I received a call to do an inspection on a new construction home. I received the builder’s requirements today. They require $2,000,000 GL, $1,000,000 auto insurance and that the inspector be a member of both FABI and ASHI.
That builder is probably using an outdated form from before HI Licensing, it was common to see statements like that ("…must belong to XYZ and ABC, and carry more insurance than the actual sub-contractors that built the home…")
I had a builder question the requirement for having GFCI protection on a receptacle in the garage about 2 years ago. They demanded that I show them that it was a code requirement. I told them that I was not a code inspector but I did send the the section of the code that references them. They didn’t argue after that.
Update. I sent the buyer an email telling her that it appeared that the builder was just trying to make it more difficult for her to use the inspector she wanted. She called the builder and complained. She hasn’t received the final OK yet but it sounds like the builder is going to give in.
If your going to do these you should use the NAHB ( National Assoc of Home Builders) Residential Performance Guidelines 4th Edition available on line. Here is a copy of the 3rd Edition CLICK HERE These are guidelines written and approved by builders, hard for them not to abide by them.
Good for you! This segment of the business is a great opportunity to add to your company’s resume. Some builders like to create large huddles to prevent third party inspectors reviewing their work. We are not code compliant building inspectors but rather quality and accuracy inspectors. We verify the client is receiving what they have contracted to purchase. Not all jurisdictions (AHJ) follow the code as it was adopted as many amend the code to meet their requirements. When I observe an item that is questionable I usually call or email the inspector to verify it is a correct application for their jurisdiction and have never found any of these inspectors not willing to explain why they have adopted a slightly different interpretation of the code.
I was a member of this group and the guidelines are an excuse to build sloppy. Tolerances are such as no 12X16 room or slab be more than 1" out of square or a wall can be 1"out of plumb. Not the finest measure of good building.
Furthermore, I spent years as a trim carpenter and heard many times “your here to make this look good”.
Personally I can live with the NAHB guidelines as performed by others but would not use them myself. The bigger question to me is: How can a typical home inspector critique what a code inspector allows?
Just because it was signed-off by someone, doesn’t necessarily mean they looked at it, or that they caught any installation issues, or that a different widget was substituted after the AHJ inspection, etc. etc.
And the local AHJ doesn’t actually test every item they sign-off.
As the project Superintendent I used to distract the Inspector with huntin’ and fishin’ stories if there was something I didn’t want him to see. Not anything deficient, just not quite ready yet, but need it signed off for scheduling. Some people would do the same thing to hide deficiencies.
I agree the guidelines are very liberal. I use them as a tool to put the builder at ease and that I am inspecting to guidelines written by his/her association. In the end we serve our customer and not the builder.
Regarding code, if your going to go there you would be better served to have the code cut and pasted into your report to prove the deficiency.