Thread: Gaston County NC getting sued over botched inspections

If a county elects to obtain insurance they waive their governmental immunity.


I-Team Investigation | House of Horrors | WCNC.com | Local News for Charlotte, North Carolina | Top Stories



Appeals Court Rules in Inspection Case

Similar Threads:

• Re-Inspections
• Pre-Listing Inspections
• Home inspections key to helping buyers make sound decision - Chicago Daily Southtown
• Owners must prepare for injury - Orange County Register

Bruce,

The top link gives a 'Page not found' error and the bottom link does not have an article about that??

links fixed.....


Jerry, I signed up on your codeman site but never got the registration email.

Originally Posted by Bruce King

Jerry, I signed up on your codeman site but never got the registration email.

Not sure why that did not work, but I've activated your account. Thank you,

Originally Posted by Bruce King

If a county elects to obtain insurance they waive their governmental immunity.

That could set another precedent.

The Florida Supreme Court, back in the late 1980s, set a precedent which has been used by other states in that governmental building departments and inspectors are not required to ascertain that each and every part of a structure meets code, only that overall the structure does not cause a negative impact on the surrounding area. And, as I recall, the judge in that case stated that if the buyer/owner wants to know that everything meets code they should hire a private inspector, which started the big hoopla here at that time and since for condo associations, etc., hiring engineering firms to perform turn-over inspections when the developer turns the property over to the owners association.

The above could well kick in and save that county from liability should they find it and use it (and surely their attorney should be aware of that precedent).

The reason is that the purchase of insurance is being used to supplant sovereign immunity, so then 'the expectation of the inspections' would then be kicked back to 'the precedent set by ... in Florida', meaning that all the homeowners costs and efforts may be for naught as the end result could well be 'Okay, you are correct, the purchase of insurance replaced sovereign immunity which allows you to sue us for non-performance, however, the standard to which you can hold us for non-performance to is that we are not required to perform as you so state.' The homeowners prevail in their ability to sue, but sue to a standard which does not require the performance being sued for. The homeowners lose in the end. They have to.

Can you imagine what would be the result if the home owners won?

There would need to be one or more code inspectors on-site, at each construction site, at all times during construction. Not only would no work get done, but the permit cost just to cover the inspections would make permits to expensive to afford.

You are building a house? Okay, let's see, you are estimating a completion date in 90 days, right? All right, that will be the cost of two inspectors with all benefits for 90 days, ummmm .... let's see ... that comes to ... (90 days= 3 months = 1/4 year = $75,000 per year per inspector with all benefits and related costs x 2 = $150,000 / 4 = $37,500 inspectors cost permit portion + plan review cost = ummmm ... let's just round it off to $40,000 for your permit fee.

Maybe the county should develop a list of what they will inspect for the already high permit fee, and actually do it.

I paid about $1500 for permits when I built my house/shop and figured out that the inspectors were here for a grand total of about 40 minutes after adding up all trips. Some trips were 90 seconds. I was here most of the time since I worked the evening shift back then.

This is not any effort at all and nothing but a front for another tax to pad the county/city budget with.

When the builders are telling the homebuyers that they have nothing to worry about because the inspection passed then there is a major disconnect between what is occurring and what the builders think they are getting.

Some builders know this and hire their own inspector but still have to give the county/city money for basically a basic driveby inspection.

In summary, the homebuyers are getting screwed and should be allowed to sue.

The only thing that might help this problem is to require builders and homebuyers to read and sign a statement that makes them aware that the only way to monitor construction is to hire your own inspector and that failure to do so is at their own risk.

Disclaimer: I have done many pre-drywall and final inspections in many counties and my opinions are factually based. This is not to say that all county inspectors are bad but I am saying that as a whole they get a grade C- to D+. Is this unusual? No, not at all, all work groups would score in that range in all professions if real testing was done.