CALIFORNIA SB-721 BILL - POTENTIAL SOURCE OF INCOME?

[Tony Escamilla]

Looking for thoughts on California's SB-721, requiring inspections of "exterior elevated elements", or balconies and decks. The bill requires inspection of multi-family building decks and balconies. Thinking this may be a good revenue source for those of us ICC building inspector certified, or who hold a contractor's license, or structural engineers. Thoughts?

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB721

Tony Escamilla
Villa Home Inspections
www.inspectaproperty.com

[Jerry Peck]

Thoughts?

One word: Liability.

Unless you will be able to see more than I suspect you will be able to see, even with the approved construction documents in your hand while looking, I doubt you will be able to see enough most of the time to give it an "approval" ... with the only other option being "not approved" ... why take the liability?

("Further investigation by a structural engineer" is NOT a suitable option for someone making those inspections.)

[Gunnar Alquist]

Looking for thoughts on California's SB-721, requiring inspections of "exterior elevated elements", or balconies and decks. The bill requires inspection of multi-family building decks and balconies. Thinking this may be a good revenue source for those of us ICC building inspector certified, or who hold a contractor's license, or structural engineers. Thoughts?
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB721


Tony,

I suspect the only way to fully evaluate an enclosed balcony would be destructive testing. This would mean opening-up (presumably) from the underside to be able to fully inspect the framing. Then, it would be necessary to repair.

If I were seriously considering this, I would look for (and follow scrupulously) an ASTM (or some kind of recognized) standard/protocol on inspecting balconies.

[Jim Luttrall]

I skimmed through the bill and saw no limit to the liability on the inspector. Meaning there is no limit and if 30 people collapse a three story deck you better have an insurance policy with deep pockets. The inspection they are after can't be done for a reasonable price. This is going to require multi day destructive testing and even then the reliability of that inspection is going to be spotty at best. Of course some uneducated person will take an online test and get "certified" to do these for $399 and think they are going to make a fortune. This is a feel good piece of legislation that will not do the job intended, imho.

[Jerry Peck]

Of course some uneducated person will take an online test and get "certified" to do these for $399 and think they are going to make a fortune.

I can see it now "Certified Master Deck & Balcony Inspector" (CMDBI) or "Certified Master Balcony & Deck Inspector (CMBDI) or even "Certified Master Elevated Structure Inspector" (CMESI) or "Certified Master Elevated Elements Inspector" (CMEI) or "Certified Master Exterior Elements Inspector" (CMEEI) or "Certified Master Exterior Elevated Elements Inspector" (CMEEEI) ... you saw it here first ... copyrighted Jerry Peck 2019, the title is for sale at a reasonable price (fulfill my retirement price :D ).

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Certified Master Deck & Balcony Inspector CALIFORNIA SB-721 BILL?
Looks like CALIFORNIA is doing a great job recognizing master inspectors.
Best regards.
(CMI) Robert Young:peep:

[Randy Mayo]

The inspector liability is the BIG issue. Not sure you could get E&O insurance to cover it.

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Randy. The way I read it, the ACT/BILL is commercial and for AHJ, but I need to read more. As well, 2025 appears to be a start date. Every six years a required inspection of said components.
I suspect, Component Height will be important regarding what home inspectors can inspect and recommend.

In my neck of the woods, commercial property inspections have been amended. The act/bill stateside or provincial commercial standard is now in effect. Everyone was given a heads up >< 3 years prior.
Every (5) years a required inspection of said components.
Component Height is important regarding what home inspectors can inspect and recommend. 5 stories and higher SE is required.

[Douglas Hansen]

This legislation creates a duty for the building owners. The AHJ is not involved except in a code enforcement capacity (not the same thing as building inspection) when an owner is non-compliant and has been reported to the AHJ. The bill specifies that the inspector be hired by the building owner and can not be in the employ of the AHJ.

In most cases, destructive testing is necessary, especially in enclosed decks. The bill is not restricted to wood decks; metal fire escapes fall under its scope. As to a standard, new section 2304.12.2.6 of the IBC is woefully inadequate to address the actual ventilation needs of enclosed framing beneath balconies. There isn't a standard or protocol for these inspections, as they are intended primarily to look for water damage or the potential for same. When do you probe a structural member? When do you dismantle a waterproofing assembly? They are a case-by-case investigation.

Some cities have their own ordinances that go beyond this legislation. Berkeley (where a deck collapse killed 6 UC students) is one of those.

I don't see this as a business opportunity for someone who isn't already doing these kinds of forensic investigations. The credentials specified in the bill are also necessary to enable someone to perform such inspections without running afoul of the California Structural Pest Act. A home inspector who is not an engineer, architect, or contractor would be in violation of that act.

Douglas Hansen