Romex Help???!!!!!

Originally Posted By: jwortham
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



I need to have that electrician come over to my house. And the 300-400 or so in my neighborhood. I sure would like to be able to get Brickkicker to pay for me to get all the NM out of my house. Just like I am sure the rest of my neighbors would be more than happy to have someone else pay for it. But alas, not going to happen.


Now, that being said, it would be a cold day in a warm place before I wrote a check for $2000.00 because an electrician said something violated code. If I was a code enforcement office, maybe.

If the electrician has specific instances of NM passing through metal framing members, ask him to point them out. Then offer to your client to pay for the grommets to protect those wires. That will set you back about $10.00. Now, no more "safety" issues and he can go back to selling snake oil.


Originally Posted By: bbadger
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Total guess here.


Is it possible this electrician is accustomed to working in the areas around Chicago that utilize the CEC? (Chicago Electric Code)

Those code sections might be a combination of the NEC and CEC.


Originally Posted By: jreim
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



If you must know…


Hucker Electric
1620 Yorkhouse Rd.
Waukegan, IL 60087

I assume most of their work would be in Lake County with a Waukegan address. But these days, who knows. Regardless, this house was not in Cook county or in Chicago city limits. Lake Bluff, Lake County. Lake Bluff uses the NEC 2002, and that is what the electrician should go by, if that is what the Village uses. Agree? Or disagree?


Originally Posted By: pabernathy
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



jreim,


I guess I agree to agree I am not sure...lol.......most all places use the NEC but their local AHJ had broad authority and as bob stated can have their own amendments to the NEC that they enforce.

in fact the 2002 NEC made it even more clear in Art 80 of the NEC.....

But in all cases......you are not responsible for anything and I would inform the client of this........she has no leg to stand on.


--
Paul W. Abernathy- NACHI Certified
Electrical Service Specialists
Licensed Master Electrician
Electrical Contractor
President of NACHI Central Virginia Chapter
NEC Instructor
Moderator @ Doityourself.com
Visit our website- www.electrical-ess.com

Originally Posted By: bbadger
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



jreim wrote:
Lake Bluff uses the NEC 2002, and that is what the electrician should go by, if that is what the Village uses. Agree? Or disagree?


Yes I agree and also think you are getting shafted on this deal.

Good luck.


Originally Posted By: bbadger
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



pabernathy wrote:
in fact the 2002 NEC made it even more clear in Art 80 of the NEC.....


You hit a sore spot with Article 80, that to me is an article written by the electrical Nazis.

Here is a sample

Quote:
80.13(5)The authority having jurisdiction shall be authorized to inspect, at all reasonable times, any building or premises for dangerous or hazardous conditions or equipment as set forth in this Code. The authority having jurisdiction shall be permitted to order any person(s) to remove or remedy such dangerous or hazardous condition or equipment. Any person(s) failing to comply with such order shall be in violation of this Code.


Excuse me did I just read that ![icon_evil.gif](upload://1gvq2wV2azLs27xp71nuhZOKiSI.gif)

shall be authorized to inspect, at all reasonable times, any building or premises for dangerous or hazardous conditions or equipment as set forth in this Code

Luckily it is not part of the NEC unless specifically adopted by any jurisdiction.

I have not heard that it has been adopted anywhere and it has been moved to an NEC annex for 2005.

FWIW I was told that article was for use outside the USA as in South of Mexico.


Originally Posted By: pabernathy
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Quote:
The authority having jurisdiction shall be permitted to order any person(s) to remove or remedy such dangerous or hazardous condition or equipment



--
Paul W. Abernathy- NACHI Certified
Electrical Service Specialists
Licensed Master Electrician
Electrical Contractor
President of NACHI Central Virginia Chapter
NEC Instructor
Moderator @ Doityourself.com
Visit our website- www.electrical-ess.com

Originally Posted By: pdickerson
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



John,


If I was in your shoes, I would see if I could pick Russel Ray's brain. He is a frequest contributor to the BB and has a good handle on legal issues.

You might also contact your insurance agent. They are usually pretty good at responding to this kind of stuff.


Originally Posted By: bkelly2
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Romex ]


Originally Posted By: bbadger
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



The unsupported NM in the picture is unacceptable in my area today but may well have been overlooked earlier.


Originally Posted By: pabernathy
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Agreed…those wires in the picture need to be supported every 4 1/2 "…



Paul W. Abernathy- NACHI Certified


Electrical Service Specialists


Licensed Master Electrician


Electrical Contractor


President of NACHI Central Virginia Chapter


NEC Instructor


Moderator @ Doityourself.com


Visit our website- www.electrical-ess.com

Originally Posted By: wdecker
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



ROMEX is illegal in most parts if Illinois. Around here, the Unions do most of the electrician training and all of those trainers were formally City of Chicago people. There are some codes that the union emforces, even if the AHJ does not.


Not saying that it is rigtht, only reporting what happens.

The only area where ROMEX is still used is around the Joliet area.

When I see ROMEX in Illinois, I defect it. 9 times out of 10, I am right.

Problem is that most ROMEX is owner installed. The problem isn't really the ROMEX, but the use of the ROMEX by unqualified people. Bad stapling, wrong guage, bad splices (without Jboxes), lack or proper support and not properly securing the cable to the boxes.

The electrical unions, around here, rule the roost.


Originally Posted By: Greg Fretwell
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



A little background on article 80. We had a muni court judge give a seminar at the BOAF show a few years ago. He basically said the whole idea of unsolicited inspections was unconstitutional. NFPA or the legislature can write all the laws they want but an inspector CAN’T just knock on your door and tell you he is going to inspect your house. You have the right to send him off for a warrant. (a civil court judge may give him one though, a criminal court judge probably won’t because they understand rights)


They can look from a neighbor’s yard, with their permission, they can fly over or they can look from public property but you can kick them off your land.


These are the kind of things that get abused because people seldom try to fight it up to a to district court or appealate court level. The warning to the Building Officials was that when it does happen the BO usually loses and ends up paying all the legal costs. Jurisdictions and BOs are usually isolated from actual damages by soverign immunity law. Basically the lawyers all get paid but the homeowner doesn’t


Originally Posted By: jreim
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



William…I am going to have to disagree with you here. You say the only place romex is used is the Joliet area? Woah! In my opinion the further you go from Chicago city limits, the more Romex I see during inspections. In fact, I would be at least half of the homes I have inspected in Mc Henry county have romex! How do you conclude that the use of it is “illegal”? The NEC article 334.10 (1) states “Permits the use of Type NM, NMC, and Type NMS cables in one- and two-family dwellings.” You write it up as a defect every time you see it? Regardless of whether or not it is installed properly? I think that is a bit extreme.