CODEGUY's blog

Town and Country Housing

A couple bought a really nice manufactured home. Built to  dwelling Code, not HUD standards. It wasn't a Hudular, aka double wide.... The dealer hired contractors to do the poured baement, HVAC, elecrical service, plumbing connections, etc.

Well the dealer's crew set the home... let me back up, the foundation anchors were not properly embedded in the concrete, the manufacturer of those anchors said they had "no loading" when sent photos of that misinstallation.

Now this is a nice home and it was built in Indiana by Fairmont Homes. So you start with a nice higher quality home and pour a foundation that has worthless anchors.

Then the dealer's crew set the home. The inspector requested being on site when the home was set. The dealer never called. The inspector heard about it from the owner and by the time he arrived the crane was long gone and the roof had been raised into place and the posts anchored in the basement.

The posts used were rated at 14,500 +/- pounds and the manufacturer's plans called for posts rated at 18,000 pounds. Now this is a nice home, better than many, setting on a foundation with inadequate anchors and undersized posts. And the properly sized bearing plates were nowhere to be seen.

And the inspector didn't get to see what the dealer's crew did when they raised the roof.... until the near final inspection, the inspection for occupancy as the garage was still being built... Well in poking his head up into the attic the inspector saw that the straps that should have been nailed to the truss web members after the roof section was raised up were up there hanging in the attic air. Probably close to 54 of them. Not one that he saw was nailed.

So this nice manufactured dwelling ( as we call them in WI ) was on a foundation that had now been somewhat  poorly retrofitted with seismic  foundation anchors to make up for their first screw-up, had been refitted with the proper columns and bearing plates but was then discovered to have been set by a crew who didn't bother to secure roof framing members.

To do that now in that attic will be a job. Those straps are not in a place that can be easily correctly nailed into place. It is easily done before the two halves of the home are married together on the foundation. Before they are lifted into place by the crane.

When the inspector called the dealer at the request of the owner and had him on speaker phone the dealer's salesguy, lets call him Kim 'cause that's his name said something to the extent like " you are the inspector who waits to tell us we screwed up" . Yup, inspectors look at the work when its at that stage ready for an inspection, and good inspectors tell them what they failed to do at all, failed to do to Code, or do incorrectly even after the 2nd or 3rd try.

What is really funny is that even when this dealer's crew have what they need on paper in front of them they manage to either do it differently, fail to do it at all or fail to look at the plans in the first place.

This is how manufactured dwellings get a bad name after a wind storm... and even before. I feel for the home owner that made an excellant choice in a home (it even has Pella windows) and it was sold by a dealer that has a crew that doesn't do the quality of the home justice the first time....

Need more info on what to watch out for when buying then just drop me a line. But the first indication of a problem is when the dealer won't sign the permit application but has the owner do it. That dealer, here in Wisconsin, didn't sign the permit as the responsible party for Code compliance, he stealthily pushed that off on the buyers/owners.... and then brought in his ill-informed contractor and his own crew to make code complaince a real challenge.

I did finally receive the installation instructions from the manufacturer (these are to be provided to the inspector by the dealer / contractor and many do). Those instructions had wording and drawings that made it clear how it should have been done.  The crew thus returned and  roof framing work was corrected . The inspector watched most of the work only leaving the attic long enough to allow his back to be straight long enough to give his back muscles a rest. This dwelling set a new record for the number of times I've entered any dwelling's attic. 

Snake in the Sewer..... Cleaning Business

An 88 year old widow's drain was running slow so she called her regular plumber who is actually named "Leaky Pipes Plumbing" . Really.  He came out and could not remove the blockage so he called his buddy at Des Moines Drain and Sewer Cleaning Service. That guy came and later informed the widow that she would need to dig up the drain line as he got his "snake" caught in the line and could not get it out. He claimed it was new and 3/4" diameter.... and gave her a bill for $500+.  The widow felt pressured to pay so she wrote the guy a check for $300 and he left.

The widow's sons called the inept snake handler and that snake of a businessman returned the next day  (without his flute) and could not get his snake out of the drain line. He told one son he had 75 or more feet of snake in the drain. The younger son thought that the front yard was only about 50 feet to the street and wondered how DesMoines Drain and Sewer Cleaning Service (DMD&SC) got 75 feet into that drain. The son called West Des Moines Utilities thinking maybe the snake had entered the main line out at the street. The City of WDM sent a camera down a nearby manhole and did not find any snake or obstruction in the main sewer.

A week later the younger son, after being told by DMD&SC that no one could pull that snake out loaded up his pick-up , a trusty Ford Ranger that has 330,000 miles on it, mostly put on doing inspections in Wisconsin, and traveled 350+ miles south to West Des Moines. That son, the writer of this blog, had loaded up any tool, jack, contraption he had that might possibly be used to "charm that snake" out of that drain.

Arriving late in the evening I set out to extract that snake. Turns out the jerk from DMD&SC had cut the snake off, and short at that, so it was a delicate operation to get enough hold on its "tail" to pull it up to the level of the clean-out and get a real grip on it. By bedtime a contraption had been securely connected to the snake's tail and I called it a night.

The next day with only about 14' out of the drain I told Mom to call the guy and tell him that a guy had started pulling his snake out. The owner of DMD&SC was out there in a matter of minutes wanting his alledged "new 3/4" pet snake... I was not only rude but slightly pissed off not to mention having used food on me that had collected in the drain, I asked the jerk to leave immediately which he refused to do as he insisted to see his snake. I had mom call 911 as I was about to totally loose it with the guy and did show him the snake up close, got a little used food on the guy as he was standing over where it was laying in the leaves and as I raised it up ... well as they say s__t happens and crap sneaks up on you... Mr. DMD&SC told be "4 guys would never get it all out of that drain."

Cop came and (mis)informed me that I would have to return the abandoned snake to DMD&SC after I got it out. (I checked Iowa law on abandoned property when I got back home) I worked with "Jack" , a 500MCM lug and some other junk hardware until later in the afternoon when I had approximately 40 feet out and was getting near the boiling point as I could only extract about 14" each time before having to re-rig my jack and other hardware. So since I was feeding it out a nearby basement window I went outside and decided to tie a rope to it and yank on it. Before doing so I fashioned some plywood around the window opening so the snake would not damage the jamb. I attached the rope via the 500MCM lug and wrapped it around my waist and headed for the street thinking there couldn't be that much more snake in the drain. The end of the snake was already at the sidewalk next to the street.

I took off the best a 60 year old guy could and did my best imitation of a horse hitched to a wagon. I pulled snake out, more and more and more. A total of 81 feet. It was not 3/4" and it was not "new" as I found a repaired joint in it.

I did coil it up neatly, tied it off with a rope and thought of taking it home with me but instead did as instructed by the WDM police officer (well kinda) I ended up returning the snake in person. Other details that continue to this day, 01/08/13, show how snakey the owner of DMD&SC  really is.

Yup my mom still owes the DMD&SC jerk $200 + as he has failed to agree to making the remaining bill "paid in full". Two typed letters have been sent to him asking that the bill be made paid in full.

I think the WDM police officer that came  should have arrested the guy for tresspassing that November 2012 day . As it is, no police report was filed. Maybe at least he could have practiced use of his taser on that "snake". But then the animal rights advocates might have gotten involved.

Make sure you get references before hiring any type of contractor. Drain cleaning servce providers do not need to be licensed in West Des Moines, Iowa.

Before I left WDM I had a reputable firm video-cam the drain line and have the DVD to prove it. That same firm later returned and  de-rooted the drain for under $100.00 .

One in a Hundred

Just did a final inspection on a new "single family dwelling" as we inspectors call them. This builder was exceptionally good. Joints in their framing were like finish work. The two brothers care about what Code had to say but always worked to exceeded it. This is the first contractor who installed the windows per the manufacturer's installation instructions without me writing them up. They used good subcontractors. The electrician was exceptional and didn't hold up the work. The concrete work for the foundation was done by a caring contractor who had many years of experince and it showed in his work.

The contractor cared about the materials they received from the lumber yard and didn't hesitate to demand the better stuff.

A joint between the countertop and the appliance garage was perfection. I generally see caulk applied in places like that. In this home the joint on both side was tight as could be, perfectly straight and considering the sink came mounted in the countertop I knew the two brothers took much extra care to make it all fit just perfectly.

These guys pay their bills on time too. They are polite, never heard any crude language out of them, they were always neat, kept the mess to a minimum, and built the home like they were building it for their mother and father.

I can honestly say that in 15 years of doing inspections I've only run across one other contractor that did such fine work.

So if you aren't in a big hurry (fine wine takes time) live near the EauClaire / Chippewa Falls area and want to maximize the quality in your new home and minimize the headaches look up Schumacher Brothers Construction out on County Road F. I do believe they have a web site. http://www.schumacherbrothers.com/

Storm Chasers

Was asked to take a look at work done by a (I’m going to say this early on) non-contractor. A tree had fallen during the early morning hours (I believe it was around 2:30 AM) on the rear sun porch of a 79 year old widow’s home during a late summer storm in 2010. The non-contractor came along that morning. This non-contractor said that the insurance company sent them. Testified to that in court.
Wondering who this non-contractor type is? Well I don’t normally give specific names but this time will be the exception. As a public service. They were Steamatic of a city just north of the Town of about 2500 where the storm had passed through.
The project manager had the homeowner, the 79 year old widow, sign a document that basically said that she would turn over all insurance proceeds to the contractor.
Now don’t blame this elderly women. She had this tree in her sun porch and a little water damage to the adjoining exterior wall of her home that her and her husband bought new about 40 years ago.
The tree collapsed the roof of the sun porch, wrecked some screens, and damaged one post. This porch had no glass except for a window on the wall it shared with the dwelling. That window was not damaged and neither was any of the siding on that wall. The porch was wood framed screens and posts.

After the “You pay us everything” document was signed, the “project manager” did up an estimate. One of two or three presented in court...Confused the judge and myself....The estimate was almost $26,000.00 . It included a new roof for the entire home and some other work that was done that was not the result of the storm or tree. The local insurance agent OK’d it. That right there makes me wonder... he sends this non-contractor and then OK’s a bloated estimate.....

This non-contractor did not pull a permit even though the municipality’s ordinance requires one for almost any amount of work. The dollar limit that triggered the need for a permit is less than $1500 in that Town. And it didn’t matter if it was a repair, renovation, addition, remodel, window replacement or new construction. But Steamatic did not bother to get a permit and of course didn’t get any inspections. Steamatic did not provide a copy of the “Right to Cure” law  brochure to the home owner either as required by State law. The “project manager” testified in court that he didn’t even know about it. 

The reason I was called is because Steamatic was suing the homeowner for the final $10 grand of the insurance check. The homeowner, one of the sharpest 79 year old women that I’ve ever met, had asked for copies of the estimates and then got copies of the invoices from the subcontractors that Steamatic had used to do the work.

The estimates from Steamatic were grossly inflated from what work the subcontractors had actually done. Steamatic turned in a bill to the insurance company that included an extra 400 square feet of Cedar board and batten siding, 400 square feet of painting, 50 linear feet of 2x - 8 foot high stud wall and more extra “work” listed than I could believe. The screened sun porch was only 10 feet x 15 feet.

Why did I get called? I wasn’t the AHJ (authority having jurisdiction) for that municipality. The widow got my name from a Wisconsin DSPS Safety and Buildings employee. I spoke to the homeowner on the phone and went to her home out of curiosity as the homeowner claimed her new roof was leaking.

I’ve never seen such bad leaks in a new roof or a twenty year old roof for that matter. And while I was there I found electrical Code violations in her sun porch’s ceiling as well as other building Code violations done by Steamitic and company...

Her roof had a 3:12 slope and the ice and water shield had not been installed per Code and the roofing underlayment had not been installed per Code. And she had leaks..  She had no leaks before or after the storm. It wasn’t until the roofing sub tore off and replaced her roof that it started to be a problem. That’s why she held back the $10 grand.

She had a real nice 1970's style home. Well kept and in excellent condition. Except for the now leaky roof and the newly water stained ceilings.

The homeowner’s attorney asked me to be the expert witness in court. I testified and answered questions from the Judge and was cross examined. I was on the stand for probably 45 minutes.
The judge did not seem interested in the technical stuff and numbers on the estimate compared to the work that was actually done. And he must have flunked arithmetic because he wasn’t following much of anything. He was more concerned with my qualifications.

The owner of Steamatic was on the stand for quite some time as was her “project manager”.
Ever see what a little kid does when they aren’t ‘fessing up to the truth. They look down, to the left or right.. Can’t make eye contact. When Steamatic’s owner was having a problem with the testimony she was giving (that’s my way of saying she was BS’n or out and out lying) her body language gave her away. Too bad. She had a nice figure and was an attractive women. Kinds hurts when your body language gives you away.

In that Court room the Judge does not have a good look at the witness’s face while they are on the witness stand.... like Judge Judy does.

So after 3 ½ hours the Judge is giving his decision. I stayed to see how things would turn out. I felt the young gal who served as the homeowner’s attorney did an excellent job. She was patient, respectful and no push over. Steamatic’s attorney was a jerk. When the 79 year old widow was on the stand he questioned her with “on what day? At what time?..” stuff like that about letters she had written and small little details in the matter that had no bearing on the roof leak or Code violations. That jerk of an attorney just nicely verbally tried to embarrass and frustrate the owner.
Don’t tell me that was his job... He’s a jerk. If that was my mother, I would have had a hellavu time holding my tongue and not wanting to lower a little heaven with him afterwards.

Back to the Judge’s reciting his findings and judgement. Well I didn’t make it through his little dissertation without getting up and approaching the lawyer’s table to tap her on the shoulder and blurt out “The judge doesn’t realize they replaced her entire roof.” I then turned and quickly made my way back to my seat. She then spoke into her microphone and diplomatically rephrased what I just said.

When I was on the stand I countered the amount of ice and water shield the contractor said he used and did the math on the stand for the entire roof. “54 feet long,.... a roll is 3 feet wide, 54 times 3 equals 162 square feet etc etc etc. The Judge wasn’t following that, didn’t care, or had already made up his mind. The contractor claimed he used two rolls. What an idiot....

You see the Judge had begun to rule that the “you pay us everything” document the widow signed was a “contract”... even though the estimate with dollar amount was created after the widow had signed the document. The Judge bought that the water spots on her ceiling were caused by condensation per the BS’g testimony of Steamatic’s so called “project manager”. Even though I specifically called them leaks and attributed them to the improper use of underlayment and ice and water shield on a low slope roof.

After my interruption of the Judge’s dissertation of findings and rulings the Judge did a little back pedaling. Not the best. But the widow was awarded, that is, allowed to keep about $3500.00 for roof and ceiling repairs and a few bucks for the Code violations. Not enough in my book but it was better than nothing. The judge did not use a contractor’s estimate supplied by the widow during her testimony for the repairs but took a number Steamatic tossed out there at the end. Why? I don’t know... To save face???

This may be disrespectful, but that Judge needs to step down. That County has a part time Judge that serves two counties. The lawyers were respectful of his mannerisms and I suppose they are all attorneys before they become judges and as we all know, sharks don’t attack each other.

I felt sorry for the widow and told her attorney that I was waiving all my fees.

I suppose I could have been found in contempt of that Judge’s court for my interruption to his half baked ruling.... but it was worth the chance I took.

I wrote this late on Christmas day 2011. Be sure that at the final judgement my Lord and Savior will also be my attorney, I’ll be guilty as hell, the opposing party will be there scaring the hell out of me. The Judge will hear him out and rule in my favor because my attorney will have paid the price 2000+ years ago on the cross. Amen? Amen!
I won’t have to do time in eternity with crooked contractors...!

Free Course for State of Wisconsin Electrical Exam

Here is a link to a free course I have on Udemy if you need to study up for the State of Wisconsin Safety and Buildings Electrical Exam.

http://www.udemy.com/wisconsin-master-electrician-exam-preparation-course/

The course teaches a method that I have had great success with as I've taken 6 S&B exams and passed them all the first time. The last exam session I was in had a pass rate of two inspectors..... enough said.

Looking for a course to study for free? That above link may be the one you need. After the first few examples of what not to do it settles down to how to study and work through an exam so you can pass the exam the first time.

With an old guy like me its tough to sit for four hours let alone have the brain on "HIGH" without blowin' a fuse!

The State Electrical Code Guy makes a point. Remember it.

Joe is the State  Electrical Department Head type guy and he makes a point.

Joe Hertel chimed in on this daily Email I get.  Joe's interpretation is literal and in that sense I have to agree with it. However complying with a minimum Code is all the Code is. A Minimum.   Those who just do that may leave something to be desired. Like wise Code says a switch needs to be at the bottom and top of stairs but it doesn't say how close to the stairs  . Where common sense fails the minimum Code does not take up the slack.

Charlie,

A permissive exception does not require a wall switch in the room. You are telling us what you think the code means rather than telling us what it says or does not say. If I use an occupancy sensor it must be in the room and either in addition to a wall switch or have its own override type switch. If all I have is a wall switch the code is silent as to where I have to place it. As an example: I have a six gang switch at the front door and can turn on, bedroom, kitchen, bathroom, outdoor, master bedroom, and patio lights from this location. While not convenient it complies with the code.

Joe Hertel

Answer:

You got it part right Joe. The part about me telling you what I think the Code requirement means. It’s pretty clear in the NECA publication where it says “Answers are the authors opinions”. NEC 210.70(A)(1) requires a wall-switched lighting outlet in every habitable room and bathroom. The intent that the wall switch be in or convenient to that room is clear and is further emphasized where Part 2 of Exception 2 references the “customary” wall switch location. That’s my opinion. Your opinion is different but you certainly have a right to it.

Like I said where common sense fails the minimum Code does not take up the slack. So make sure the owner does before you begin to build, otherwise it may meet Code but the owner may not be happy with it. And the inspector can't help you out if it meets Code.

The bugaboo is the use of  " wall switched lighting outlet" If one looks in the definitions "outlet" does not mean receptacle where you plug in a corded light or appliance... and the Code doesn't say switch outlet but it says "wall switched lighting outlet"

Joe is right in this State. Charlie is streching it .....

Play it safe. Show the switch locations on the plans .... That is what plans are for.

 

 

Slow economy, low new housing starts, hungry contractors. Watch out for the weeds.

Ever notice how when its been really dry that only the weeds grow well in your yard. Well as a plan reviewer and Inspector I can say that during this "drought" in  new home construction that the "weeds" are out there and making a mess of things.

Seems that the best contractors are not willing to cut their prices like the fly by night guys. The better contractors are not grabbing up new businsess in these parts but the "weeds" are popping up all over.

Now some may feel that is rather harsh to label them as "weeds" , so let me explain. The Code is a minimum Code. The better contractors have no problem building to Code and more than likely exceed it. The "weeds" on the other hand are those contractors out there that when times are good they rack up more Code violations on a single dwelling than most of the quality contrators do in a decade.

My problem is I can't just mow them down or pull them and throw them on the burn pile..

Consider more than just the price. Consider the quality. If price was all there was to chosing a home building contractor then it'd be easy . Make a trip down to the Building Inspection department and ask to see inspection reports (they are public records in this State) and check with some of the Contractor's recent customers.

You can never be to careful.

 

Be sure to check out your contractor, the inspector only looks at his work.

From WGAL.com :

"A Berks County contractor is being accused of defrauding 25 contractors and five homeowners out of $730,000.

The Berks County District Attorney reported that John Anthony Kuvusak Jr., of John Anthony Contracting, LLC, contracted with the homeowners, accepted payments but did not pay subcontractors.

On several occasions the homeowner would then pay the subcontractor for the work completed to avoid a lien being placed against the property, causing the homeowner to conversely make double payments.

Kuvusak is facing 31 counts of theft by deception, 31 counts of theft by failure to make required disposition of funds received, 31 counts of deceptive or fraudulent business practices, 31 counts of receiving stolen property and 25 counts of theft of services."

This may be an extreme case but if you read the following blog you'll see that not all  crooked contractors are such BIG crooks...

Contractor Theft

Over the past four years I have seen an interesting way that a couple of contractors have earned a little extra income. In one case it was tax free.... for a while.

This technique could be considered nefarious by a district attorney. In the state where I reside there is, tucked away in the State Statutes on Construction Liens, a section on contractor theft. Contractor theft is, without getting too technical, defined as using money or material from one job on another or somewhere else.... like maybe a Casino???. If Builder Bob is building a dwelling for Sue and talked her into an up front payment for materials of $2000 and then he took that money and paid for materials he bought for the project he’s doing for Frank, in this State that is contractor theft. Same goes for if he paid himself before he paid for your materials, that too is contractor theft.

Pretty nifty, huh? Try to track where your money is going and try to get a DA to prosecute... and what harm is there if Builder Bob pays for the materials on another job with your cash as long as he does your job to your satisfaction?

(As a side note, if a contractor asks for money up front, try to get the name of the lumber yard on it too. Like “Pay to the order of Jack of all Trades and Home Lumber”. If the contractor won’t accept a check like that then why does he need it with just his name on it? As a 2nd try just put the name of the material supplier on it.... and the address of where your project is. If you think that is a little over the top, read on.)

My sister lives in Australia and over there they “cook tea” which is our equivalent to “making supper”. Yup “tea” is a meal and a drink... Over here in the good old USA, there are individuals that “cook the books”. More on that bit of culinary genius later.

What happens when a contractor manages a job so poorly that after he pays himself there is not money left to pay the subcontractors or for the materials? And then the subcontractors legally place liens on your property? Isn’t that a great way to find out that Bob’s new ATV should have been Plumber John’s payment.

And then there is Builder Bob not paying for the materials he used on your job. The lumber yard is now seeking somebody’s cash and they “know” Bob and want his future business so they, in this State and others, can legally place a lien on your property.

Now it becomes obvious why that section on contractor theft is slipped into the statutes on construction liens.

But some contractors are smarter than the law. Take one that was building a very nice, half log sided home ... strike that ... mansion. The owner makes a few minor changes and then the contractor claims that he had to buy more siding. The owner of course is not totally up on the cost of materials. But he did notice a pile of siding that “disappeared” . With a little bit of poking around and in talking to a couple of the workers he finds out that the builder took that siding to another job. When the owner finally had it up to here with “extras” he dug a little deeper and found out that the “another job” was the builder’s “cabin”. Now this type of activity does not fall under the statute section in Construction Liens about contractor theft.

That was simply Jessie “Hammer” James.

After contacting an attorney and finding out how hard and costly it would be to prosecute Jessie Hammer James because the burden of proof would be on the owner, the attorney suggested a call be placed to 1-800-829-1040 . Lets see how that works and how to get even with Jessie. Jessie is using your money that you paid income tax on to buy materials for his cabin. That is the same as receiving income that Jessie decided he didn’t want to pay taxes on. In other words that was tax evasion. You did catch the last four digits of that phone number didn’t you? 1040   , think April 15th if that helps.

You see when you work you get paid and pay taxes on your income. If you get compensation and hide it and decide not to pay taxes, that is tax evasion, a.k.a. tax fraud or “cooking the books”. The owner had evidence that the builder, Jessie Hammer James, was not paying taxes. The IRS is always looking for crooks and loves to do audits where they know what they are looking for. It makes their life so much easier. Add a witness that will vouch for the nefarious activities of others and Mr. CONtractor gets a free audit and fines and penalties. And if he’s not so lucky he gets what Al Capone got.  They finally nabbed Al Capone on tax evasion.

All this with a simple phone call and filling out some simple IRS forms (yes they are simple compared to doing your taxes)  to report tax fraud . No lawyer to pay, not even a long distance phone call charge, and you feel like you are finally getting something for your tax dollar..... Can you imagine the hassle the builder now has trying to get all his receipts, invoices and other financial papers together for his trip to the IRS office.

Now the other way to handle things is to try to negotiate with the builder AFTER you get his final bill and then threaten the 1-800-829-1040 call. Most nefarious builders will call your bluff. But at least you warned him.

In another case where the builder left the State with unpaid subcontractors, the DA tracked him down and brought him to trial but did it in such a way that the DA had the other State hold the guy until he paid up and then extradite him back to stand trial. Kudos to that DA !

Did these builders have good references. Sure they DID.....

One last thing. If you, as owner, has a construction lien placed on your property and it isn’t a truthful, legal lien, it will cost you dearly to get that lien removed unless the contractor sees the light and removes it . That is not typically the case because the contractor had to pay to file that lien in the first place.  And if a subcontractor places a legitimate lien on your property it will mean a delay in getting permanent financing and time is money....

Not enough can be said about staying in control of your project from day one and as Barney Fife would say, “Nip it in the bud!”

Builder + Contract = Monopolist

There is a vast indifference in the knowledge levels of builders and owners when it comes to construction. This vast difference sets up an unlevel playing field between builder and owner.

Couple this with the fact that owners want to trust their builder. They want to believe their builder can do no wrong, can walk on water, change water into brandy, Coors Light or whatever their favorite liquor is, and can heal the sick. And if you do a background check on some builders you will indeed find that they did rise again .... from bankruptcy....

When you buy a vehicle you are trusting that the manufacturer knows what they are doing and you've checked around and compared prices. Fact is you've bought from that dealer before and the guy is a square dealer because he wants your return business. That return business  sets him apart from home builders and especially from dealers that sell manufactured homes. Home owners won't be returning in a few years for a new model.... The builders know this. 

I recommend a book by Barry B. LePatner, Broken Buildings, Busted Budgets that does an excellant job of explaining what is not right about the business & management end of the construction industry in the USA . I'd love to include excerpts from this book but will let the reader of this blog seek out additional information found in his book. Though this book is written by an attorney (and might not be very exciting to read) and is aimed more at very large construction projects the principals apply to most all construction projects from reroofing, decks, homes, garages and even window replacement. http://www.brokenbuildings.com . There are some excerpts at that site.

So you think you are planning everything to avoid any pitfalls? You got four bids. Builders, remodelers, roofers, and even landscapers have but one shot at getting your business. They know this. They also , almost all of them, know that while a low bid may not have the profit built in that they'd like to make on the job that the bidding stage is the only competitive part of the project. Getting the job is job ONE!  After they have the work they can get added compensation for extra's, find a cheaper subcontractor, find better prices on building materials or slip in one of lesser quality, or any other number of ways to make extra bucks.... on large projects such as the "BIG DIG" in Boston the added costs came to over (sit down if you are standing up)  $11 BILLION. A project that started out at nearly $3 BILLION ended up costing over $14 BILLION. An extreme case but there is a lesson there.

The bidding process is the only competitive part of a project no matter how big or small. So unlike a football game where the competition continues throughout the entire game ...unless you are playing against the Green Bay Packers (GO PACK!)

Once the bidding is over and the builder has contract in hand, he/she becomes a monopolist. Add to this the huge disadvantage the owner has because of their lack of knowledge about construction and the builder is well on his way to the bank and winning the game.

How does one avoid the monopolist /builder. Good plans aren't good enough, they have to be such that every detail is shown and known. Put it in your bid documents that any deficiency in the plans must be clearly stated with the bid and the bid must include moneys to provide for those deficiencies. Then find the guy that drew the plans and hammer on him and his costs to regain the difference or at least part of it.

Include in your request for quotation / bid documents that you want to know who the subcontractors are and their costs AND if subs are to be changed, you need to know why and any difference in costs and that you are going to share any savings with your spouse....

If you don't have exactly which external finishes, internal woodwork, cabinets, fixtures, and the like selected up front make sure you remain in control of those items. There may be an "allowance" in the bid for those items. The trouble with that "allowance" is that a different subcontractor may install vinyl  rather than cement board siding, tile flooring rather than sheet vinyl or carpet  and the contractor may have a deal going with his subs or you don't know how much the builder/general contractor is charging and what his costs really are..... or if the general contractor / builder is doing the work his labor costs are more than kinda flexible and who is to say that what he/she charges you is the actual costs and not inflated to make up for the competivie bidding process.... all costs become mutable because the contract was to begin with.

What can you do in these cases? So many things. Barry LePatner discusses them in much detail. One I like is having the builder show you his actual costs / invoices and as part of the contract allowing him a known % to cover his overhead and profit. This may be more involved than you'd like to suffer through but its your money buddy / honey !  Find your low bidder by laying out all the rules of the game up front and let him know you are willing that he make a fair profit and that he is not a monopolist because you are on the field and in the game. Tell him that by the bid documents and plans and specs... not literally that "hey buddy you are not going to be a monopolist!"

If you just hand off the ball (checkbook) and want to watch the game then expect 10 dollar beers and 8 dollar hotdogs...

Some may choose to hire a "construction manager". In my opinion construction managers only work best when they are employed by the owner or are the owner. Second or third party construction managers could mean trouble unless your contract with them makes them liable for everything and be sure they are treating every nickel like it was their last one. And DO NOT base their fees on the projects cost, if you do they have no incentive to hold down costs and every incentive to allow extras and justify them to the owner.

As an inspector I see monopolists at work all the time...

Speaking of time, one of the ways the builder with contract in hand acts as a monopolist is in how he / she  times his work.  Time is money. The owner has the construction loan and is paying the interest so there is no incentive for the builder/monopolist to move a project along.  Some I know don't like to show up some days because they don't have a full days work there until somebody else totally finishes up and they delay the job waiting for them BECAUSE they can go over to another one of their jobs and put a full day in without having to switch jobs.

To make sure your monopolists doesn't run up the interest on your construction loan, add verbiage to your bid documents & contract "that all work shall proceed on a daily basis, weather and building supplies permitting". And make sure materials are ordered and delivered in a timely manner.

No roof trusses? When were they ordered?    ........ Why weren't they ordered sooner?.........

So what can you do once you get this builder a contract that seems pretty much in your favor and the builder/monopolists is dragging his feet....You can't piss him off 'cause he just might drag them a little longer. You can't go out and hire somebody else, that might take too long. If you withhold a payment it might just turn into a pissing match because you can bet he's got other work going...

Yup your monopolist may have you over a barrel.

If I might borrow a quote from Barney Fife, "Nip it in the bud". The very first time you see your monopolist / Builder  not fulfilling the terms of the contract (to borrow a crude phrase from a builder I know " screwing the pup")  have a meeting with him and let him know in no uncertain terms that you will not put up with it.... And the second time he pulls a day when he'd rather be out fishing or whatever have another one of your unsuccessful bidders on the phone.

As a project engineer back in the '80's , I had a "talk" with a contractor in Dallas that had another job going at Texas Instruments and the second time it happened I contacted the next lowest bidder and that guy was on the job working when the would be monopolist came back to my job and I read him the contract language and he packed up and left the site that day. The second lowest bidder put the project back on schedule and saved the day / project / budget .... Guess where they came out of...

Memphis. They kick butt and that's how they make their fair profit and are still in business to this day. They are organized, have skilled workers, know what a schedule is for and work to please their customers. Who are they? IMC . Industrial Mechanical Contractors. I liked to think of them as "Its My Company" because they performed like they were working for me....

So in closing all I can say is stay in control of the "ball",  plan to take a few hits,  don't be afraid to call "FOUL!", and above all plan on winning and enjoy the game.

If you see a contractor smiling on a job, he better have just heard a good joke.... otherwise he's making too much money.....

Price, Quality, Quotes ..... Is there a difference other than price?

Inspected a really nice home today. Was to be the final inspection but the electrician wasn't done. I wanted to leave but I drove there so I inspected what I could. That dwelling has 7 bathrooms and two laundry rooms. The general contractor said they spent close to $30grand on appliances. A six burner range, two pairs of front loading washers and dryers, the biggest fridge I've seen in a home. warmer drawers, wine fridge.... of course it had a dishwasher... to go with the TWO kitchen sinks. Lots of room for dirty dishes!

Downstairs in one of their two utility rooms were the two 200Amp electrical panels. (don't send me the electric bill... ) I'm sure the electrician was the low bidder. I've run into him before.

Did I tell you about the beautiful grand piano they had in their great room? Made me wish I could play piano.... chopsticks or anything.. I didn't touch the piano, it was just too awesome... Beautiful wood. I have no idea how they got it in the house, they must have brought it through the double doors even though it looked wider than the doors.

The electrical panels are another story. Many folk do not realize the differences in panels. Some have copper innards, some have tin plated copper innards and some have aluminum and plastic innards. Yes I'm sure aluminum alloys have improved over the years but that panel and panels of similar construction are the less expensive panels. Plastic brackets hold the breakers in and... well they figured out how to compete with other cheap panels even though that manufacturer's name makes some of the best electrical equipment around and always has.... but they caved into building a cheaper competitive panel because other companies do. That electrical breaker panel  is like comparing  that grand piano to  one made out of particle board...

The panels were cheaper, all the breakers were cheaper, and the electrician no doubt pocketed the difference. And the GEC was not installed to Code.....

Sure the panels are all UL approved but a Yugo was a car too. You do remember the Yugo don't you? Wikipedia it if you don't know what a Yugo is. You could buy a Yugo for a list price of $3990.

Folks planning on building need to ask which panel model is being used. For the electrician to reply Square D or Cutler Hammer or Siemens does not tell the whole story. Find out which "line" of panel they are buying. Ask questions and Google to get the details or call their customer service line.

The same goes for windows, floor plywood, roofing, siding, plumbing fixtures.... just about everything. If one quote is the low bidder and they are using the "Vega" or "Pinto" of a company's product line ask the next closest bidder to quote the same material. They may do it for you or they may tell you they won't install the less expensive product. Ask them why.

And check and make sure they install what they quoted. The inspector just makes sure it meets Code and has no clue of what was quoted.

And a Yugo was really a car.... as was the Vega. Both were small cars but nothing close to the VW Golf or Rabbit from the same year.  Rabbits are still running around out there, try to find a Yugo. ..

Specify exactly what you want, do not assume it is in the building Code.

The Building Code is a minimum Code. Certain things are not required by Code. You could have a $260,000 dwelling built to Code in Wisconsin that does not have a place to hook up your garden hose on the outside of the dwelling. Gutters and downspouts are not required by Code either. Many other things that some new home owners assume will be included by their builder never magically appear in or on the dwelling.

Most builders are guys and all guys have flunked Mind Reading 101 and the rest have dropped out of Thought Perception 102. Just ask their wives....

Code officials can't help you with them either. They just enforce a minimum Code.

Some items are found in Code but are not required in a dwelling. If you get an outside hose hydrant, what I call a hose "bib" on your dwelling there is Code that specifies how to install it and what type of backflow prevention is required for it. But Code does not say you have to have one on the dwelling to meet Code. Think of it like a 2nd bath room. Not required in a dwelling BUT if you get one it has to meet Code.

Gutters on the other hand are not required by Code and there is NO CODE dealing with the installation of gutters. Nothing saying what gauge the metal should be, the spacing of supports, the size of the downspouts, the slope so they drain efficiently, the framing the gutters are connected to, etc.  You could get gutters that are randomly nailed into a 1x 4 fascia board and are nearly level and the Code official couldn't help you when they end up on the ground after the ice and snow of the first winter. (I've seen it happen... the owner had her X install them to save her money.  I really question that women's logic because she still owes him $10,000 from their divorce settlement...  penny wise and pound foolish?)

Some structural matters that are good practice are not required by Code. Good practice has roof plywood / OSB end joints that are staggered. A close check of what is required by code shows that is not required.  I just came from a job where the all the ends of the plywood ended up in the same framing members. A check with the Code powers that are in our Capital confirmed that the builder met Code. The APA documents confirmed that. So much for good practice.....

I fully realize that the home owner is at a disadvantage when it comes to knowing what needs to be known. Once a contractor is hired,  he becomes a monopolist as soon as the contract is signed. My next blogging bit will talk more about that. But for now ask a zillion questions UP FRONT before you sign anything or open you wallet and also touch base with your Inspector to see if  (and its not his job) he will give you any things to look for, ask about, or specify.

How many zeros are in a zillion anyway? You can't ask enough questions, let the wife talk too.

Yes, there is in common law what is called an "implied warranty".  An implied warranty says an item should be fit for the purpose it was intended. Don't expect an inspector to enforce an implied warranty. If the contractor doesn't have the integrity to correct the problem you may need to seek a remedy via the courts ... and a good lawyer. Small claims court in this State is only good for 5 grand.

Until next time....

 

 

Be part of the solution, not the problem......

So an inspector's role is to point out to the various contractors what doesn't meet code. A week ago a concrete contractor had placed 6 wall brace anchors in the wrong spot.
I came along for the foundation inspection and the owner was there so I pointed out the problem and called the general contractor . The general contractor had received verbal info from the guy at the lumberyard and passed it along to the foundation/concrete guy.
Rather than just write up the Code violation I got on the cell phone and called the manufacturer's field rep. Had a short discussion with him where he pointed out that you wouldn't install a Maytag dishwasher without having the instructions in front of you. I pointed out that the instructions come with Maytag Dishwashers. It was the weekend so I didn't hammer him too bad but I did secure a promise from him that he would help make it right.
Granted the lumberyard guy had a catalog with all the instructions you could want and he should have showed the builder that page or even made him a copy. I argued with the manufacturer's rep that the instructions should have been in the box the anchors came in.
Before I go any farther, one must realize that building and homes aren't what they use to be. To insure their structural integrity, certain metal braces and engineered fasteners are often used around huge openings and other nonconventional framing. And those engineered parts MUST be installed per the manufacturer.
The above mention dwelling had six anchors improperly placed in a concrete wall. Each was rated around 4000 pounds so this was a huge problem as the concrete was hard and getting harder by the day.
Funny thing happened the next day. I was browsing around a Habitat for Humanity ReStore Store and I found this box about the same size as the one that the anchors came in. It was unopened and marked Maytag. It had parts needed for the installation of a Maytag Dishwasher. I bought it for $5.
Emails were sent to the Manufacturer and I kidded about the Maytag man... That next friday the "Maytag Man" showed up on the jobsite with all the builder needed to retrofit the anchors. Not a cheap bunch of parts by any means. The rep, Curt J, aka Maytag man, did an excellent job of explaining how to fix the problem and how to do it right the first time next time. Curt J. is an asset to that company which is Simpson Strongtie.
That company has never been known by me to let a customer down. They understand customer service, cranky old inspectors and most importantly they know their products.
We all learned something that day. I'm sure that will help the lumberyard and the builder was educated and got what he needed, (minus labor) and I got to get a final jab at the rep when I showed him that $5 box of dishwasher parts with the instructions enclosed.
Curt left us with full catalogs and job handbooks for the Strongtie products.

Some may say that what I did was not the role of an inspector. Some may say its not the role of a highway patrolman to help change a flat tire. Well in my book if you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem . ... and being a cranky old inspector I can get away with it... So whatever you do, do with your whole heart as working for the Lord and not for man. Col 3:23.

You bet I Emailed Simpson Strongtie and told them about their excellent service and that outstanding field rep...... If only our congressmen were half that good.... We could all learn something from Curt.

TypePad Conversations » Answer this question!

What the Guy From State Has to Say

LET ME SAY THAT THE ANSWERS THAT THE REPLY CAME WITH WHERE IN RED, In transferring them to this blog the red color is lost but you can still find them easily enough..... personal info has been X'd out to keep this blog one of not pointing the finger but rather one where others can learn from other's mistakes.
_________________________________________________ READY?

Answers inserted below in red. I hope the owner at least considers complaint against the inspector's license. Open records violation lawsuits can win some $ too, but as you are both residents of that township, you would be picking your neighbor's pockets on that, so it is up to you on pursuit of that.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: XXXXXX [mailto:codeguy@integrity.com]
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 10:11 AM
To: XXXXXXXXX- COMMERCE
Subject: Doing this for the home owner.

Hello Mr. XXXXXX,
On Wednesday and Thursday I sat through 11 hours of hearings. The owner wanted to put me on the stand, along with the Town Clerk and another inspector but the lawyer for an inspector would not let the owner do it..... rules of evidence. The Owner had fired their attorney after $8grand+ in fees. A legal mess.

Questions for you and then I'll let you know the outcome.
Dwelling was built in 20XX.
If an inspector does a plan review and there is a walk out basement and an attached garage, do you think he should know there would be "jumps" in the footings, differences in elevations? Just from looking at the plan and elevation drawings even if the foundation plan did not show those "jumps". If the plans were properly prepared, then per Comm 20.09(4)(a)3. of that code in 20XX should have "...exterior grade, footings and foundation walls..." shown. Thus if "footings" are properly indicated on the elevation plans, then yes those jumps should clearly be shown on that plan set approved, even without correct notation on foundation floor plans.

IF an inspector claims he was never called for a foundation inspection but later came out and looked at below floor plumbing to be under the basement slab before the foundation was backfilled do you think the inspector should have noted something on an inspection report about foundation issues at that time? or that he wasn't called, so he claimed even though the contractor and home owner testified they did call him..... As the 2004 UDC Commentary states on page 2004-20-57 that "Depending on construction, it is possible that the footings & foundation could be inspected along with the rough inspections discussed below." And then the next paragraph is on rough inspection and begins with "The important principal to remember is that all work must be inspected prior to concealment." Thus yes he should.

Inspection reports were never received by the municipality. Those produced at the trial had no date. Inspector on stand clearly said they weren't dated after being shown each one. No papers for foundation and drain tile inspection. Others had owner's name, "OK", signature of inspector and a box or two checked for type of inspection. Would you say that is diligently doing the job? He never found a single violation and never noted not being called for the foundation inspection... NO!!

The horizontal distance between footings at a "jump" was eight feet per Cooper engineering. Should the inspector have noted this during footing inspection and inquired about how that "lintel" would be incorporated into that section of foundation wall and ask for how it was going to be reinforced? It should not have been ignored entirely on plan review and inspection, clearly some where it should have been clarified to show code compliance.

Smooth talking lawyer objected to Cooper's Eng fix and judge sustained the objection ........... I about died...

Does ACI 318 (Comm 20.24) apply to such a long lintel as mentioned above or can it just be done by "experience" of the concrete guy who didn't know what a lintel was in his deposition? As the code has no prescriptive design stated for that, yes ACI 318 standard should have been utilized.

No conditions of approval were given the permit applicant. The inspector came to get the permit application and filled out the Permit card and took the check. The Town or inspector do not have a copy of the plans. Is this negligence of the Code, a Code violation, if you will, done by those who are to enforce the Code? Since Comm 20.10(3) was added to the UDC in April of 2007, that is clearly a code violation, as well as Statute 19 violation of the open records law. Comm 5.10(1)(a)3. and 5.003(32) related codes would also be applicable to the inspector.

Inspector testified as to working another job 40 hours a week, 1 1/2 hours from his home that summer.

It was an interesting two days.

Much more but there was a $20grand judgement against the concrete guy, the original quote he gave was under that amount, he had been paid cause he filed a lien and the owner had to get the lien removed to get long term financing. The inspector (with Mr. Smooth Talking Lawyer) was found not to be negligent and the homeowner is to pay the inspector's lawyer's fees (three "expert witnesses" there most the time and about $9 grand in previous charges)

One of those expert witnesses built 1500 homes in 6 years in the Eau Claire area and only had one issue with an inspector and that was about setbacks. (Do the math, that is a home a working day). I caught up with him out in the hall and reintroduced myself and reminded him of a home he built in the Town of Howard three years ago........ But the judge in his disertation of the facts and findings before his ruling at the end of the case quoted this expert witness and the number of homes he had built....no they are not manufactured, they are all site built.....

So what do you think about the inspector? Comm 5.10(1)(a)3. and 5.003(32) related codes would also be applicable to the inspector.
More "fun" stuff.
One of the expert witnesses drew a sketch on the white board of the footing and foundation showing a keyway. The home owner questioned the keyway and pointed out there was none and the concrete guy agreed and finally asked Mr. Peterson P.E. (is the E for expert) ....... he never saw the footings.......
The other P.Expert testified on the first morning that the lintel should have been designed by ACI 318 as should the other three which also cracked but in the afternoon he fell in line when put back on the stand to : "they are shrinkage cracks" and "performing to industry standards".... I'm sure you know this P.E. out of Rice Lake, he even said in the morning he'd charge $500 for those designs. First name was Bob (Robert) S ..

So do you think the inspector did his job? No. Was he negligent? Yes. Did he do any violations of Code Comm 20.09 and 20.10 ? Many.

The home owner is kind of in shock but I plan on forwarding your answer to him.

The concrete contractor probably will never pay as I don't thnk he has much more than I or a pot and a window to throw it out off..... when asked about BCR he still doesn't have it and knew nothing about it even after the owner explained it to him, he said concrete guys don't need it.... The owner, by the way, is a HVAC contractor.

Please let me know your "legal" position on the inspector. Maybe I've been driving and writing too much these years... "OK" and my name would not only save ink but inspection report forms too.. Even though it may get assigned to me, and I do not need more work to do, I hope someone or multiple people file complaints against this inspector's license causing an investigation of him; so that some people will get better dwellings and some judges will learn that not all inspectors are above the law [and that he can continue his full time job elsewhere & stop being a poor excuse for a building inspector - giving us all a bad name].

XXXXXX XXXXXXX

The guy that did the framing saved the day and what saving could be done for the home owner. Excellent on the stand describing the foundation problems. Owner did not "prove" to the judge the inspector wasn't doing his job.... That Township fired him in early 20XX.

TypePad Conversations » Answer this question!

More on that Court Case. Justice was not done.

About that hearing. The owner, even though he got a $20grand judgement against the concrete guy he also got the other defendants legal fees and court costs, almost $10 grand. Add that to his own fired lawyer's $8grand+ charges and the owner got the short end of the stick.
It will be very tough for him to collect on that judgement as that concrete contractor probably doesn't have a pot to go in or a window to toss it out of....
Wish you could have been there. At the end of the first day's hearings the wife had brought the couple's twin 3 month old boys and had them out in the corridor. The defendant's lawyer and the appeaser / inspector both stopped and commented how cute they were and asked their age etc. She should have slapped then both..
The morning of the first day, the plaintiff / homeowner put one of the defendant's expert witnesses on the stand and that guy clearly repeatedly stated that where the problem was should have been "designed" with calculations using ACI 318 which is adopted in the State-wide building Code . After lunch and I'm sure a short talk with the inspector/defendant's lawyer who hired him as one of three expert witnesses, the same guy took the stand and did a total flip - flop. The huge cracks that clearly indicated a structural problem that a PE had designed a fix for became "shrinkage cracks"
Another "expert witness" took the stand who is a local builder. He claimed he only had one "red flag" with an inspector and that was due to a set-back issue. I caught up with him in the corridor during a break and addressed him by his first name. I then proceeded to remind him of a home he built in a municipality I inspect for and the Code violations concerning truss bearing support on that home that required a few bucks to fix.... And that guy claimed, on the stand, that he built 1500 homes in 6 years. The judge noted his testimony in his final findings of fact before he gave the verdict. Evidently the judge can't do math very well. 1500 divided by 6 = 250 or almost one new home every working day for six years.. And these were site built homes and with maybe two crews.. pretty amazing.... The guy is also a realtor. MAYBE, just maybe he's listed that many homes in 6 years but in this area that might even be pushing it.
Noticed something about the other two expert witnesses. Ever notice how a young child can't look you in the eye when they are lying to you. Well two of those expert witnesses had a hard time looking up when answering the defense's lawyers questions . Those questions were all worded for simple yes or no answers. Some were leading questions but the plaintiff never objected.

All in all it was a sad day in court for the 1 and 2 family dwelling Code in this State.
My next blog will be a reply from a State employee concerning questions I asked Emailed him the night after the hearing was over.
Be sure to read his answers.

TypePad Conversations » Answer this question!

Contractor and Building Inspector on Trial. Rules of Evidence Won....

Been a week now and I want to share an 11 hour hearing I sat through. I was to witness but the defendant's lawyer wouldn't let me on the stand. The Plaintiff had fired their lawyer after over $8grand in charges and them trying to settle oput of court for 1/4 of what the owner ended up getting acting pro se, so I had not been put on the witness list as neither had a couple of Township employees and another inspector. Rules of evidence trumped the truth.
The outcome is interesting in that the contractor had a judgement of $20grand against him for his poor workmanship. The original bid was for $18grand. The Code related items didn't even enter into that judgement. Defendant #2 got off scott free because the plaintiff, acting as his own attorney, pro se, could not call witnesses to the stand. The inspector, defendant #2, admitted to not doing the inspection. Inspection reports he had done for other phases of construction were a joke. They weren't even dated and simply had the Owner's name, permit number, his name and "OK" written on them. He found absolutely no Code violations, not even petty stuff. He clearly stated on the stand under questioning from the owner/plaintiff that the reports were not dated or filled out...
State Code is clear about the paper work to be completed by an inspector:
1. A record shall be made of each visit to a site, each inspection
type performed and the pass or fail results of each inspection.
2. Approved plans shall be retained for 4 years after completion
of the dwelling.
3. Applications forms, correction orders, correspondence and
inspection records shall be maintained for 7 years after completion
of the dwelling.
The municipality had no, none, zilch records from their inspector.... but he got off because of rules of evidence. Even though he freely admitted to not doing the inspection where all the violations and sloppy work happened AND he admitted to having another full time job an 1 1/2 hour drive one way away it made no difference to the judge.
The inspector charged $690 for the inspections, did not do a plan review where he should have caught the Code violations on the plans and claims he never was called for the inspection even though the owner testified he had called.
Well as an inspector, had I not been called and was later called to do an inspection of another phase of construction before the previous work had been covered I would have inspected it even if I had not been called. Furthermore an inspection previous to the one that never got done would have clearly shown there was a problem waiting to happen! THE FOOTINGS WERE NOT WIDE ENOUGH FOR A FOUNDATION WALL OF THE PROPER THICKNESS ! The inspector that got off should have noted that while inspecting the footings instead of just writing "OK".
The above mentioned case points out one of the biggest problems with some building inspectors. They either don't know Code or don't have the balls to enforce it. The inspector / defendant never filed records with the municipality and it took the complaints of a citizen of that municipality and an inspector to get the guy fired. He was not doing inspections, he was building his retirement account and doing appeasement.
That inspector still works for several other municipalities where he serves as good ole' boy and the Father's of those municipalities like him because he's a people person. ACTUALLY HE ALLOWS BUILDERS TO SLIDE CRAP BY HOME OWNERS and the municipalities don't know the difference or don't care.

So how did he get caught in the above case? The home owner is a HVAC contractor that knows a few things about other phases of construction.
What is a regular home owner to do? Well with this same inspector in another municipality the home owner ended up selling her home back to the builder because it was so riddled with problems.
The inspector should have been hung and would of if the plaintiff's witnesses would have been allowed to take the stand.
So if you are going to hire a lawyer check them out ahead of time and direct their efforts. Make them see it through to the end and make sure they don't try to cut a deal with the opposing party.
Email me at codeguy@integrity.com with questions.

TypePad Conversations » Answer this question!