I recently inspected a new home pending closing, with a walled but open stairwell at the rear of the garage leading to the common (non-separated) attic above the entire house. The gas fired split system heat pump is located in the attic. I advised my client that this stairwell would need a compliant doorset installed to preserve fire separation. The prospective owner discussed my report with the builder for rectification who advised her that the city inspector had issued a certificate of occupancy for the house therefore disregard my comments. The city uses 2003 versions of all codes. I don’t have access to my pictures at present otherwise I would post (will try later when back at the office) however, hopefully you will get the gist of my recommendation. In your opinion, would it be opportune to speak with the city inspector as I believe this totally contravenes fire separation requirements of the 2003 IRC:
R309.2 Separation required. The garage shall be separated from the residence and its attic area by not less than 1/2 " gypsum board applied to the garage side.Garages beneath habitable rooms shall be separated from all habitable rooms above by not less than 5/8 " Type X gypsum board or equivalent.Where the separation is a floor to ceiling assembly , the structure supporting the separation shall also be protected by not less than 1/2" gypsum board or equivalent. (not Type X per se)
Comments appreciated.
rcloyd
(Russell Cloyd, KY LIC #166164, IN LIC#HI02300068)
2
Sounds like your assessment and recommendation is spot on. No need to speak to the AHJ. BTW, A home inspection is not a code inspection.
You should complete your profile so we know where you are located. It would also be a good idea to complete your signature area with company name and contact info. Helps with SEO.
As to your post: You make recommendations, and yours sounds fine, but it is the client who decides what to do about it, if anything.
Don’t surprised, as time goes on, that a vast majority of recommendations you make in your inspection reports are ignored by your clients.
The kicker happens when they have their lawyer send you a letter wanting you to pay for the repair or upgrade.
I realize that we are not code inspectors but we also need to be aware of relevant codes to be able to provide sensible recommendations. I have been doing this for over 5 years now and nothing really surprises me regarding what the client decides to do, or otherwise, with recommendations!
Tried to edit/insert image in original but it didn’t appear. Any clues as I tried to 1. copy and paste then 2. use the paperclip but it asked for a URL.
City inspectors pass all kinds of things that they shouldn’t. They have a lot of houses to inspect and little time to spend on each. They sometimes are not the most diligent. I never care about what the city passed.
Of course, if your client were to contact the city building department and point out your finding to them, they may well reconsider whether it should have been green tagged. Perhaps, if the client were to suggest that he might go back to the city for clarification, the builder may reconsider all on his own. I will provide my clients them all of the backup information (code references, installation standards, etc.) that they need to support my findings, but I do not attempt to negotiate for them.
Thanks Chuck, I didn’t realize the advanced option was where pictures were uploaded. I was trying to do this from the standard reply page, obviously with no luck.
At last, managed to post the picture of the open stairwell to the rear of the garage leading to a common attic above the entire house that I started this thread about. As far as I am aware, it is still in this condition after issue of the Certificate of Occupancy by the city.
