• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

No permit, job completed, possible structural issues

jar546

jar546

CBO
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
12,939
Location
Not where I really want to be
After the fact, we found this that once had a ceiling:

How does your department handle this?

IMG_9649.jpg


IMG_9650.jpg
 
If that is a "Ridge Beam" buried where we can't see it. I want to know how they headered it over that window. Chances are that is NOT a ridge beam but only a ridge board. Skylights were not there either.
 
I'm sure you are right on all counts, I doubt theres a beam, or the header above the window.......get an engineer folks! That would be my comment.

Looks purty tho.......
 
That's the problem with most bad construction; it usually is covered with a pretty facade.

One action would be to require exposing sections of the construction for inspection; with appropriate fines and/or fees.

Another is to write the violation; and, put a cloud on the title.

Insurance companies look for this kind of illegal construction; for a reason to not pay claims; and, homeowners should be aware of this.

Uncle Bob
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Require that a testing laboratory or an engineer investigate and document the existing framing of the roof. Require pictures and other documentation be provided. Then require that the engineer provide calcuations or other evidence of code compliance.

Tell the owner that you consider the building to be not in compliance with the code and that you will take steps to abate the non-compliance but because you are a good guy you will give them a couple of weeks to resolve the problem.
 
give them a couple of weeks to resolve the problem.
Click to expand...
While working for a risk-averse jurisdiction, we were told not to offer an allowable period of noncompliance - if something happened during that time, there was a concern that there was risk for us for accepting/permitting the non-compliant condition, albeit temporarily, to exist.

There will no doubt be some period of time before you are able to return to verify that the deficiencies have been corrected. Nonetheless, the work is not in compliance, and will remain as such until it is corrected, which you will verify at some later time...hopefully before the snow and wind come in this case!
 
I guess that inspectors see problems where engineers see solutions. (Looking at the pictures I can see several ways to engineer the building.)
 
We would allow them to expose the framing for an inspection, or have a licensed structural engineer sign off on the work. If the property owner chooses to do neither we 1.) Put the property owner in violation (which our jurisdiction does not pursue) 2.) Place a memo in the property file and 3.) Place a hold on all future building permits. I also remind them (as uncle bob stated) that insurance companies look for reasons to get out of paying claims, and unpermitted construction is a great reason.
 
"I guess that inspectors see problems where engineers see solutions."

Agreed, hence my comment...............
 
"I guess that inspectors see problems where engineers see solutions."

I prefer to see it as inspectors verify that a project complies with the building code. Whenever a project falls outside of those code accepted practices an licensed engineer can be sought out to verify the structure can carry the required loads. Although we can try to assist property owners to correct these issues we also have to bear in mind that the municipality could be found liable for any corrections we propose which fall outside of the code; " I think it was strong enough" does not hold up in court.
 
Besides the structural issues, I wonder how long it will be before the roof rots out, assuming they have the insulation packed against the roof sheathing.
 
NH09 said:
We would allow them to expose the framing for an inspection, or have a licensed structural engineer sign off on the work. If the property owner chooses to do neither we 1.) Put the property owner in violation (which our jurisdiction does not pursue) 2.) Place a memo in the property file and 3.) Place a hold on all future building permits. I also remind them (as uncle bob stated) that insurance companies look for reasons to get out of paying claims, and unpermitted construction is a great reason.
Click to expand...
Unless the next project somehow interfaced with this project area, I don't know that legally a proper building permit application for a separate project area can be denied. We take a "every application stands on it's own merit" position, but I'd be interested in learning if either position has been tested in court (?)
 
Write a violation notice, require approved permits and engineered plans, expose any areas where you feel comfortable to inspect, and pursue it until it complies and you feel comfortable finaling the permit. They probably have a nice photo album of the work in progress but will claim: "I didn't know we needed a permit......"
 
We have code enforcement handle it. That means until a complete submittal and permit issued have handle it. Once the permit is issue I would get involved on what we will need to do to inspect it. I am sure there is an EOR that will be preforming the structural inspection and stamping his approval or it will be expose everything. I am sure the insurance company would be pretty hot about this as well if they knew.
 
In response to Yankee's reply, we only put a hold on the permit after a violation has been issued. If property is still in violation when they come in for a new permit we work with the property owner to fix the violations. If they choose not to correct the violations then I suppose they could take it to court, however that has not happened yet. In all past cases we have been able to acheive a reasonable level of compliance prior to issuing a permit for the new project.
 
GHRoberts said:
I guess that inspectors see problems where engineers see solutions. (Looking at the pictures I can see several ways to engineer the building.)
Click to expand...
I can think of several myself.

Experience would lead me to bet that none of them were used on an unpermitted residential addition.
 
beach said:
Write a violation notice, require approved permits and engineered plans, expose any areas where you feel comfortable to inspect, and pursue it until it complies and you feel comfortable finaling the permit. They probably have a nice photo album of the work in progress but will claim: "I didn't know we needed a permit......"
Click to expand...
Agree with you totally Beach.

Sue, living la vida loca in the land of fruits & nuts ;)
 
Pull back some of that purty finish to expose framing in suspect areas. If beyond the scope of the IRC, call an engineer. Double the amount typically charged for permit fees.

I sure would like to see the framing around that paladium window. Most likely the skylights are not framed correctly either. Did they claim ignorance of the requirement for a permit for this kind of work?
 
Will suggest that engineers can see potential problems that most inspectors will not see. The reason that engineers are seen as focusing on solutions is because they are the ones that have to find a fix.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top