That’s right. Construction codes have nothing to do with home inspections. According to your profile, you are in New York. You should consider taking a home inspection course at a school such as Merrell Institute.
I was one of the first inspectors licensed in New York and I am a New York approved instructor for both home inspection and business. I am very familiar with the New York SOP. The NY SOP, as is the case with most home inspection SOPs, requires the inspector to identify components and report on CONDITION. It specifically excludes any other requirements such as installation standards.
I don’t know how you came to believe that construction codes have any bearing on a home inspection but that is a misconception that too many people have. It is wrong for you or anyone else to go onto forums and spread misinformation without knowing what you are talking about.
I checked with NY and found that you are not licensed as a home inspector in the state. If you pursue a license in NY, you are going to have to become familiar with the NY SOP.
Section 197-5.3 Minimum Requirements
(b) Home inspectors shall report on those systems and components observed that, in the professional opinion of the home inspector, are deficient, not functioning properly and/or unsafe. https://www.dos.ny.gov/licensing/homeinspect/hinspect_ethics.html
The opinion of a home inspector when reporting deficiencies and unsafe conditions should be based on modern authoritative sources, not something that was okay 100 years ago or is okay just because someone thinks so or doesn’t know any better. There is a reason why continuing education is required. Not sure if you have attended any lately (they have to be NY state approved) but most of the classes are based on latest construction safety & standards. While the law instructs the home inspector not to determine code compliance, it does not stop one from using it as source to determine what’s unsafe & deficient. To claim that construction codes have nothing to do with a home inspection is in fact absurd
Yes. In the 2020 NEC, Article 406.9( C ) will be changed to read “Receptacles shall not be installed within a zone measured 900 mm (3 ft) horizontally and 2.5 m (8 ft) vertically from the top of the bathtub rim or shower stall threshold.”
Thank you, that’s not going to go over well when you can’t put the receptacle behind the toilet for the fancy toilet seat because the toilet is next to the shower.
Show us where in the NY SOP it says anything about basing an inspection on current construction codes? It seems that you are just another hapless clueless troll, a wannabe building inspector. You aren’t a NY licensed home inspector. You aren’t a NY approved instructor for home inspection. You aren’t even an InterNACHI member. But, you presume to tell us how home inspections are supposed to be done. From what I can see, you don’t have any qualifications whatsoever to have any opinions about home inspections.
I’ll wait for you to show us where in the NY SOP it says anything about home inspections being based on building codes. Give us some evidence that you are something other than a troll.
I already explained my position. Unfortunately, it’s impossible to teach a man with a made up mind. I’m not here to tell anyone what to do, everything I post is my opinion (educated one if I may add). I always recommend to do what one believes is best for them & do their own homework. I’m not here to prove anything to you. I hope you can realize this. If there is nothing of value you can find in what I post, you can safely ignore my posts. Thank you for sharing your input
You have not explained your position. I asked a simple question. Where in the NY SOP does it say anything about inspections being based, in any way, on building codes?
If you come on to a public board and make absurd comments about an occupation that you know nothing about, you are doing harm to those who are trying to learn the business and to the industry as a whole.
For every ONE SOP that you can show us that says a home inspection is related to building codes, I’ll show you at least three where there is no such relationship.
You are in New York so start with New York. You won’t find it because it doesn’t exist. So, stop making crap up to suit the way you think things ought to be.
Receptacle outlet(s) located in the area around a dwelling unit bathtub or shower stall have been revised to include a restricted “zone” similar to luminaires in said areas. The 2017 NEC text in this section indicates that a receptacle outlet cannot be located “within or directly over a bathtub or shower stall.” What constitutes the bathtub or shower space? Is the bathtub space the outside dimensions of the tub or the inside of the tub? Does it mean the walls enclosing the tub or shower?
Some users of the Code consider this language vague, leading to confusion and varied interpretation. New language has been proposed for this section dealing with receptacles similar to what is found at 410.10(D), which provides specific dimensions for electrical installations near bathtubs and shower stalls for luminaires, fans, etc. The new proposed language would prohibit receptacle outlets from being installed within a zone measured 900 mm (3 ft.) horizontally and 2.5 m (8 ft.) vertically from the top of the bathtub rim or shower stall threshold. This zone would be all-encompassing and include the space directly over the tub or shower stall. An exception would allow a receptacle outlet within this 900 mm (3 ft.) by 2.5 m (8 ft.) zone in smaller bathrooms where the proposed zone measurements could not be achieved due to limited space. In these cases, the receptacle outlet would be required to be installed on the farthest wall within the room that is opposite the bathtub rim or shower stall threshold. Consideration was also given to 552.41(F) for park trailers, which states the following: “A receptacle outlet shall not be installed in or within reach [750 mm (30 in.)] of a shower or bathtub space.” (See Figure 1.)"
I think he has stated his opinion, explained it and acquitted himself quite well on the matter. He’s under no compulsion to respond to your strawman challenge which has nothing at all to do with what he stated.
Maryland states the same situation in their SOP. The key is in the definitions (which the know-it-alls-don’t-read).
(26) “Significantly deficient” means to be unsafe or not functioning as deigned or intended.
(32) “Unsafe” means a condition in a readily accessible, installed system or component which is deemed to create a significant risk of personal injury during normal, day-to-day use,
which may be the result of damage, deterioration, improper installation or a change in accepted residential construction standards.
You can read that last part, “change in accepted residential construction standards” as codes! You would be wise to use a euphemism ( i. e. "modern safety standards) in your report to prevent arguments.
This directly substantiates what Simon Rechkin stated in his post.
InterNACHI training and exams are rife with errors and misinformation. Congratulations on identifying an example. InterNACHI training materials, while useful, should not be considered an authoritative or universal source for defect identification.
I agree. I will always report on something like that, because it will protect my liability. Whether I am required to or not, I don’t want them blaming me when they get shocked and it causes injury or death! I will be off the hook if they choose to ignore it.
