• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Work Signed Off By Building Inspectors

SCBO1 said:
I wish my former boss adhered to that statement. His belief was if the RDP stamped it, signed it and dated it, they should stand behind it!
Click to expand...
I would like to use a hypothetical situation to clarify your former boss's position. I will use a hypothetical from an actual event of the past.

If an architect submitted drawings to convert the basement of a 3000 square foot pizzeria into a nightclub and that basement had one way in and out via interior stairs from the pizza parlor and no other EERO because it was sandwiched between to other 'main street' buildings, had no plans for fire sprinklers, showed an occupant load over 200 and planned two single occupant bathrooms, one male and one female. Are you saying that your former boss would have approved this if it was signed by an architect?
 
jar546 said:
I would like to use a hypothetical situation to clarify your former boss's position. I will use a hypothetical from an actual event of the past.

If an architect submitted drawings to convert the basement of a 3000 square foot pizzeria into a nightclub and that basement had one way in and out via interior stairs from the pizza parlor and no other EERO because it was sandwiched between to other 'main street' buildings, had no plans for fire sprinklers, showed an occupant load over 200 and planned two single occupant bathrooms, one male and one female. Are you saying that your former boss would have approved this if it was signed by an architect?
Click to expand...
Maybe....How big is the basement? What is the new OL vs. the existing? Was the basement storage before or A use? ....Code can't be "designed" away....Structure can...

I would never accept something just because it is stamped, but they are not always wrong either...
 
ICE said:
What you have is an approved code violation. Depending on the jurisdiction, that can be bulletproof. Many building officials will allow the violation rather than admit that an inspector doesn’t know the code.
Click to expand...

We are not perfect. Read the damn code. This isn't like when I refereed football, and had to make near-instant rule applications, by memory, without reading the rulebook. I have all the time I need to go back to the truck, fire up the machine, read the Code/standard, fire up the interweb and verify an assembly/NFPA standard. Whatever it takes. GET THE CALL RIGHT.

ICE said:
Contractors get so many different reactions from inspectors that they are convinced that nobody knows the code. Contractors are motivated to pass inspection and carry on… code compliance is not a part of that.
Click to expand...
Hence my strict adherence to providing Code/Standard references where I am requesting a change in submitted plans or during onsite inspections.
 
Inspector Gadget said:
I have all the time I need to go back to the truck, fire up the machine, read the Code/standard, fire up the interweb and verify an assembly/NFPA standard. Whatever it takes. GET THE CALL RIGHT.
Click to expand...
I have all the time that I need to write the correction and get to the next inspection. Purists that insist on providing the code section numbers dumbfound me.

The OP is about violations that were not written. The violations were found after the fact by a real inspector. That real inspector is logically on the hook for section numbers since he is crapping on another inspector's pathetic performance.
 
ICE said:
I have all the time that I need to write the correction and get to the next inspection. Purists that insist on providing the code section numbers dumbfound me.

The OP is about violations that were not written. The violations were found after the fact by a real inspector. That real inspector is logically on the hook for section numbers since he is crapping on another inspector's pathetic performance.
Click to expand...

So yes, we're diverging .... but part of the issue we face is the accusation that "we've never had to do that before," and "you're just making this up," etc. Giving the code reference is a way of demonstrating that we're making our correction requests based on something tangible, and that unlike some who have gone before who may not have had a clue what they were doing, we may, indeed, have a clue what we are doing.

It's also a function of my mantra, "what am I saying to the judge?" If the client wants to get cranky and oppositional, the very first documents citing the code references indicate that I had a clue what I was doing.

Thta said, I agree that fundamentally, the stuff that was passed and ought not to have been are on the original inspector. But if someone else is coming along and requesting changes to what was already approved, it's even more important that we demonstrate that we are requiring changes based on actual, factual findings referenced in one of our many books.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top