Bryan Holland
Silver Member
This is the overhead service drop from the utility pole to the dwelling service...
Once it's inside the new building it will be.....not an acceptable wiring method 330, service violations 230, and so on...Frank said:On utility side of meterOutside the scope of the building code
i'm damn near with Frank except i would say outside the scope of the electrical code!Frank said:On utility side of meterOutside the scope of the building code
Exactly as should have happened when they pull this crap.Bryan Holland said:The service is supplying an existing dwelling. The new structure being built is a detached garage. The permit includes relocating the service on the dwelling. The POCO (FPL) has scheduled the disconnection of the existing service & reconnection to the new service 2-weeks out. The builder of the detached garage didn't feel like waiting. The service was still energized at the time the blockmasons built the wall. We caught it when they actually scheduled a fill-cell / tie-beam inspection & thought we wouldn't notice or care about the service drop located in the wall.FPL was notified. They immediately disconnected the service & removed the service drop. They notifed the owner they would be back in 2-weeks to hook up the new service as originally scheduled. Th homeowner has been without power since then...
IMO, because doing things right takes time and that usually means more money! Also,the trades person may not be a legal citizen in this country, hence, they are not goingwhy can't "tradespeople" act like tradespeople ? a good mason would have raised the concern, and had the riser brought up higer so as not to build it intop the wall. rediculous