Good article, Nick.
Licensed home inspectors with unlicensed contractors. tsk tsk
It’s even more interesting to understand that, in most municipalities around here, the actual workers do not have to be licensed, but can work under the GC’s license. GCs are not state licensed, but only licensed by the county or various municipalites. Such ‘licensing’ only requires proof of insurance and a business license and (usually) a $35.00 license fee.
So, it the buyer cannot even be assured that the sub-contractors are quailified.
Besides that, City codes allow all kinds of things that HI’s would call out, like insufficient combustion air for furnaces, venting bathroom and laundry exhausts into attics, high (I have seen them in the 25% range) voltage drops, etc.
Some of you may remember the flap, about 2 years ago, with regards to failing back porches. The new problem is developers installing large, wooden roof decks on flat roofs (not included in the plans). These lead to premature roof covering failure and the roof structure is not designed with these in mind. I have had 2 condos that I have inspected where these decks came down into the top floor unit!
Plainly, the public believes that the code inspection is an assurance of full safety and quality. It is clear that it is not.
Nice article, Nick.
Well done Nick! Keep up the good work!
The real problem is that very few consumers think they need to have an inspection done on new condos.
Even with existing condos many consumers feel it’s not necessary. “It’s a small place, I’ll save the $350”. Lenders should require an inspection on all mortgage loans.
That would be great now wouldn’t it… Lets get to work on that piece of legislation
Vote for Joe [FONT=Wingdings]J[/FONT]
Secretary Chicago Chapter