Originally Posted By: darmstrong This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Found a 100 amp Murray breaker panel with a 2 - pole 40 amp breaker that had two 10 gauge conductors on each pole (double tapped). the breaker was serving the range.
Originally Posted By: Steven Brewster This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Absolutely. Not only do you have a double tap but overfusing 30 amp wire on 40 amp breaker if the wiring is NM solid conductor type. Are you sure that this circuit only serves the stove?
Is there any room in the panel to add an additional 2pole breaker?
Originally Posted By: rcooke This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
darmstrong wrote:
Found a 100 amp Murray breaker panel with a 2 - pole 40 amp breaker that had two 10 gauge conductors on each pole (double tapped). the breaker was serving the range.
Am I correct in citing this as deficient?
Danny
Double taps Recommend immediate further evaluation by qualified person.
That is how I ( A retired Sparky ) would write this up and move on to the next part of my inspection.
No need to look what it feeds it is wrong and must be fixed.
Originally Posted By: jpope This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
rcooke wrote:
Double taps Recommend immediate further evaluation by qualified person.
There's that "F" word again. . .
rcooke wrote:
No need to look what it feeds it is wrong and must be fixed.
You contradict yourself here Roy but this it more in line with what should be recommended.
It unfortunate, but many electricians don't see double taps as a problem. The sad fact is that if we recommend further evaluation, it may not get repaired. The sparky may just say "It's no big deal."
No offence Roy, I've always valued your opinion. I simply feel that the "Further Evaluation" phrase is over-used by inspectors.
After all, "Further Evaluation" is what we are hired for in the beginning. . .
-- Jeff Pope
JPI Home Inspection Service
"At JPI, we'll help you look better"
(661) 212-0738
Originally Posted By: darmstrong This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Jeff, I agree with you also, but in this case the range top and oven were built ins and I would not try to trace the wires from the panel area to the loads.
After saying that, it just occured to me what they have probably done here. They have most likely used one conductor for each unit (range top) and (oven) since they are separate. Still not right!
After all, there is only so much troubleshooting one can do for the inspection fee alone!
If we don't refer some of the items to quallified technicians, we'll be there all day troubleshooting this stuff.
Originally Posted By: rcooke This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
jpope wrote:
rcooke wrote:
Double taps Recommend immediate further evaluation by qualified person.
There's that "F" word again. . .
rcooke wrote:
No need to look what it feeds it is wrong and must be fixed.
You contradict yourself here Roy but this it more in line with what should be recommended.
It unfortunate, but many electricians don't see double taps as a problem. The sad fact is that if we recommend further evaluation, it may not get repaired. The sparky may just say "It's no big deal."
No offence Roy, I've always valued your opinion. I simply feel that the "Further Evaluation" phrase is over-used by inspectors.
After all, "Further Evaluation" is what we are hired for in the beginning. . .
Sorry I feel it is a concern . I have made what I feel is the proper call if the client does not get it repaired ,whether it is lack of railing incorrect gutters I am a generalist and do not try to know what is the proper way to fix what is needed .
I guess we will have to agree to disagree.
I do not have a code book, do not want to know codes( Too Many ) I do a visual inspection and if I feel it is not correct write it up . Better to make a mistake on telling them to get further evaluation the too miss something . I try to follow the SOP and stay out of COURT.
Originally Posted By: jpope This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
rcooke wrote:
I am a generalist and do not try to know what is the proper way to fix what is needed .
Nor do I, however, I am willing to make the statement that it should be fixed rather than evaluated (unless, of course, I don't know what the problem is).
rcooke wrote:
I try to follow the SOP and stay out of COURT.
As do I.
-- Jeff Pope
JPI Home Inspection Service
"At JPI, we'll help you look better"
(661) 212-0738
Originally Posted By: rcooke This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
jpope wrote:
rcooke wrote:
I am a generalist and do not try to know what is the proper way to fix what is needed .
Nor do I, however, I am willing to make the statement that it should be fixed rather than evaluated (unless, of course, I don't know what the problem is).
rcooke wrote:
I try to follow the SOP and stay out of COURT.
As do I.
Ah yes but what if I am wrong and it does not need to be fixed.
Example Sq D you are allowed double taps.
Example I feel the furnace could have a crack Further evaluation covers me if it did not have or did have a crack .
CRA ( cover Roys A$$ )
Example ground wire is required on gas pipes in my area and I do believe this is not the case in all areas .
Different codes for different areas so by telling them they need further evaluation I think it is the correct call .
Originally Posted By: jpope This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
jpope wrote:
Nor do I, however, I am willing to make the statement that it should be fixed rather than evaluated (unless, of course, I don't know what the problem is).
If you don't know, recommend evaluation.
If you know, recommend repair/correction.
Quote:
Example Sq D you are allowed double taps.
Double taps are never allowed on current carrying conductors. Some Square D breakers allow for two conductors - specifically designed to keep the conductors separate and allow for adequate contact - that is not considered a double tap.
Quote:
Example I feel the furnace could have a crack Further evaluation covers me if it did not have or did have a crack .
Perfect example of when "Further Evaluation" is an appropriate recommendation. Because you don't know if there is a crack although you suspect that there is.
-- Jeff Pope
JPI Home Inspection Service
"At JPI, we'll help you look better"
(661) 212-0738
Originally Posted By: rcooke This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
jpope wrote:
Nor do I, however, I am willing to make the statement that it should be fixed rather than evaluated (unless, of course, I don't know what the problem is).
If you know, recommend repair/correction.quote]
Evaluation means they should have the whole system checked .
Repair states they should fix what you have said is wrong .
I like the idea of the purchaser getting every thing fixed .
I find an error in the electric panel .
I am satisfied they need to get every thing in the panel fixed .
I do not continue to go down an itemize ever error in the panel there could be considerable
Originally Posted By: rcooke This post was automatically imported from our archived forum. Please read the top we were talking about double poles in a panel .
2-pole breaker double tapped
___________________________________________________________
The above in in My check list would be
Task.............................. Location...........................Time
Repair or replace.............. bed room......................Immediately
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the same as would come up in my check list for double taps.
Under that would be ( Further evaluation by qualified person.)
You and I both know most people do not do most of those things that should be done .
Originally Posted By: rwand1 This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Further evaluation in my opinion is used by me when I realize I am in over my head. If double taps are not permitted why would you recommend further evaluation?
If you are an experienced inspector and have seen a variety of panels, wiring problems, and other faults, why would you need to recommend further evaluation, when you know its wrong just from exprience? In my opinion I would be stating that there are a number of breakers which are overfused and double tapped. This concern should be repaired/replaced by a qualified/licensed electrician.
Or,
Upon inspection of the electrical panel several concerns were noted. Due to the nature/complexity/unfamiliarity of these issues we would recommend Further Evaluation by a qualified/licensed electrician.
I think we do a great deal of disservice to our clients "sometimes" if we quickly revert to the old life safer "further evaluation."
My thoughts.
Cheers,
Raymond Wand
Alton, ON
-- Raymond Wand
Alton, ON
The value of experience is not in seeing much,
but in seeing wisely. - Sir William Osler 1905
NACHI Member
Registered Home Inspector (OAHI)
http://www.raymondwand.ca
