Are we enforcing the code or just looking for reasons to avoid doing our job? Too often, inspectors and building officials fall into the trap of seeking excuses rather than solutions. Whether it’s fear of upsetting property owners, resistance from contractors, or simply a reluctance to handle the tough calls, the reality is clear: our job is to enforce the code, not to win popularity contests. The International Building Code (IBC) makes it abundantly clear that enforcement is not optional. Under IBC Section 104.1, the building official is "authorized and directed" to enforce the provisions of the code. This means there’s no room for interpretation when it comes to ensuring compliance, especially with life-safety issues.
One of the most common excuses is that the non-compliant condition was previously approved or ignored by another official. This argument doesn't hold up. IBC Section 104.6 provides building officials with the authority to issue necessary notices and orders to achieve compliance, regardless of how long a violation has existed. Life-safety provisions are not subject to grandfathering; they exist to protect public welfare, and once an issue is identified, it must be addressed. Ignoring a known hazard, simply because it was overlooked in the past, is not only a failure of duty but also a liability risk for the jurisdiction.
The fear of backlash from contractors and property owners is another common deterrent. Some officials worry about being seen as the "bad guy," but the truth is that the appeals process exists precisely to handle disputes. IBC Section 104.2 grants officials the authority to interpret the code and adopt policies that clarify its application, ensuring fairness and consistency. Officials who hesitate to enforce due to fear of conflict misunderstand their role—we are not making subjective judgments; we are applying established standards.
It’s time to stop looking for excuses and start taking responsibility. When a potential violation is identified, enforcement must follow, no matter how uncomfortable the conversation might be. The job of a building official is not just about inspections and approvals; it’s about ensuring the safety and well-being of the public. The reality is that avoiding enforcement now can lead to far greater consequences down the road—injuries, lawsuits, and even loss of life.
Building officials are protected under IBC Section 104.8, which provides immunity from personal liability when duties are performed in good faith. This protection exists so officials can do their job without fear of personal repercussions. Yet, some officials still hesitate, letting perceived fear outweigh their legal responsibility.
The bottom line is this: enforcement isn’t optional. We have the authority, the responsibility, and the legal backing to do the job correctly. Instead of looking for ways out, officials should focus on the tools at their disposal to enforce the code effectively. Whether it’s utilizing technical reports, issuing corrective notices, or leaning on the appeals process, solutions exist.
The next time you’re faced with a tough decision, ask yourself—am I protecting the public or just protecting myself?
One of the most common excuses is that the non-compliant condition was previously approved or ignored by another official. This argument doesn't hold up. IBC Section 104.6 provides building officials with the authority to issue necessary notices and orders to achieve compliance, regardless of how long a violation has existed. Life-safety provisions are not subject to grandfathering; they exist to protect public welfare, and once an issue is identified, it must be addressed. Ignoring a known hazard, simply because it was overlooked in the past, is not only a failure of duty but also a liability risk for the jurisdiction.
The fear of backlash from contractors and property owners is another common deterrent. Some officials worry about being seen as the "bad guy," but the truth is that the appeals process exists precisely to handle disputes. IBC Section 104.2 grants officials the authority to interpret the code and adopt policies that clarify its application, ensuring fairness and consistency. Officials who hesitate to enforce due to fear of conflict misunderstand their role—we are not making subjective judgments; we are applying established standards.
It’s time to stop looking for excuses and start taking responsibility. When a potential violation is identified, enforcement must follow, no matter how uncomfortable the conversation might be. The job of a building official is not just about inspections and approvals; it’s about ensuring the safety and well-being of the public. The reality is that avoiding enforcement now can lead to far greater consequences down the road—injuries, lawsuits, and even loss of life.
Building officials are protected under IBC Section 104.8, which provides immunity from personal liability when duties are performed in good faith. This protection exists so officials can do their job without fear of personal repercussions. Yet, some officials still hesitate, letting perceived fear outweigh their legal responsibility.
The bottom line is this: enforcement isn’t optional. We have the authority, the responsibility, and the legal backing to do the job correctly. Instead of looking for ways out, officials should focus on the tools at their disposal to enforce the code effectively. Whether it’s utilizing technical reports, issuing corrective notices, or leaning on the appeals process, solutions exist.
The next time you’re faced with a tough decision, ask yourself—am I protecting the public or just protecting myself?
