"the Codes" in reference to another thread

[Dirk Jeanis]

THere has been a "discussion" regarding interpretation of codes and whether or not one understands them.

Years ago in San Jose a client built a new home. There was a spiral staircase to the Master bedroom from the living room hall. It was gorgeous, fully engineered to meet code including the mean step width, rise and run. It was engineer stamped.

This took two meen about two weeks to build to the specifications. It was GORGEOUS, but….going up it felt perfect, going down it felt un-natural to walk due to the tightness of the spiral.

The in process inspections were all passed but a new inspector on final REJECTED the entire staircase. He saw the stamps, saw the documentation from the city engineering approvals and still rejected it. His statement was "while it may meet the code per se, it does not meet the intent of the code. Moving down the stair is not safe".

Believe it or not the CITY upheld his position. The inspector wanted a tear out completed. Instead the top and bottom of the stair was walled in and a new straight ramp stair was added from the living room to the bedroom.

The builder waited until buy off of the construction and opened the walls and tore out the new stair closing off the walls there. The as built stll showed the hidden existing walled stair….and it was on the prints so the builder determined that it was LEGAL to use them.

In the same build, one inspector looked at the cheap counter flashing that came with a tub. he suggested that the cheap crap be pulled (custom home) and that aluminum or galvanized roll material be uesde instead. The builder was happy with that and did it.

The next inspector in (not even inspecting that feature) saw the rolle material and said, that is not the material that came with that tub, it does nto meet manufacturer installation specifications. Pull it and replace it with the manufacturer product. he red tagged the tub. Th builder was an engineer and told him that this exceeds the manufacturer requirement and is acceptable..Inspector said "tuff ****"…take it out.

My point is that while some do not understand the codes, others think they know what is best and still others are just on power trips.

I still suggest that an engineering stamp and plan approvals where specific details exist over ride ANY related code not included therein, including manuctured products. It means that an engineer has taken the time to make sure that all requirements have been met, period. His license and insurance are on the line.

If an inspector determines otherwise it will be between the city and the engineer to determine the true condition, not the inspector.

[Jim Port]

The inspector needs to inspect to what is written, not intent. They also should not be able to request anything beyond the code. The code is the minimum acceptable level, not a level to start from and require more.

[Dirk Jeanis]

The inspector needs to inspect to what is written, not intent. They also should not be able to request anything beyond the code. The code is the minimum acceptable level, not a level to start from and require more.

I am just stating what transpired, I was there and had been an inspector in industry for over 10 years. Had I rejected to "intent" I would never have worked again in industry, EVER.

[Jerry Peck]

Some inspectors still say "Because I said so.".

I tell people that when an inspector says that, it is because the inspector can no longer support what he wants with the code, and that is when the inspector has overstepped their bounds.

Some contractors respond with "That may be true, but if I challenge him I may win that battle, but I will lose the war."

Unfortunately, they are right much of the time.

[Dirk Jeanis]

Some inspectors still say "Because I said so.".

I tell people that when an inspector says that, it is because the inspector can no longer support what he wants with the code, and that is when the inspector has overstepped their bounds.

Some contractors respond with "That may be true, but if I challenge him I may win that battle, but I will lose the war."

Unfortunately, they are right much of the time.

You arent kidding about losing the war. The worst part is when an inspector describes something general and does not tell where exactly he is talking about….like nail patterns not to code. there may be ONE sheet not to code and he states it generally….like it is all bad, and enver tells you WHERE he ws referring to.


I did find a way to help avoid this condition for the most part. I install a job box with all drawings, details and approvals in it. There is a section in it for inspection cards.

When opening the box there is a sign titled "ANVO" in large print. With a body similar to;
This site accepts NO verbal orders, change orders or information. Information and rejections to subcontractors from the general contractor will be in writing here, all answers will be in writing here. All inspection rejections are to be fully described in writing with the proper code(s) referenced and the exact locations of discrepencies noted. There will be NO exceptions.

When asked, I tell the inspectors that this is because of the subcontractors and to control them, but that the inspectors need to comply or it all goes to ****. I tell the subcontractors it is beacuse of the inspectors, but they have to comply or it all goes to ****.

After one job working this way, everyone loves it and prefers it.

Only once did I have to talk to a manager in a municipal inspection department. I told him we have working copies of prints in the box and they can be marked up as to any rejections…showing us where and what the problem and code is. He asked his inspector why he thought he didnt have to do that to begin with. Yes, I got inspected REALLY HARD THAT FIRST ROUND. After that the inspector liked it actually.

[Dirk Jeanis]

Jerry - You are the typical bone headed AHJ inspector. You do not understand the codes and enforce the "because I said so" or "I have my head so far up my code book" philopsophy . You do not have the intelligence or experience to intelligently address issues. You are the typical knuclehead that one would expect to find in a municipal inspectors position.

Jim,
I don't know you and have never had a "conversation" with you. I don't want to be on anyone's bad side ever. Not worth the hassle.

That said, I notice that you are directly addressing another in a directly personal and negative manner. You are not addressing the posting or conversation. You seem to be intent on defaming another professional here instead of addressing issues and questions and thoughts at hand.

The worst part is that it seems you have also decided to "stalk" this person from topic to topic to debase and defame him.

I don't know what lit the fire, but if I was the moderator or owner of this site I would warn you once, then ban you forever and even block your known ip addresses from even seeing this site (yes there is that technology).

There is NO room in a professional chat and forum arena for your attitude. It just makes everyone here (especially yourself) look to the world as if we are petty, uneducated, and useless.

Please consider your actions and attitude carefully in the future as it is unprofessional, distasteful, and rude to continue in your current process.

Should I notice any further actions in defaming others online here by you I will ask for moderation so that I do NOT have to leave the forum or to feel embarrassed for you any longer. Please take no offense and make no response to my statement here. Just change to a more positive personal condition and all will be well. I make this an open admonisment because you have made open defamations. If you have problems with anyone here, keep them private and professional.

I hope that I have helped you become mroe professional and more respectable by being open about this matter.
Thank you
DJ.

[CHARLIE VAN FLEET]

DIRK-- great thread hopefully jim will read and also Brain-- i too hate going to this web site LATELY because of the assault by Jim--grow up Jim and get a life--cvf---and Jerry AGAIN STOP ANSWERING HIM--PLEASE

[Jerry Peck]

... and Jerry AGAIN STOP ANSWERING HIM--PLEASE

Yes, Sir, I try to restrain from answering, but letting his incorrect information stay unanswered is also bad (not everyone here knows his information is incorrect, albeit most do).

I will practice my ummmmmms ... ummmmmms ... ummmmmms ... better (isn't that the yoga sound used for clearing your head of all evil thoughts?

[CHARLIE VAN FLEET]

JERRY JUST STOP PERIOD--DON'T FOLLOW THE CARROT ON A HORSES BRIDLE---CVF

[Vern Heiler]

Yes, Sir, I try to restrain from answering, but letting his incorrect information stay unanswered is also bad (not everyone here knows his information is incorrect, albeit most do).

I will practice my ummmmmms ... ummmmmms ... ummmmmms ... better (isn't that the yoga sound used for clearing your head of all evil thoughts?

Jerry, my daughter owns a dog day care & boarding and has past on a life lesson learned by watching dogs who are happy; "It's time to kick some dirt over that $hit and move on".

[Jerry Peck]

Not eating or chasing carrots, sure is taking a lot of dirt to cover all that $hit, though.

[Garry Sorrells]

Some inspectors still say "Because I said so.".

I tell people that when an inspector says that, it is because the inspector can no longer support what he wants with the code, and that is when the inspector has overstepped their bounds.

Some contractors respond with "That may be true, but if I challenge him I may win that battle, but I will lose the war."

Unfortunately, they are right much of the time.

---------------------------------------------------------

Jerry - You are the typical bone headed AHJ inspector. You do not understand the codes and enforce the "because I said so" or "I have my head so far up my code book" philopsophy . You do not have the intelligence or experience to intelligently address issues. You are the typical knuclehead that one would expect to find in a municipal inspectors position.

--------------------------------------------------------
Jim,
You need to read without attitude and prejudice. You chide Jerry for agreeing with you, which does not serve your cause what ever that may be. Like many that are so myopic in their views and perceptions of reality they will condemn someone that agrees with them only because that person is speaking.

Jerry's comment is reality. A builder/contractor will not fight a loosing battle with an inspector, no mater how wrong the inspector is. Like you it is ego driven by the inspector, just like many HIs. "Because I say so!" The contractor will pay the $2 and move on. Unless the contractor is willing to go to war over the issue and is willing to spent the time and money to support that war, no matter how much it takes or how long it will delay a project.

I have gone to war over issues and in a business sense it is not cost effective, when it happened it was about principal and not time nor money. Also it will lay the ground for future confrontations when paths cross. Further, the word goes out that you don't respect the group and they will band together against you. So it adds long term costs even if you win one war.

[Jim Port]

I have had the opposite result when I questioned the inspector. The learned something and they also knew that I knew the code and would have a compliant installation ready for inspection.

One one job I called the head inspector over crap work that someone else had installed and had passed inspection. The head inspector came out and agreed with me and sent the first guy back out. I showed him everything he missed and he agreed and voided the inspection until corrected.

[Jerry Peck]

I have had the opposite result when I questioned the inspector. The learned something and they also knew that I knew the code and would have a compliant installation ready for inspection.

I always encourage that - let's pull out the Handbook (it contains the code as well as commentary with examples) and look it up.

[Dirk Jeanis]

Some inspectors still say "Because I said so.".

I tell people that when an inspector says that, it is because the inspector can no longer support what he wants with the code, and that is when the inspector has overstepped their bounds.

Some contractors respond with "That may be true, but if I challenge him I may win that battle, but I will lose the war."

Unfortunately, they are right much of the time.

Jerry,
I have been thinking of what you said here. What do you think of doing what the inspector tells you to do but documenting it and taking pics etc. Then, when buy off is complete send a complaint to the department regarding the inspector's behaviour. Pics and explanations, even the fact that you FEARED reprisal if you tried to fight and only meet codes etc.

Somehow I dont think that you would get bit in the future by the department. No one wants to do that to someone who "makes book"

[Jerry Peck]

Jerry,
I have been thinking of what you said here. What do you think of doing what the inspector tells you to do but documenting it and taking pics etc. Then, when buy off is complete send a complaint to the department regarding the inspector's behaviour.

If you are going to file a complaint - file an appeal to the appropriate board first (Board of Appeals or Rules and Appeals).

If you don't like their decision you can take it to the next level - court.

Many contractors take things to the Board of Appeals. Only a few go to court after that.

If the Board finds in your favor you may have a case to report the inspector to the ... (in Florida this would be the Building Commission) ... but the case needs facts to support the claims.

If the Board finds against you, you probably don't have a case against the inspector either.