Floor Covering Required? - InspectionNews

Joe Nernberg · #1 (**permalink**) 05-22-2007, 09:15 AM

This is something that has bothered me for some time. For new construction, can the builder get his C of O without floor coverings?

My new-home-inspection clients tell me that they want a nicer carpet, laminate, etc. but the builder charges a premium for that upgrade. Instead, the homeowner agrees to the cheapest carpet or vinyl floor covering and then rips it out the next week.

This is wasteful and must be wrong. Is there a reference, code section or a link that supports the builder's claim?

Rick Cantrell · #2 (**permalink**) 05-22-2007, 09:26 AM

Floor covering is not required to get a CO, however many lending institutions do require it.

Jerry Peck · #3 (**permalink**) 05-22-2007, 04:43 PM

Rick nailed it - usually it is the lending institution which requires it.

Bathrooms and kitchens used to be required to have an impervious surface, but that is gone now (I think - would have to look that up to be 100% sure, right now only 99% sure).

Scott Patterson · #4 (**permalink**) 05-22-2007, 04:56 PM

I have seen hundreds of homes with concrete floors. It is or was a fashionable thing to do. They dye the concrete and sometimes they score it with decorative patterns.

Phil Lanier · #5 (**permalink**) 05-23-2007, 03:12 PM

You are correct, some lenders do require it. I'm actually building my new home right now. Most of the flooring i nthe home is stained concrete with carpet in the bedrooms. I'm seeing more and more new construction with stained and scored concrete. Builder's don't like it because of pre-cautions needed to not damage the flooring. Although, in your case, it sounds like the builder is retaining his profits by keeping his flooring.

Of course in my case, I'm the home owner and the inspector and the one who signs off on a CO. You gotta love it....

Richard Rushing · #6 (**permalink**) 05-23-2007, 09:27 PM

Flooring installation is required from the lending institution, prior to the builder getting that percentage of his draw of funds for construction. No flooring, no draw of funds. Which is ludicrus because the extra care, score cuts and staining cost more than the cheap flooring does...

Why not just figure that into the plan to begin with and part of the draw in lieu of the original/ basic floor-plan??? Sounds too simple to me.

Rich

Joe Nernberg · #7 (**permalink**) 05-23-2007, 09:40 PM

Maybe I am relentless. I contacted a few lenders and I received one message so far:

"Dear Joe,

Thank you for contacting E-LOAN. While we cannot speak regarding the requirements that another lender may have, E-LOAN would also require that there be floor coverings. The floor coverings help to ensure that the home is inhabitable, a requirement that E-LOAN has for all of its home loans.

If you have any other questions, please call us at (888) 533-5333 and one of our Customer Care Representatives will be glad to assist you.

Thank you."

Rick Hurst · #8 (**permalink**) 05-23-2007, 10:20 PM

Those acid-stained concrete floors look nice when first done but after a few months they can look horrible. Re-waxing them with the concrete wax sealer gets expensive.

Plus they seem like they are a dust magnet. Everyone I've talked to that has them regret doing them.

Richard Rushing · #9 (**permalink**) 05-24-2007, 06:08 AM

"The floor coverings help to ensure that the home is inhabitable"

Yikes!!! They are trying to ensure the home is INhabitable???

Rich

Joe Nernberg · #10 (**permalink**) 05-24-2007, 08:20 AM

Interesting. I inspected a foreclosure recently. The angry homeowner removed the furnace from the attic. The loan funded nonetheless. No heat, but it had carpet. I disagree with the definition of habitable.

Jerry McCarthy · #11 (**permalink**) 05-24-2007, 08:49 AM

Richard; Inhabitable is correct usage. I suspect you’re thinking of uninhabitable?

Jerry P; the only sections where the I Codes address floor finish to my knowledge is IRC 307.2 and IBC 804. (2006 versions)

Richard Rushing · #12 (**permalink**) 05-24-2007, 10:45 AM

but... but... I can do math.

Maybe I was thinking along the lines of;

inconcievable
inconvenient
incoherent
incapable
incredible

Or anything else that the *in* in front of it make it a negative, to mean; *not*...

O.K., so I originally thought a Thesaurus was dinosaur.

Thanks, Mc.

RR

Rick Cantrell · #13 (**permalink**) 05-24-2007, 11:31 AM

Warning tread drift

Flammable and inflammable, both mean the same.

Bob Mayer · #14 (**permalink**) 05-24-2007, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Rushing

but... but... I can do math.

Maybe I was thinking along the lines of;

inconcievable
inconvenient
incoherent
incapable
incredible

Or anything else that the *in* in front of it make it a negative, to mean; *not*...

O.K., so I originally thought a Thesaurus was dinosaur.

Thanks, Mc.

RR

Doesn't inflammable mean not flammable?

An then there is ravel/unravel. English is crazy.

- BOB

Rick Cantrell · #15 (**permalink**) 05-24-2007, 12:05 PM

Bob
According to Mariam Webster the 1st meaning given for inflammable is FLAMMABLE

Jerry McCarthy · #16 (**permalink**) 05-24-2007, 12:34 PM

Richard
I had an inspector friend of mine years ago tag an extremely talkative agent who appeared to find more than 5 seconds of silence unbearable with a very appropriate description. He described her as “verbally incontinent.”

Of course my all time favorite is still, “she (he) could talk the teeth out of a saw.”

Edgar Abrego · #17 (**permalink**) 06-15-2007, 12:16 AM

Some builders will give a credit to the buyer instead of using their basic flooring. But will require the buyer to buy the flooring and have it installed through the builders contractor. It is some thing you can recommend they look into in the future.