Originally Posted By: jmyers This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Chad,
It is more for the people that don't know that I worry.
Since I know what you are speaking about, I can draw somewhat of a picture of what you are saying to envision looking for it in the panel, tracing wires or even possibly turning off circuits to see how energized feeds are entering each box.
The average home inspector does not have that kind of experience and therefore would have no idea, other than to look in the boxes and find neutrals all connected together. I don't want them to think it is wrong because of what they are reading here and call it a defect, when in fact it is the preferred method with a few exceptions, one of those being the scenario you are describing.
I am not playing dumb, I really am. I admit it openly and without hesitation. I believe I had questioned on several occasions in this thread about how you could "look" and see this. Hence came the explanation that you had seen 12 hot and 6 neutrals in the service panel. For further clarification as long as those 6 neutrals are sized correctly that all in itself is not enough to come to the conclusion that you have drawn. That would make it more of a multi wire circuit and assuming that neutrals were sized correctly, perfectly alright as far as the NEC is concerned.
Like I said, I would be most interested in looking at those pictures to see if I can draw the same conclusion as you did.
I am always interested in learning, I just don't like learning from books I like learning from experience. 
Originally Posted By: dbozek This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
I’m just trying to figure out why a HI is even opening up junction boxes in the first place. I remember a statement made by a HI here some time ago stating that a home inspection is a general cosmetic inspection of a house. With this in mind, I must wonder why any HI would open junction boxes to inspect the wiring inside of them. Would that not be going above and beyond a general cosmetic inspection?
Now if the boxes were open already, I could see someone, even a HI, looking inside of it. Nevertheless, again, it is still just a cosmetic inspection. So stating that the wire is not protected properly as it enters the j box, in my mind, would be a fair thing to mention in a report. However, stating that the wiring is not properly terminated, or that there are too many neutrals or hots tied together, really goes into a area that in my mind, should not involve a HI. As mentioned in a reply by others, it would take an amount of time and the right diagnostic equipment to determine if there are violations in how some wire is terminated. So why would a HI go to that extreme? Remember, curiousity killed the cat!!
Originally Posted By: jmyers This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Dennis,
I personally do not go to that much of an extreme. Chad had stated the boxes where this was witnessed were already open.
I would have to be 100% on a call like that before I made it. I am there, after all, to give the peace of mind, not make them nervous about defects that don't exist. 
Nice to see you back, you expert opinion is always welcome here as well! 
Originally Posted By: jtedesco This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
jfarsetta wrote:
Joe,
Not busting balls here, so please don't take it this way.
How about a plain-language answer, instead of referring to a section of the electrical code? We are not code inspectors. We do not reference code when examining j-boxes, for the most part.
Help us out here...
Right or wrong, in your opinion... and, of course WHY.
Originally Posted By: Gino Conner This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
I sort of lost track of Mike Park’s original question.
If his scenario was four NM cables in one junction box
with feeds from two different legs in the MDP, and all the
neutrals were tied together, wouldn't that be a violation
of 310.4 Conductors in Parallel
Originally Posted By: jmyers This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Quote:
If the 'hots' are separated that is a VERY good indication that there are two circuits.
That is one assumption that could cost the home inspector a service call for an electrician to come say everything is alright.
Can you please provide a code reference for the violation? Would this be a violation for a 120 volt circuit? Would this be a violation for a 240 volt circuit?
Originally Posted By: Gino Conner This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
The code reference for this violation is 2002 NEC 310.4 “Conductors in Parallel”. I’m not going to copy the actual section here because quoting the NEC here is often frowned upon, for reasons I understand.
The theory for this violation is, if the parallel conductors are not the same length, conductor material, size in circular mil area, insulation type or terminated in the same manner, there is a potential for the one of the two parallel conductors to carry an increased amount of the load returning to the panel. That conductor could easily become overheated and start a fire.
Originally Posted By: jpeck This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Mike Parks wrote:
"WOW...Mike.....you can actually tell that without a voltmeter?? "
Yes.
Edited added (Dennis) I know your qualifications and this is not meant to be a slam, but yes I can.
Mike,
Not to belabor this or anything, but to wet your finger and do the "touch" test? Arm jumps back half way and it's 120 volts, arm jumps back all the way and its 240 volts?
If not, how do you tell the voltage without a voltmeter.
I used to work for an electrical contractor who would wet his finger, stick it in a light socket, feel around and say, 'Yep, it's got power ... I think ... wait a minute ... yep, there it is." Me, I just get close and it comes out and bites me in the finger - don't even have to touch anything.
Originally Posted By: dbozek This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
When I was in the military and just a junior sparky, I knew this guy who thought if he slept with 9 volt batteries attached to his toes, he could create an immunity for electrical shock I wonder if it ever worked for him
– You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they should and could do for themselves. Abraham Lincoln
Originally Posted By: jpeck This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
dbozek wrote:
When I was in the military and just a junior sparky, I knew this guy who thought if he slept with 9 volt batteries attached to his toes, he could create an immunity for electrical shock  I wonder if it ever worked for him
Didn't work for me. Or did I just stop doing it too soon?
Originally Posted By: Mike Parks This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Jerry
"If not, how do you tell the voltage without a voltmeter."
I do not and can not.
I am taking about looking at certain electrical systems and knowing what is correct and what is not.
I know that you and others do the same thing all the time.
I was trying to give an example of one of the most common mistakes in wiring, connecting grounded conductors (past the 'main' disconnect or 'service' disconnect) of different circuits.
Originally Posted By: dbozek This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
That doesnt always hold true though Mike. Even I…resident sparky with over 30 years twistin wires…has to yank out the ole voltmeter to check sumthin…it isn’t a good practice to assume anything is wired as you might think. A white wire attached to a hot could be one end of a switch leg then again…maybe not. To be absolutely sure it is a switch leg you have to test it. Assuming it is would be a mistake. Happens all the time too where the sparky was too lazy to mark the wire.
I was on a emergency service call some time ago where it turned out that the ground wire in a piece of nm was used as a hot. Now if I had assumed that the ground wire was actually a ground....my caretaker would probably be writing these messages here for me now.
-- You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they should and could do for themselves. Abraham Lincoln
Originally Posted By: jmyers This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Dennis,
I am glad you can appreciate what I was saying about assuming anything when it comes to electrical installations. Not only can assuming become costly in terms of money, it can be be costly in terms of loss of life.
I am always surprised to see those that are most concerned about safety could make such a simple assumption which could make it their last.
Given the time restraints of the home inspection, we are always limited to the visual defects which are readily apparent. We just don't have the time for advanced diagnostics which would be necessary to prove these types of defects.
Originally Posted By: dbozek This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
It was an example of how no one should “assume” how something is wired. You stated that you can tell just by looking at a box full of wires, as to how something is wired. I said…how without testing it…you said you didn’t need to test it you knew…I said horsepucky…you “assume” it is wired a certain way…there is no way to be absolutely sure without doing some sort of testing on the circuit(s). I assume all the time and granted most of the time I am right but I only…and I repeat…only know for sure after it is tested. Never take any circuit wiring for granted especially in a residential atmosphere. The life you save may be your own.
Frankly though, I cannot understand why determining how something is wired has to do with home inspection in the first place.......especially when some of ya won't even stick your head above a drop ceiling  
-- You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they should and could do for themselves. Abraham Lincoln
I wonder if it ever worked for him