Originally Posted By: KipHamilton This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Hey guys…
This is actually a follow-up to my question about using leak-detection equipment and stepping over the bounds of a visual inspection.
Somewhere, either the NACHI agreement or the SoP it states something to the effect that the inspector will not inspect for building code compliance.
Same question... it seems that knowledge of the current building code requirements would be essential to performing a comprehensive HI, and since many, if not most of the actual "codes" are wrapped up around some issue who's root is actually a safety concern...
How do you guys balance performing a quality inspection and inspecting and reporting on code violations?
Are we supposed to know specific code requirements and/or report on them or aren't we? If we are, then why the exclusionary language in the SoP?
One of the reasons for my question is that my "day" job is in the Architectural Services of a "major" US homebuilder. Last week a supervisor called in in a panic because a home buyer had engaged a HI to have a look at his new home. The HI wrote us up because of a low window sill height in the 2nd flr bedrooms. This is one of our best-selling models, so we knew right away that we were ok with the windows. As it turned out, the sill height was one of 4 criteria on a list, ALL of which had to be met for a "violation" to be triggered. The HI just focused on one of the four and wrote it up.
He caused a big flap, because he (maybe) overstepped his bounds as a HI and didn't have a full understanding of what the IRC actually requires.
So again, are we supposed to inspect for building code violations or not?
Originally Posted By: jpope This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Kip,
The short answer is "no, we do not check for code compliance."
One reason for this is that codes affect new construction rather than existing dwellings (for the most part). Older homes are not necessarily "code compliant," but at the same time, they are not in "violation" of codes.
For instance, a ten year old, two story home will commonly have handrails with opening up to six inches wide. At the time of construction, this was in compliance with local codes. New homes are required to have openings in rails which do not allow a four inch sphere to pass through.
Bringing a home "up to code" can be very costly and is usually only required during remodeling or reconstruction. Checking for code compliance on older homes is almost impossible as we cannot see inside the walls or under slabs.
I will commonly "recommend upgrades for safety enhancement" when I run across situations where the "old codes" appear unsafe by today's standards.
Did I make any sense?
-- Jeff Pope
JPI Home Inspection Service
"At JPI, we'll help you look better"
(661) 212-0738
Originally Posted By: Joseph A. Ferry This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Kip -
I think that it would be an unreasonable for a prospective homeowner to expect an HI to sign off on a property's compliance with the local building code. These codes wander all over the lot and vary widely from municipality to municipality. Generally, a U & O cert is required to make settlement, a process that theoretically ensures that the property complies with the current code.
That is not to say that, if the HI *knows* that the property is out of compliance, she should keep her mouth shut. In that instance, it would be appropriate to give the client a heads-up ALONG WITH A DISCLAIMER that there may be other areas where the property is out of compliance and suggest that the client check with the local code enforcement officer.
In other words, you're not WARRANTING that the property is OTHERWISE in compliance SOLELY because you pointed out one area where you know that it is not.
Originally Posted By: KipHamilton This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Hey Jeff!
Yeah, you did...but you demonstrated your knowledge of the code(s) in answering the question of whether we inspect to them.
I have noted a lot of "chatter" on the BB about what code book to get and a boat load of comments and/or pics of all kinds of code violation issues.
In that many of the "official" code violations will also be safety concerns which we should be pointing out to our customers that there will be some overlap.
I was just interested if this not inspecting for code compliance was one of those wink and nod things that officially we don't do, but do.
Originally Posted By: jpope This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Okay, try this on;
We don't LOOK for code violations specifically. However, if we find one, we don't REPORT it as a "violation." I think that's the more important differential.
Originally Posted By: roconnor This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Building codes can be a very useful tool for an HI, if used correctly just like any other tool. They can help to determine what is “current practice” or a “safety issue”, but code section should never be quoted and nothing should ever be described as a “code violation”. That part is up to the local building official.
Originally Posted By: dbowers This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
As a HI that has been and is Code Certified on 1 & 2 Family Dwellings on Electrical, Plumbing, Mechanical and Buildings with BOCA, ICBO and ICC - I know a little bit about codes. So does that mean while doing a HI on an existing house that I’m doing a “Code Inspection”. NO!
In most areas of the country the only person that is allowed to do and enforce a "Code Inspection" is the City, County, Fire Marshall or similar building official. The rest of us (electricians, plumbers, engineers, home inspectors, etc) often VENTURE our OPINION about something not being up to code - but that exactly what it is - our own opinion.
Most Code Issues are Safety Related Issues. I'm inspecting a 20 year old house in a rural area (that just adopted their 1st building codes about 2 years ago). My buyer is a 25 year old buyer with a very active 3 year old and the house has a deck 15 feet off the ground with gaps in the railings 14" wide - Do I Care or Even Consider For 1 Minute That The Condition May BE "GRANDFATHERED" by Code. Hell No - Its A Safety Issue that needs to be discussed with the buyer and then written up. Its not a Code Violation on an existing house but its darn sure a SIGNIFICANT SAFETY ISSUE for that little kid.
Originally Posted By: GENE LITTLE This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Hello Folks,
Funny reading about this, I’m in Canada and in order to obtain a registered inspector designation with OAHI you HAVE TO take 2 Building Inspector courses at few colleges that offer these expensive courses (course cost, b/code books etc…). After taking both these courses and finding that we do not report on b/code compliance (just added another reason for me not to renew membership with OAHI). I must admit the courses are not without merit but not actually needed, just another money grab .What’s needed are more courses designed for Home Inspections with actual on site training , like an apprentice set up or so many apprentice hours needed with a registered or certified experienced Inspector.We all know you can read dozens of books but they wont mean a thing until your out there in the field. Just my opinion
Originally Posted By: Walter Engelking This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Although I am aware of current and former codes, I cannot possibly do a code inspection.
I inspect within a metropolitan market of 11 (count them) eleven counties. within this area, I can't even count the number of municipalities. All of these have their own codes and interpretations. And, with all of these changing over the years, who is to say what code was in place when something was built?
I do inspect with safety, and structural integrity in mind. When I find something that is not up to IRC I may comment, but don't blow it out of proportion. Sometimes, in the case of older structures, I might just state that in general terms rather than all occurrences.
Originally Posted By: rsummers This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
We have a Inspector in this area that markets the 1 year warranty on new homes. As a construction supervisor for a mechanical contractor I had a number of instances where he would call code violations on a home the City had approved. He not only has made many building officials dislike him a number of contractors feel the same way. As a home inspector you should not list code violations just safety concerns and visible construction defects. I never let on to be professional at any trade and to site code violations may make you be seen as pro in the area of the violation. The way they interpret building codes in this county changes so often what is ok 1 day is a bust on another. How do you keep up?
Originally Posted By: Phillip R. Hinman This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Although not licensed I am VP of a Construction Code organization in NJ. I have recently finished the NJ mandated course to become a licensed HI in NJ.
I have 30+ plus years in residential and commercial construction.
While taking the course the instructor said we would be able to inspect new homes.
I must say I was dismayed at this statement. The course I took certainly made me a better homebuilder because I was trained to look at things I relied on subs to do such as electrical and HVAC items.
It was by no stretch of the imagination a course on how to build a home!
The course did not teach anyone how to read plans, kitchen or bath layouts, electrical plumbing or HVAC plans or complicated truss drawings.
Furthermore the expectations of someone hiring an inspector to inspect their new home would certainly include code compliance, roof and floor truss knowledge and many other items not addressed in the typical "home inspection" process.
My advise to HI- stay away from new home inspections unless you have a background to back it up!
Originally Posted By: Mike Parks This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
“He not only has made many building officials dislike him a number of contractors feel the same way”
Me too. They do not like when I call out improper or no grounding/bonding of the electrical system. They also do not like when I call a staircase having a 5' 10" headroom clearance. Lack of 6" in 10' grading. Vent pipes too low on their extention from a roof. Wardflex not secure.
Just a few of what is missed.
While I would like to get along, I am not being paid to be "nice".
Originally Posted By: rsummers This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Mike I agree that if a house has code violations they should be called on them during construction. I’ve seen some really poor work get by the building dept. Doing a Home Inspection I think should be approached different than what county or city building do. You need to care what the costumers think or the phone will stop rigging. If something on the home is defective list it why call it a code violation.
