Five Effects as a Result of Poor or Complacent Building Inspections and Enforcement

[jar546]

Poor building code enforcement and complacency of building inspectors can have a number of negative impacts on society, including:

1. Safety hazards: Buildings that are not constructed or maintained to current building codes can pose significant safety hazards to the people who use them. This can include issues such as structural failure, fire hazards, and inadequate emergency egress.
2. Economic impact: Poorly constructed buildings can have a negative impact on the local economy. They may be less desirable to live in, and may discourage businesses from operating in the area. This can lead to decreased property values and a lack of economic growth.
3. Displacement of residents: When buildings are found to be unsafe and are condemned, residents may be forced to leave their homes, which can be a traumatic experience and cause significant disruption to their lives.
4. Cost of repairs: If building code violations are not identified and addressed in a timely manner, the cost of repairs can be much higher than if they had been addressed earlier. This can be a significant burden on building owners and the government.
5. Loss of trust in government: A lack of building code enforcement and complacency of building inspectors can lead to a loss of trust in government. When people do not believe that the government is protecting their safety and well-being, they may be less likely to support government initiatives and more likely to be skeptical of government-provided services.

 

[ICE]

Chat GPT at work?

 

[ICE]

One would think that there's the five reasons that you identified and even more which would compel the jurisdictions to bring their A game. I have first hand knowledge of how lax it really is. The jurisdictions pay more attention to the public than they do to the job.

A litmus test is an ICC certification. Granted, the certification is not a testament of competency but it is an indication that the jurisdiction has a clue about the function of a building department. I can check city after city and the inspectors have one or none.

I have posted many examples of dereliction and even criminal behavior that goes unchecked. So what is the result? Of the five consequences that you provided which is the worst? The truth is no harm, no foul. Buildings are not falling down. Spontaneous combustion isn't happening. People are not getting poisoned or asphyxiated in their sleep. Everybody is just as happy as if they had good sense.

Well then here's the good news. Twenty-five years ago I became an inspector. At that time inspectors were responsible individuals that were granted enormous authority. It has been trending down for all of those twenty-five years. As you would expect, the spiral has gained momentum. Having gone from an educated work force to what passes today created an environment where old habits that were correct were the saving grace. The complete erosion that starts at the top will eventually overcome any grace....and then all bets will be off.

As a side note: When I say that I have insider knowledge .... trust me, you would call me a liar if I told you the truth.

 

[Beniah Naylor]

One item that was not listed is that the knowledge and skill of the trades decline sharply without competent inspections. Many contractors take pride in their work, but without an inspector to point out issues, they learn only by trial and error. The failure of trial and error is that many times the contractor who performed an installation will not be the one who is called back to fix it when it fails. The new contractor does not always correctly assess what the original issue was, so the new contractor does not always learn either. Contractors pass on their ignorance to the next generation, and many times the next generation did not get a lot of training anyway, so the cycle of ignorance is perpetuated.

When they finally meet a competent inspector, it is a rude awakening that most are not able to accept because they have "been doing it that way for 20+ years". Then they ask when it changed... which makes it awkward to explain that it has been wrong for 20+ years... sometimes 50+ years... sometimes forever... The precedent set by decades of doing it wrong is usually stronger in an individual's mind than documented objective proof showing the need to change. It is extremely difficult to accept that you have been one of the hacks you constantly deride to other contractors and your customers, and have been for many years.

The good part is that contractors that usually work in competent jurisdictions will largely keep keep building to the standard they are accustomed to, even in neighboring jurisdictions that don't do as competent inspections, or do no inspections. So, the work you do in your jurisdiction can elevate the quality of the work done outside your jurisdiction. Inspectors can't be everywhere or watch everything get done, but they drive up the competence of the industry overall. There is much a contractor would never learn through trial and error alone.

 

[Mark K]

Maybe the trades need to understand what is required and not try to hide behind bad habits. Relying on inspectors who got their training from working in the trade to teach the trades what is in the code does not seem to make sense.

It also does not help when the inspections of different inspectors are not consistent. Because of these inconsistencies individuals get mixed messages. Do building departments adequately supervise their inspectors?

 

[jar546]

Maybe the trades need to understand what is required and not try to hide behind bad habits. Relying on inspectors who got their training from working in the trade to teach the trades what is in the code does not seem to make sense.

This is part of a bigger problem whereas the trades are not getting much, if any code training nor are they even getting trade training. The only place I see good training for workers is in the union construction trades. Some of them can be a model for everyone else.

It also does not help when the inspections of different inspectors are not consistent. Because of these inconsistencies individuals get mixed messages. Do building departments adequately supervise their inspectors?

I don't think that many departments have the resources to properly supervise the inspectors. As a result of poor code knowledge, bad habits from being a contractor and the political environment, you now have the breeding grounds for inconsistency in enforcement.

 

[Beniah Naylor]

Maybe the trades need to understand what is required and not try to hide behind bad habits.

All I know is that when they are left to themselves, the overall competency plunges. Given the set-up we have here in Kansas, we can easily contrast how things are done with no inspectors present, vs what we have in our jurisdiction.

The political will to properly run a building department is lacking in many places, due probably to a failure of marketing on the part of the building department. If the politics do not favor proper enforcement of the codes, which is an honorable goal, obviously the public is not aware of the importance, and opposing forces are controlling the narrative. In plain speak, people are hearing more negative things about the enforcement of building codes than they are about what happens when it isn't there.

Strong public opinion drives the politics that either promotes a strong building department that elevates the standard of the competency, or strangles the building department funding, salaries, number of positions, etc, which in turn leads to all of the issues that poor and inconsistent inspections cause.

 

[Plumb-bob]

Maybe the trades need to understand what is required and not try to hide behind bad habits. Relying on inspectors who got their training from working in the trade to teach the trades what is in the code does not seem to make sense.

It also does not help when the inspections of different inspectors are not consistent. Because of these inconsistencies individuals get mixed messages. Do building departments adequately supervise their inspectors?

I do not see the average tradesman keeping up with both the advances in the actual trade work that are happening at a rapid pace, and keeping up with the codes, which are constantly changing. I think inspectors should be playing an educational role as we are one of the only stakeholders that have ongoing code training.

As a side note, I also deal with architects and engineers that could use some building code refreshers.

 

[steveray]

All I know is that when they are left to themselves, the overall competency plunges. Given the set-up we have here in Kansas, we can easily contrast how things are done with no inspectors present, vs what we have in our jurisdiction.

The political will to properly run a building department is lacking in many places, due probably to a failure of marketing on the part of the building department. If the politics do not favor proper enforcement of the codes, which is an honorable goal, obviously the public is not aware of the importance, and opposing forces are controlling the narrative. In plain speak, people are hearing more negative things about the enforcement of building codes than they are about what happens when it isn't there.

Strong public opinion drives the politics that either promotes a strong building department that elevates the standard of the competency, or strangles the building department funding, salaries, number of positions, etc, which in turn leads to all of the issues that poor and inconsistent inspections cause.

One of the best, simplest sum ups I have seen...

 

[jar546]

All I know is that when they are left to themselves, the overall competency plunges. Given the set-up we have here in Kansas, we can easily contrast how things are done with no inspectors present, vs what we have in our jurisdiction.

The political will to properly run a building department is lacking in many places, due probably to a failure of marketing on the part of the building department. If the politics do not favor proper enforcement of the codes, which is an honorable goal, obviously the public is not aware of the importance, and opposing forces are controlling the narrative. In plain speak, people are hearing more negative things about the enforcement of building codes than they are about what happens when it isn't there.

Strong public opinion drives the politics that either promotes a strong building department that elevates the standard of the competency, or strangles the building department funding, salaries, number of positions, etc, which in turn leads to all of the issues that poor and inconsistent inspections cause.

This is an outstanding post and says a lot.

 

[jar546]

All I know is that when they are left to themselves, the overall competency plunges. Given the set-up we have here in Kansas, we can easily contrast how things are done with no inspectors present, vs what we have in our jurisdiction.

So very, very true. Good contractors who pull permits and know they are getting inspected fail inspections. Imagine what the contractor who does not pull permits is doing.

Case in point.

One of my friends is getting his kitchen remodeled and asked me to stop by. I asked him if he had a permit and he said no. Interesting I thought and warned him about not getting permits just to "save a couple of bucks and some time." They decided that they wanted a clean backsplash, therefore they are going to hide the receptacles underneath the top cabinets with wiremold. In order to do that, the existing receptacles were removed and extended upward. Guess what I found? They removed the boxes and pushed the splices with the new NM back into the wall and was just going to cover it up. No junction box, no rewiring to extend it the right way. Just bury splices in the walls. This is what you get when you know you are not getting inspected. Incompetence & willful misconduct which equals gross negligence.

 

[steveray]

So very, very true. Good contractors who pull permits and know they are getting inspected fail inspections. Imagine what the contractor who does not pull permits is doing.

Case in point.

One of my friends is getting his kitchen remodeled and asked me to stop by. I asked him if he had a permit and he said no. Interesting I thought and warned him about not getting permits just to "save a couple of bucks and some time." They decided that they wanted a clean backsplash, therefore they are going to hide the receptacles underneath the top cabinets with wiremold. In order to do that, the existing receptacles were removed and extended upward. Guess what I found? They removed the boxes and pushed the splices with the new NM back into the wall and was just going to cover it up. No junction box, no rewiring to extend it the right way. Just bury splices in the walls. This is what you get when you know you are not getting inspected. Incompetence & willful misconduct which equals gross negligence.

At least they could have used the TYCO splices.....

 

[SCBO1]

At my current muni I have only been fortunate to run into one contractor that owned a code book. He grabbed his code book when I wrote him up for not having a tempered glass in a window next to his 3-0 door. His customer switched out a patio door for a window and walkout door which was not on the plans. We discussed the code right there in the room. It was refreshing to find out he took the time to purchase a code book although it was three year's out of date, it was the same verbiage.

The only place I see good training for workers is in the union construction trades.

Union worker:
We had a union electrical worker do some work on a commercial job here, it was the best work I had seen. He told me he learned his trade in Chicago. I could only gig em on an open junction box, the GC said he had the box open and took the bullet for him. I remember saying "Please come back and do some more work here, It makes my job so much easier!"