Did an inspection for a young (mid to late 20s. I just turned 60. Go figure!) guy buying a 3 flat in the Chicago area. Older building (1929) with 3 units. Pretty good condition.
The rear porch was in no way compliant (Chicago wooden porches) and was a problem. Improperly footed and undersized posts. Bad post splices (Chicago requires 5 bolts). Balusters on the exterior of the guard and handrails. Undersized joists. Ledger secured to brick wall with lags. All wrong and non-compliant.
The seller (who tagged along, buyer agreed to this and wanted me to tell him) got all bent. He called me back (along with buyer) that afternoon and had a guy with him. The guy showed ID that he was a city code inspector. He told me that the porch was OK and started telling everyone the home inspectors were just hacks. I, calmly, explained that we are state licensed, as opposed to being some Aldermans’s brother-in-law and would he be willing to put his opinion is writing, backed up by insurance and liability. He called me a bad name and stormed off.
I called a friend of mine who is an Architect and works for a local contractor that specializes in suck porch repairs. He came over.
He pointed out all the problems, and underlined them on a paper copy of the cities’ porch code requirements. There were about 19 points of problems.
So, my client is now holding his head together to keep it from exploding because he does not know who to believe.
I explained that one should always go with the people who actually back up their opinions with insurance and liability of they are wrong.
Just another example of the difference between city employees and professional home inspectors.\
As we used to say, on the South Side; “I trust ya, but I know where you park your car.”
Hope this helps;