• 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.

Retaliatory Building Inspector? How to handle this situation.

didn't touch a thing above the floor joists. The plumbing and electrical below deck was extended to grade because the house was now 12 feet higher. The service panel was brought down to grade. The stairs were extended up to deck level.
 
ICE said:
Were there no seismic issues to deal with? The inspector seems to be a trusting sort and you made the mistake of insulting him….in his own mind anyway.
Click to expand...
huh? This was an air conditioning install upstairs. What does seismic have to do with anything? The only insult to him was I called him on his "no-show x 2" and then trying to make ME pay the re-inspection fee. Not sure where "trust" has anything to do with it? He inspected the home and signed off on the final. He had EVERY opportunity to call for corrrections or ask questions at that time did he not? Where is it MY burden to do his job?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My apologies I'm a bit frustrated.

Can someone point me to the code section (if it exists) that requires building inpectors to provide/cite the code section for each violation?
 
jakesktm said:
My apologies I'm a bit frustrated.

Can someone point me to the code section (if it exists) that requires building inpectors to provide/cite the code section for each violation?
Click to expand...
Found the applicable code. California Health and Safety Code Sec. 19870 (a)-(d) requires inspector to provide articulated reasoning and code citation for wach violation.
 
jakesktm said:
huh? This was an air conditioning install upstairs. What does seismic have to do with anything? The only insult to him was I called him on his "no-show x 2" and then trying to make ME pay the re-inspection fee. Not sure where "trust" has anything to do with it? He inspected the home and signed off on the final. He had EVERY opportunity to call for corrrections or ask questions at that time did he not? Where is it MY burden to do his fucking job?
Click to expand...
No need for taking the language in that direction, that IMO you should edit, but be what it may.

Here in lies the rub, if you add up the number of hours alone you spent on this forum on this and apply a number to that, and then add in all the other costs you have spent to save less than $100.00. It is not about the money at all and as thus, Strickley a point.

Points like this are like opinions and assumptions, and unless the end goal is to have that person removed from office, you will turn blue and be dead before then.

What I believe you are having a hard time with, at least from where I sit 3,000 miles away, is a failure to understand that I doubt the inspector cares if they are right or wrong, they are just not going to make this easy for you, again over a cost of less than diner out with no drinks.

Good luck, no matter where it goes, but education cost money, and normally the public servant is not left holding the bill.

Cheers - Tom
 
Last edited:
tbz said:
Here in lies the rub, if you add up the number of hours alone you spent on this forum on this and apply a number to that, and then add in all the other costs you have spent to save less than $100.00.
Click to expand...
I think the problem is … that horse has spilt the milk and gone over the dam.

If he had paid the reinspection fee this probably would not have happened. But when he refused, the inspector escalated to a nuclear level and there’s no turning back. No he’s trying to do damage control.
 
e hilton said:
I think the problem is … that horse has spilt the milk and gone over the dam.

If he had paid the reinspection fee this probably would not have happened. But when he refused, the inspector escalated to a nuclear level and there’s no turning back. No he’s trying to do damage control.
Click to expand...
This is true. I now see clearly how building inspectors act with absolute impunity. And when I say "absolute" it's not hyperbole. There is a serious flaw in the system of building regulations and enforcement.
 
jakesktm said:
This is true. I now see clearly how building inspectors act with absolute impunity. And when I say "absolute" it's not hyperbole. There is a serious flaw in the system of building regulations and enforcement.
Click to expand...
While that can and has happened, it is a certain percentage of inspectors. I have witnessed inspectors that were serial offenders. They were tolerated by management that avoids all forms of conflict. Rather than trying to reel in an outlier it is easier to ignore the malfeasance until a customer complains. Even given a complaint, the inspector would not be reprimanded nor expected to improve.

I'll give you an example. One morning the back office was populated with inspectors. An inspector was on the phone with a solar contractor and was explaining the County position of placing solar over asphalt shingles. The inspector had written a correction at the one and only inspection allowed by the state. The correction said to remove the solar and replace the roof covering because the inspector does not think that the asphalt shingles will last another fifteen years. The inspector repeated this several times with the followup that he himself has been a licensed solar installer for ten years and he is surprised that the contractor was unaware of County policy.

Five inspectors and the assistant office manager were privy to the conversation...nearly regaled as this asshole loved the sound of his own voice. In a soft, non-confrontational tone I ask the inspector where that County policy came from. He hemmed and hawed and finally said that it came from the Roofers Institute. I remarked that we do not enforce items such as that and in fact it is not a County policy.

The inspector told me to "Stay in your own lane" and complained to management with regards to my comment. I received a written notice that I had created a "hostile work environment" and was to never correct that asshole again. Bear in mind that this was one of hundreds of bogus corrections and random torture dealt by this inspector. Management was well aware but afraid of the individual as he had successfully sued employers in the past. The shocking truth is that he was hired by an AHJ that possessed full knowledge of his history and character. It's altogether possible that they feared a lawsuit if they didn't hire him.

He still works there and is in line for a promotion to management.

Of the group of inspectors that I have worked with on a daily basis I estimate that fewer than ten percent fall in the asshole category and some are super duper assholes. So Jake, it is not fair to make all inclusive negative assumptions and broadcast them publicly.
 
Last edited:
ICE said:
Get the inspector to put his demands in writing. Document every interaction that you have with the inspector, city, and contractor. Politely tell them to go pound sand. If they continue the assault, find a code professional with experience beating up a building department.
Click to expand...

^^^ This!

Many years ago, when I was working as a code consultant, I was retained by a gentleman who owned an old building in a semi-ghetto area of what is a mid-size city in this state. He was frantic because a fire inspector had checked his building and issued a citation calling for over fifty things to be corrected. The building was a late-19th to early 20th century structure with a small convenience store on the ground floor and two floors above with two apartments on each floor. Out of the fifty-plus [alleged] violations, there wasn't a single code section cited.

It took me a while but I was finally able the schedule a walk-through with the fire inspector, after which we went to the local hot dog emporium and sat down to discuss it over lunch. By the end of the lunch, the fifty-plus item list was down to about ten items, with code sections identified, so we had something that could be dealt with.

Basically, what it came down to was that the fire inspector didn't like people of color. Once he realized that he couldn't get away with just making stuff up, we were able to focus on addressing the actual issues (which were real, but not unexpected in a building nearing 100 years in age).

The former chief prosecutor for our state attorney general's office who handled cases in which building officials and fire marshals need legal support to drop the hammer always beat us over the head: "If you can't cite a code section, you don't have a violation."
 
Yankee Chronicler said:
The former chief prosecutor for our state attorney general's office who handled cases in which building officials and fire marshals need legal support to drop the hammer always beat us over the head: "If you can't cite a code section, you don't have a violation."
Click to expand...

^^^

This. I cite code/standard for every violation, or error in a plans review. It holds me accountable.

I regularly say to my co-workers "what am I saying to the judge?" I spent too many years on the inside of courtrooms (former journalist) to change my mind on this topic.
 
I always included the code or state Construction & Professional Services Manual reference in my comments when I used to review plans for state projects. It saved a lot of arguments and re-reviews.
 
Many years ago, as an inspector I resolved to provide a code citation for everything ( I do the exact same for plan review comments). This was my decision, and I did not encourage or even inform anyone else in my office that I was doing it. Others found out and some were less than pleased because it made them look bad. I did this for two reasons, #1, to make sure I wasn't writing up bullspit, #2, to lessen the arguments. #1 worked, #2 didn't. I thought by making sure I was correct in my citation by verifying it, and by giving them the answer to their question without being asked (where is that in the code?), I would be doing them a favor. At the very least I figured it would make the arguments more educated. Instead, they just started with personal attacks and complaints and/or went over my head when they didn't want to comply. Now there aren't a lot of complaints that I am wrong, hard to do that when I basically recite the code, just that I am "not very nice", "too rigid", "don't know what it's like to be a builder"....etc. (I quote those because they are just a few of the actual complaints.)

There are problematic people on both sides, plenty of legitimate gripes on both sides, but still I think a small percentage overall. In this case, BASED ON WHAT HAS BEEN REPORTED, the inspector should find another job, and maybe the plans examiner. Could the OP have avoided this by paying 67.00? Maybe. Should he? As a builder I paid a few fees I didn't think were legitimate. I simply did a cost-benefit analysis. That is a reality in nearly everything we do in today's world. Kudos to the OP for standing up for himself. On the other hand, was it worth it?
 
jakesktm said:
Owner/Builder and Contractor [California]

Purchased a turn of the century home built in 1904. Pulled a permit to lift the home in place (the home was originally built as a balloon framed single story resting on 6' pier block with a brick stem wall foundation) and add a 2/1 unit (attached) underneath existing home (and all that it entails - new foundation, plumbing, electrical, mechanical to the ground). City was between building inspectors at the time and hired third party inspectors the whole time.

Company Z conducted the final inspection and the city issued a Certificate of Habilitability in 2019.

The house has been rented out since.

Fast forward to 2023.

I needed to replace the A/C units (window units) on the west facing bedrooms upstairs and pulled a permit to replace them with a 2-zone mini split. The front bedroom wall had no insulation I discovered so I began a partial demo to expose the wall so I could insulate. Company Z inspector drove by and red tagged the work saying I needed a demo permit. I didn't argue, apologized for my ignorance and went down the same day and paid the red tag fine and pulled a separate demo permit as he requested. His reasoning was that he wanted to see what was behind the wall. He also wanted the sheetrock tested for asbestos which came back negative.

I scheduled an inspection after removing the 100 sq feet of sheetrock, 10:00-11:00 am - The inspector no-showed. I called he didn't answer. I had to leave the job site.

I re-scheduled but could not be onsite the day he was available and left the unit accessible for the inspector. He showed up but said he couldn't get in. We rescheduled a third time. He no showed the third time with no phone call, nothing. I went down to the city building department and the clerk said the inspector wanted a $66 re-inspection fee.

At this point things went south. I told the building dept. manager the inspector no showed without notice so "no I'm not paying a re-inspection fee."

Inspector Z writes a scathing email calling me a liar and copies the email to all the city admin.

I respond to the email stating the above facts and asking for a new inspection date and request to meet with my contractor associate onsite.

The inspector shows up with a city police escort (I cannot make this up), and proceeds to tell my associate "he shouldn't have called me a liar" (for the record I never called him out as a liar, I just stated the problem).

He then proceeds to attack the 2019 Final Inspection (despite him being the inspector on the final) and wants me to open up walls, get engineering approvals, provide building plans, and that he will need to review the entire project again before I can proceed with the work. Zero inspection of the demo permit.

I have relayed my concerns to the city administration none of whom want to sit down and discuss. Instead I was offered to talk with the owner of Company Z.

What should I do at this point? Is it legal for the inspector to re-open an investigation into a project that has already been finaled and issued a certificate of habitability? What role does the city have to become involved?
Click to expand...
Everyone has a BOSS. It sounds to me like what you did should be considered as a REPAIR under the IEBC ( Ext'g Bldg Code) Wonder why a "Window" AC Unit needs a Permit as well. The Code Officials should be governed by a State Board and If you really think this guy will continue being Officious then you may need to call them and share your story and see if a formal review by his governing body will hear your case
That's what you could do in my State of PA, Not sure about you being in the State of Confusion
 
Sifu said:
reasons, #1, to make sure I wasn't writing up bullspit, #2, to lessen the arguments. #1 worked, #2 didn't. I thought by making sure I was correct in my citation by verifying it, and by giving them the answer to their question without being asked (where is that in the code?), I would be doing them a favor. At the very least I figured it would make the arguments more educated. Instead, they just started with personal attacks and complaints and/or went over my head when they didn't want to comply. Now there aren't a lot of complaints that I am wrong, hard to do that when I basically recite the code, just that I am "not very nice", "too rigid", "don't know what it's like to be a builder"....etc. (I quote those because they are just a few of the actual complaints.)
Click to expand...

You have a job to do. That job is enforcing the code. You can express empathy for a builder's situation, but .... Sometimes, we have to tell the bad news and move on ... and we have to be careful in how we empathize with the situation.

One of the things I have done in this career to overcome the 'you're a heartless ****hole' commentary is to look for situations where I can deliver some positive commentary. See a flashing pan done well beyond code? "Wow Frank ... that's well done," or, "Hey, that flashing ... tell whoever did that work that it's rock solid, would you?"

Goes a long way.
 
One of the issues with writing a code section for every violation is the time commitment. In my previous jurisdiction, if I took the time to write a code section for each violation, I would have been missing inspections. However, most of our construction was done by our regular developers, so we were able to cultivate a psychologically safe environment where they knew they could ask questions when we wrote a violation. We were always happy to do further research when a correction was questioned. We got maybe 2-3 questions on corrections a year from them out of 2400 inspections a year. I'm not trying to disparage anyone from writing code sections, just highlighting that there is a tradeoff there.
 
tmurray said:
One of the issues with writing a code section for every violation is the time commitment. In my previous jurisdiction, if I took the time to write a code section for each violation, I would have been missing inspections. However, most of our construction was done by our regular developers, so we were able to cultivate a psychologically safe environment where they knew they could ask questions when we wrote a violation. We were always happy to do further research when a correction was questioned. We got maybe 2-3 questions on corrections a year from them out of 2400 inspections a year. I'm not trying to disparage anyone from writing code sections, just highlighting that there is a tradeoff there.
Click to expand...
100% right, and my time is get more difficult to manage. Most that reject the idea cite this as the concern, and that is a legitimate issue. I definitely find myself asking why the heck I do it this way sometimes when it would be easier and faster to not do it. One of the benefits is that I navigate the codes a lot quicker because of the constant consulting of the books, so it does get quicker over time. I am not advocating either way, just relating what works better for me. It may be better not doing it my way for an individual because then maybe one might have more time to do other important things. Everyone should find their own way.
 
tmurray said:
One of the issues with writing a code section for every violation is the time commitment. In my previous jurisdiction, if I took the time to write a code section for each violation, I would have been missing inspections.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying "write out the code," just provide the reference.
 
In this case you're going to have to go to your commissioner but don't expect to ever get any more inspections done on that property after this case is settled. California is notorious for excessive government control and I wouldn't have gotten a permit for a damn window unit!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top