Existing Gates - Renovated Pool

[Joe.B]

You're not a building inspector

You're the building police. Remind me, where do you work?

 

[Joe.B]

That was supposed to be said <sardonically>

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

I don't think it is any different than doing an inspection for a permit where they are adding a new receptacle in an existing house, and you notice that the bedroom window is too small, or the basement stairway is almost ready to fall down. I can suggest they get it up to code, but that's all.

Bad example. In an old house, a bedroom window probably didn't need to meet rescue window dimensions at the time of construction, so it wouldn't be a violation. If it WAS subject to a code requirement for rescue window size when originally constructed, then if you are there to inspect something else and you see the window -- you have a duty to cite it as an on-going violation and to require remediation.

The difference is whether or not the condition was allowed under the code that applied at the time of original construction.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

One problem here is we did not have any codes until 20 years ago, after 95% of the buildings here were built.

If there was no applicable code, then there's no violation.

The pool barrier gates in the question were subject to a code when installed, and did not comply with the applicable code when installed. That makes them on-going violations.

 

[steveray]

I was at a police supply store purchasing a ticket book for my correction slips. As I paid, the lady behind the counter said, "Stay safe out there." I replied that I am not a police officer. She asked what I was and when I told her that I am a building inspector she said, "Oh that's much worse. A cop can take their car and you can take the house."

There was a day when I observed a 6' tall split-face fence leaning 45° over a sidewalk. Two little girls were walking under the leaning wall. I approached the property owner, an elderly woman and her son. I was adament that the wall was an extreme hazard and must be dealt with immediately. There is a swimming pool in the yard so a temporary fence was required while they sorted out what to replace the barrier with.

A few weeks later I drove by and the wall was still there and leaning a little more. I stopped again and went down the same road as before only this time I gave them seventy-two hours to comply. On the fourth day it had not been done. I took a different approach and told them that I would have a County crew demo the block wall and attach a lien to the property tax bill. The son perked right up and the elderly lady asked about the temporay barrier. I told them that a barrier isn't required when I do the demo because we will put the demolished wall in the pool. You will be able to walk on water, so to speak.

The wall was gone and a temp fence was up in two days.

In the days before cell phones I had a case with the fence removed and no barrier. I tried to talk the owner into erecting a barrier to avail. On my last visit I didn't spend much time talking about dead children and simply asked to use the phone. The lady asked who I wanted to call and I told her that I will call the Fire Dept. That changed her demeanor. I explained that the FD has big pumps and I was fixing to drain the pool. Well I didn't have to make the call.

I both of these stories I had no authority to do what I did. I got the job done. The choice is yours. You can be a building inspector or just another guy with a pad of correction slips.

You're not a building inspector unless you are prepared to 'take the house'.

I have torn people's houses down for them.....

 

[ICE]

The difference is whether or not the condition was allowed under the code that applied at the time of original construction.

The difference is whether a child can get to the pool. Who gives a rip about this code or that code? It has never occurred to me to wonder if there is a code for everything that I run into.

I used to be tasked with business license inspections for a contract city. A convenience store opened and when I went there I found a display of porno tapes by the register. Raunchy pictures on VHS tapes and some awful magazines. Of course I said no. The owner was upset because the porn was bringing in money. This stuff was at eye level for small children.

I was called into the city managers office to explain myself. No questions were asked about codes, ordinances, or laws. My authority was not mentioned. I was instructed to keep up the good work.

The owner relocated the offensive porn to another location where kids have access. Nope. He built an alcove for the porn. Nope. He put a curtian over the entry to the alcove. Not yet.

I told him that the alcove has to have a locked door and the customer has to get the key from him. That's when he said that people will be doing terrible things in a locked alcove filled with porn. To which I said life's a bitch and perhaps a roll of paper towels is the answer. The porn went away because I kept up the good work.

In a few years the entire strip mall went away because the city was sued for not having enough low income housing. eminent domain claimed the property and atrocious condominiums were built.

 

[wwhitney]

This stuff was at eye level for small children.

Most would agree that is something society should not allow. So if your jurisdiction has enacted a clearly written law indicating the limitations for the sale of such material, and you turned down only what was not allowed under that law, and accepted what was allowed under that law, good job. If you were making it up because there was no law, or if you rejected proposals that met the requirements of the law because you didn't find them adequate, that was an abuse of power.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[ICE]

Abuse of power all the way.

 

[Joe.B]

Abuse of power all the way.

 

[ICE]

View attachment 15053

I have never made the claim that I fit in. Why would I?

 

[Joe.B]

In have never made the claim that I fit in. Why would I?

Not saying you would, or should, or could. Just calling it like I see it, cowboy.

 

[Joe.B]

 

[jar546]

One problem here is we did not have any codes until 20 years ago, after 95% of the buildings here were built.

Under Pennsylvania law, the Building Official has a clear duty to enforce the Uniform Construction Code (UCC) when life-safety issues are identified, regardless of whether they were previously missed. 34 Pa. Code § 403.84 explicitly requires the correction of unsafe conditions that pose a risk to public welfare, meaning the non-compliant pool gates must be addressed now that they have been discovered. The notion that past oversights somehow exempt current enforcement is misguided—34 Pa. Code § 403.1(a) states that the UCC applies to the construction, alteration, repair, and maintenance of structures, which includes the renovated pool area. Inspections conducted under 34 Pa. Code § 403.45 are not just routine checks; they are essential to ensuring compliance and public safety. Turning a blind eye to a known life-safety violation isn’t an option, and looking for reasons to avoid enforcement doesn't change the fact that it's the job of the inspector to uphold the code. The bottom line is that life-safety provisions are not up for debate—they exist to protect people, and it’s the Building Official’s responsibility to enforce them, not to find excuses to avoid doing so.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

Driving to a building for an inspection I could see at least a dozen of unsafe conditions on the way, and this could happen up to 10 times a day. If I say anything to the BCO about them he would probably tell me to keep my eyes on the road.

 

[jar546]

Driving to a building for an inspection I could see at least a dozen of unsafe conditions on the way, and this could happen up to 10 times a day. If I say anything to the BCO about them he would probably tell me to keep my eyes on the road.

You just don't get it, do you? There was a pool renovation permit, including the deck around the pool, mechanical equipment, electrical, etc. This has no relevance to just driving around and seeing violations. Why do you continue to attempt to justify your inaction? Honestly, with how you describe building officials in PA, why even have a code?

 

[bill1952]

Is there a difference between previously missed and accepted? I've had officials accept something even after I pointed out it was not completely compliant because of existing condition, whatever.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

You just don't get it, do you? There was a pool renovation permit, including the deck around the pool, mechanical equipment, electrical, etc. This has no relevance to just driving around and seeing violations. Why do you continue to attempt to justify your inaction? Honestly, with how you describe building officials in PA, why even have a code?

There are numerous pools and spas in my area that do not have any guards around them. Some were built before we had codes and some never passed their final inspection. I drive by them every day. We do not have the power to ticket or fine anyone. We would have to file a civil suit and pay a lawyer to go to court. We lose most cases because of how the state laws are written which makes use look bad. If we win, the judge can impose a fine which would not go back to us. No profit in this.

 

[steveray]

Is there a difference between previously missed and accepted? I've had officials accept something even after I pointed out it was not completely compliant because of existing condition, whatever.

Alternative means and methods, engineered design, modification are all way to meet code when you don’t meet code…

 

[jar546]

There are numerous pools and spas in my area that do not have any guards around them. Some were built before we had codes and some never passed their final inspection. I drive by them every day. We do not have the power to ticket or fine anyone. We would have to file a civil suit and pay a lawyer to go to court. We lose most cases because of how the state laws are written which makes use look bad. If we win, the judge can impose a fine which would not go back to us. No profit in this.

You keep banging the same drum. I for one, am a little tired of hearing the same beat.

 

[Inspector Gadget]

There are numerous pools and spas in my area that do not have any guards around them. Some were built before we had codes and some never passed their final inspection.

Doesn't that create a common-law duty of care to do something about it?

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Is there a difference between previously missed and accepted? I've had officials accept something even after I pointed out it was not completely compliant because of existing condition, whatever.

The code explicitly states that building officials have no authority to approve anything that doesn't conform to code requirements, and that any such purported approval is invalid. Code sections cited in post #17.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

There are numerous pools and spas in my area that do not have any guards around them. Some were built before we had codes and some never passed their final inspection. I drive by them every day. We do not have the power to ticket or fine anyone. We would have to file a civil suit and pay a lawyer to go to court. We lose most cases because of how the state laws are written which makes use look bad. If we win, the judge can impose a fine which would not go back to us. No profit in this.

You're still missing the point.

First, unless a code requirement is retroactive (which building codes aren't), there is no requirement to upgrade something constructed prior to the enactment of a code to current code requirements. If most of the structures in your jurisdiction were built before there was a building code in effect -- everything that's already there is grandfathered unless some law or code creates a retroactive requirement.

Second, there's a HUGE difference between driving around town and [maybe] seeing something on a property you drive past, versus being ON a specific site, by appointment, to perform a required and scheduled inspection.

Third, I don't think laws requiring building codes do so for the purpose of ensuring that third-party inspection companies make a profit. I think codes are supposed to be about public safety.

 

[BN4537]

No profit in this.

While this is absolutely the wrong way to think as a government employee whose job is to promote public safety, this is an entirely legitimate position for a third-party inspection company to take. You cannot expect mercenaries to have the same attitude as your dedicated troops. They have their purposes and uses, but they are not the same.

If the jurisdiction cared about safety, they wouldn't allow the hiring of third parties at all. Or, at least, they would manipulate the profit incentive to give the desired results.

One might further argue that, in this instance, they are receiving the results they desire... put the blinders on and don't make waves. A third-party inspector in such an environment is providing the services paid for, and whatever services they get paid to provide do realize a net benefit to the population as a whole. Making money and doing a little good on the side is not a bad gig, and they have no obligation to go beyond that.

"Mercenary Inspections LLC" - has a nice ring to it... Maybe an idea to save for the future...

 

[ICE]

We would have to file a civil suit and pay a lawyer to go to court. We lose most cases because of how the state laws are written which makes use look bad. If we win, the judge can impose a fine which would not go back to us. No profit in this.

Who's the 'we' in this? You represent the AHJ so it woukld be the AHJ that hires a lawyer and hauls them to court.

If you lose most cases, you are barking up the wrong tree or just not good at it.

Your company doesn't collect the fine because the infraction was not against you. Your company gets paid for each hour that you work whether you are testifying in court or washing a school bus.

A third party inspection company will not find windfall profits. The contract sets the rate that is paid for the inspector. Remuneration is based on hours worked not work product.