dampers be ripped out and replaced in two buildings built by a certain local multi-billion dollar family owned conglomerate, their staff engineer and lawyers quickly turned their attention away from me and I got compliance when I pointed to a similar requirement in the permit conditions.

Some poor HVAC engineer, who stamped the non-complaint submittal sheets, probably lost his job that day.

 

[ICE]

We couldn't just keep writing the same correction time and time again

I did that for an entire career. I encountered a handful of contractors several times a year and hundreds one time. The handful would get it wrong and when asked why they would say, "I didn't know that you were the inspector."

this process did not serve our interests, the interest of the contractor, or public interests.

The only interest that concerned me was the public.

So, we backed it off to just the corrections that were critical.

The only correction that I would overlook is the one that requires a vacuum breaker on a hose bib.

Now, we prioritized corrections on impact to life safety, and even then, felt relatively safe in limiting our corrections.

There has never been a limit put on the number of corrections that I would write. Several managers asked me to stop at twelve corrections. They felt that any more than twelve made look like I was taking it personal. I asked them what I should do about the next twelve and they said that I could write those on the next visit. No shlt...they said that and what's worse...meant it.

These were more related to building longevity.

There ya go....that would be the owner's interest.

 

[Inspector Gadget]

Well, not the design professionals or contractors. But when I required all the fire dampers be ripped out and replaced in two buildings built by a certain local multi-billion dollar

Nose-snort reaction over here.

family owned conglomerate, their staff engineer and lawyers quickly turned their attention away from me and I got compliance when I pointed to a similar requirement in the permit conditions.

Some poor HVAC engineer, who stamped the non-complaint submittal sheets, probably lost his job that day

On a strangely linked thought pattern, I am just now pondering how to craft letters of assurance forms, and possible ways to require said letters in building bylaws.

 

[Inspector Gadget]

There has never been a limit put on the number of corrections that I would write. Several managers asked me to stop at twelve corrections. They felt that any more than twelve made look like I was taking it personal. I asked them what I should do about the next twelve and they said that I could write those on the next visit. No shlt...they said that and what's worse...meant it.

All-time record for me was 23 violations found on a building that was being sold and hadn't had its final.

Next up: 13 corrections for a total catastrophe. Had that twice, same contractor, come to think of it. (Slow learner.)

As for "taking it personal," our office requires any notice of violation/correction to be accompanied by a reference to Code or standard .... it is intended to provide assurance that it's not something pulling our of our nether regions for malicious intent.

 

[ICE]

All-time record for me was 23 violations found on a building that was being sold and hadn't had its final.

I broke fifty. It took four hours. The job was framing and MEP on a new house. Not a big house either. Headquarters sent a phalanx of engineers to go over the corrections that I wrote. They validated them all and came up with one more. I was embarrassed about missing that one more. The contractor was an ethnic minority and he said that I was racist. The engineers were all from an ethnic minority. I am married to an ethnic minority. I was the only ethnic majority that worked in the district office so I was actually an ethnic minority....funny how I never felt racism.

Looking up the code sections would have been another four hours.

 

[klarenbeek]

Do you all allow intumescent fire stopping of the annular space adjacent to a fire damper?

I always made sure it was smoke tight but did not permit any intumescent products in the annular space unless explicitly permitted by the fire damper supplier in the listing.

Nothing in the annular space unless the fire damper manufacturer specifically allows it. The damper sleeve needs the room to allow expansion from heat to still be able to operate in the event of a fire. The retaining angles cover the gap of the annular space to make it relatively smoke tight.

 

[Plumb-bob]

Your post, I think, gets to the crux of the issue. I came form a smaller jurisdiction where we typically saw the same contractors time and time again. The comment "you don't need to write every correction you see" rang true, but probably not the way it was intended in your case. At the start of my career I did one of the first framing inspection ever done in my jurisdiction. I had 3 pages of violations. I walked through everything with the framer, then we repeated the process on a second building, then we repeated it again on a third building.

We couldn't just keep writing the same correction time and time again, this process did not serve our interests, the interest of the contractor, or public interests. We asked ourselves why he wasn't getting it. Why he kept getting the same things wrong on every inspection. Well, we were giving him too much to learn at each inspection. So, we backed it off to just the corrections that were critical. He learned those and we stopped writing the corrections and started writing new ones. About two years later, we didn't need to write any corrections. Now, we prioritized corrections on impact to life safety, and even then, felt relatively safe in limiting our corrections. This guy had framed hundreds of houses, and none had any significant issues. These were more related to building longevity.

In smaller jurisdictions, we can make those kinds of investments in our contractors. Larger jurisdictions, it would require a substantial amount of coordination between inspectors to accomplish the same thing. I'm not sure it could work...

I am in the same situation in a small town. It has taken 5 years for the building community to get used to me but we are all generally on the same page now, with some exceptions and surprises from time to time.

In a small town, word gets around pretty quickly about shady builders and contractors. As such, I would say our average level of construction quality here is quite good, as the "fly by night" type gets a poor reputation very quickly and is pushed out of the market.

I have spent a bit of time in Vancouver with other inspectors and was horrified by some of what I saw, everything subbed out to the lowest bidder with resulting low quality. The city inspectors really have to be on their toes! However, I can also see the benefit of not personally knowing every contractor on every job, every day.

 

[ICE]

A friend that is an inspector sent me these pictures. He works from home performing virtual inspections. The inspection that he was doing is for solar. The GEC connections were previously approved by an in person inspection of a service panel upgrade.

 

[ICE]

There's a Canadian thread about roofing with multiple layers. Apparently there is no limit to the number of layers that are allowed. Seems odd to me.

Little Old Lady
​

I was driving down the street when I spotted a re-roof in progress. Being the only inspector in the town, well there was another but he hardly ever showed up for work….okay so me being the only inspector, I knew that there wasn’t a permit. I was also fairly new to the occupation and a tad bit too eager so I got involved.

The roof had an existing two layers of asphalt shingles and the pitch was about 4” in 12”. The owner was an octogenarian widow. She told me that she got several estimates and all of the contractors except this guy wanted a lot of money to tear off the existing roofing. She said that this guy could cut the extra expense in half with special lightweight shingles. She offered that she has paid $1000 so far and owes another $3000. I told her to sit on her money until I approve the work.

They weren’t far into it. I gave them a stop work notice and asked them to get a permit.
Some days later the lady called me at the office. She was crying. I went right over. She said that at 10pm last night some guys on motorcycles woke her up demanding a check. She was told that if she didn’t pay them she would lose the house. Of course she didn’t pay or sleep that night and she was trembling. It was hard to witness.

Well the roof was completed without me. I called the contractor. He said Hello. I said, “I know how to deal with demons.” “Pay attention”…

“You will obtain a permit”…”There will be a fine attached”…”You will remove all three layers and install a single layer” … “Lets review the cost. $1000 for the permit. $1500 tear off. $1500 for a new roof. And the whole time you could have been bilking a different person so there’s a loss of another $2500”. “That’s $6500 to collect $4000”.
“This is your other option. You walk away with the illegal $1000 that you have already taken and stay away from the lady. If she tells me that you contacted her again I will have every government agency from Animal Control to the IRS up your ass. So what’s your choice?”

He said, “You really do know how to deal with a demon.” ...and hung up.

The roof was 2”x6” rafters and carried the weight with no problems. I told the lady to keep the money available for a year or so and to contact me immediately if the hooligans come around. I didn’t hear from any of them again.

That's not the end of the story as a County Supervisor overheard my end of the call. She went off. Apparently I am not the judge, jury and executioner of that city. I respectfully pointed out that I was the building inspector. I was working in a contract city so she reported me to the County District Office. Those folks knew me well enough to leave it alone. It's good to be the inspector.

 

[MtnArch]

Ahh .. so THAT'S where your user name came from! You have to be able to sit on a hot stove and 'p' icewater!

 

[MtnArch]

(sorry .. borrowed that from an old Darrell Waltrip quote but felt it fits ICE!)

 

[ICE]

Winning​

1996. I was due to graduate from college with ICBO certifications in building, plumbing, mechanical, electrical and plans examiner. It had been a year of intense study. I hadn’t been able to do much of anything other than digest codes. A few weeks prior to graduation a lady approached the teachers seeking help with a recalcitrant contractor.

The lady was recently divorced with two young children. A genuine Betty she was. Her home had been the subject of a great deal of shoddy remodel work. She had approached the City asking for help because the furnace had died and it was a winter with scant resources. That’s when the City Rehabilitation Program took over. Money was allocated, a contractor was hired.

$40,000.00 worth of work was done. Well I shouldn’t use the word “worth” as the work was laughable. The number of code violations was amazing and the scope of work included idiotic projects. To top it off, the new furnace didn’t work. I would provide a detailed account here but I’ve lost track of the details and a hundred page report that I generated.

The lady sought the help of lawyers. The lawyers wanted an upfront retainer fee that she didn’t have. One lawyer suggested an alternate inducement which Betty declined. So I commenced dealings with the City’s risk management person.

The end result was that the City purchased the property at the fair market value had they not ruined the home. The $40.000.00 debt went away and she was awarded an extra $50k. I was paid $8k. Of course her bi-sexual girlfriend's lawyer husband stepped up at the last stretch...so there's that. Shirley I could have left that out but hey now, that's the way it went down.

Start to finish took three months. I visited the property a dozen times. Digital cameras had not been available yet but there was a computer program that allowed screen shots from a video. Canon Corp and I made a report worthy of any documentary. Because the City controlled the payments to the contractor, I was able to show prior case law that made the City a general contractor and therefor responsible for the end result.

During the course of negotiation I was referred to as a wanna be building inspector by the city council. The sleazy lawyer saw my report and offered to put me through law school with the proviso that I work for him for six years. I did for $8k what the lawyers wanted $25k.

I lived in that county. I lost any prospect of employment within a hundred miles of that county. I did find work six-hundred miles south of that county. I wonder if they remember me.

 

[Plumb-bob]

Hey ICE, you should write a book of inspection anecdotes.

There is a BC inspector that wrote a book called "Building Inspector Memories" I believe, I found it quite entertaining.

 

[ICE]

Hey ICE, you should write a book of inspection anecdotes.

There is a BC inspector that wrote a book called "Building Inspector Memories" I believe, I found it quite entertaining.

I just ordered the book from Amazon.